What did you HATE the most about RFL this season?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): everyone's 2 cents on everything, but that's...
Boobies! (Cals): Inconsistent performance, a benchmark trait of my lousy teams. Losing in the playoffs sucks.
Dude (Clark): I did not like the free agents to pick up from. I got lucky to have drafted SAlexander and SMack. But that's luck. I think it should be more about who the best players are to start on a given weekend, not about if you're lucky enough to have a player to even score points. The luck part makes it less competitive because you are stuck with who you drafted (FOR THE MOST PART). But you've heard this speech from me already! [Commish's comment: If RFL is really ''more about who the best players are to start on a given weekend''... we wouldn't need to have a Draft. Everyone could pick their own 7 starters from the entire player pool each weekend. If anything... my opinion is nearly the exact opposite of Clark's. My preference would be to draft nearly every player - so that each team has its own reserve squad. I'd like to see more emphasis on draft preparation - and less of an emphasis on who has dibs priority.]
Invasive Species (Stan): Torn ACLs, Rams
Uffdalators (Kevin): The draft. It's the best part, but it seemed like many didn't come prepared, didn't take it seriously and bailed early.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): Another bout of injuritis
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): My pathetic season
BKotC (JoePa): We hated the Fred Taylor Disappearing act, We hated Kurt Warner getting Marshall Faulk's MVP award (Again!), and we hated the fact that Wang's team blew through the season and was bounced in the 1st round by a lucky #8 seed.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): It's not 1 big happy family anymore. I see a split happening shortly
Jersey Juggernauts (John): MY TEAM SUCKED!
SCBoP (Ali): For me, there was nothing about the RFL to hate this season. Being involved in this league is nothing short of a pleasure.
BUBE (Wang): lack of ''participation'' from some GMs. RFL would be so much more fun if everyone would be more ''vocal'' - and more conscientious about *TRYING TO WIN* every single week.

What did you like the most about RFL this season?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): All the player movement and trades.
Boobies! (Cals): Consistent updates and insightful analysis by the RFL WIR editorial staff, not to mention the thoughtful commentaries of league GMs on the email forum.
Dude (Clark): WIR were good. After eddie G, McCaffrey and duce (my first three picks) bombed, I liked how my 2nd stringers I picked became starters in the season - so i could win some games.
Invasive Species (Stan): Backups who came in and played like studs.
Uffdalators (Kevin): The WIRs.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): First round of the playoffs [win over BUBE] [Commish's comment: We aim to please.]
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): New QB yardage rules
BKotC (JoePa): We liked the way the QB scoring worked. The relative quiet that comes when the Pimps finish last. 49ers back in the playoffs! A first-ever Aglione Bowl champion!
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): My team
Jersey Juggernauts (John): Definitely enjoyed all the Monday Night Madness games. Seems like I was always involved in Monday Night Madness (usually got shafted).
SCBoP (Ali): Wang's management of the league. The WIRs and playoff scenarios were impeccable. Unless Wang has a streamlined process for generating WIRs and stats, one wonders about the time left over after Sony and RFL. Or is Sony running the RFL??! :) [Commish's comment: All this sucking up to the Commish will get you places!]
BUBE (Wang): winning my 1st-ever Steamroller, winning 15 of 17 games, ending my jinx against Cals, the level of effort put in by Brad.

What is your final impression of the difference between the new 200-300-400 QB yardage rule vs. the old 300-350-400 rule? I know some might not have even noticed the difference for most of the season!

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): I like it
Boobies! (Cals): Good rule.
Dude (Clark): Good change. It puts less emphasis on QB. But because they get hurt, and benched more often, it's nice to have.
Invasive Species (Stan): It kept me hanging on to Flutie which could have been good or bad. It had a minor impact.
Uffdalators (Kevin): It didn't help my team but it helped my opponents. Ultimately I don't care what the scoring rules are, but I am still really upset the scoring rule was slipped in 30 seconds before the draft started. I put a lot of time into draft prep, using a value-based system, and it throws off my draft list when I suddenly don't know where each QB stacks up against the other players. I may have drafted a QB earlier if I had known about the rule change. Hopefully there will be a rule change deadline of at least a day before the draft.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): I like the new rule
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): Loved it!
BKotC (JoePa): As stated before, we liked the rule. A bad day got a goose egg; the average QB got a few points; a good day got twice as many points. And I didn't predict it, but many QBs had days below 200 yards. Worked very well.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Good
Jersey Juggernauts (John): I think 200 is way way way too low. If anything, put in 250, 325, 400 scoring. Any scrub can throw for 200! [Commish's comment: So what does that say about vINTy?]
SCBoP (Ali): I hardly noticed it. However, I think it affected the draft in a positive way.
BUBE (Wang): The new rule worked out well.

Are we done tinkering with yardage levels for bonus pts?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): Yes
Boobies! (Cals): Is that question directed to me? I am satisfied for now.
Dude (Clark): Yes
Invasive Species (Stan): I hope so, but probably not.
Uffdalators (Kevin): Things are fine the way they are.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): YES. DEFINITELY YES
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): Hopefully yes.
BKotC (JoePa): That is a biased way to ask the question. The real question should be ''Are there any other ideas for adjusting the yardage levels for bonus pts?'' And really, we all know this pertains to the earlier passed 50-100-150 adjustment for WRs, RBs and TEs. With all that said, my answer is ''I hope so [done with changes].''
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Yes
Jersey Juggernauts (John): NO WAY! I say we tinker away. We can even have different point systems for rushing versus receiving yards by running backs, and we should definitely reward rushing touchdowns more than receiving touchdowns - those wide receivers are all a bunch of nancies anyway!!! F'ing contact-avoiding, don't get no mud on me, run out of bounds at the first sign of a tackle, fancy-pants fairies!
SCBoP (Ali): Yep.
BUBE (Wang): I hope so.

What is your impression of the new playoff positioning tiebreaker rule (the one that put Ali and Gary in at 7 and 8 - instead of Vesh and Ali)?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): Always should be head to head 1st
Boobies! (Cals): The rule is OK, the interpretation was mangled. Head to head is only valid for 2-way ties. [Commish's comment: In which universe is head-to-head a tiebreaker for 2 teams, but not for ties with more than 2 teams?]
Dude (Clark): Playoffs should work exactly like the NFL
Invasive Species (Stan): Didn't seem fair. I forgot why though.
Uffdalators (Kevin): I don't like it as much as the old method.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): Head to head should only be used if it is a direct head to head- not record against common opponents. I should not have been in the playoffs (but it was worth it so I could kick [BUBE's] ass).
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): Indifferent.
BKotC (JoePa): I think I agree with the former Commish-for-life, Cals. Since we have no Defense, we should have used the old tiebreaker.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Points should rule all
Jersey Juggernauts (John): Seems fine to me.
SCBoP (Ali): Since I would've been in anyway, it doesn't really matter! But seriously, I am actually in favor of the old rule, where total points scored comes before head-to-head results.
BUBE (Wang): I think head-to-head (even in cases where more than 2 teams are tied) is *WAY* much more relevant than breaking ties based upon which team has scored more points.

Should we switch back to total pts scored over head-to-head next year?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): head-to-head
Boobies! (Cals): See above.
Invasive Species (Stan): Yes.
Uffdalators (Kevin): I like this method a little better.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): Yes
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): No, head to head keeps it interesting.
BKotC (JoePa): As stated, due to the lack of a Defense, it is more fair to be judged on the points your players produce. [Commish's comment: I feel it is more fair to be judged on wins and losses. If I finish tied with another team (or 2 or 4 other teams), and if I lost to that team (or all the other teams)... there's no way I'd deserve to finish ahead of them if I somehow managed to score more pts over the course of the season.]
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Yes - Points truly defines the top team
Jersey Juggernauts (John): NEVER! What kind of candy-assed league doesn't consider head-to-head the deciding factor? Stats don't win games, head-to-head is the thing. The only thing that matters in the real world is who kicked whose ass!
SCBoP (Ali): I guess I answered this question before...yep.
BUBE (Wang): No. But RFL *IS* a democracy.

Should we allow the option to start a 3rd WR over a 2nd RB next year?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): Definitely
Boobies! (Cals): No. Strong GMs shouldn't need this crutch.
Dude (Clark): NO
Invasive Species (Stan): Absolutely not.
Uffdalators (Kevin): Definitely. I'd like to give it a shot for one season. I think it would add more fun (i.e. strategy), more parity in the draft and season.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): NO. It will not make it better
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): No, there are plenty of RBs in this league so finding a 2nd back is not too difficult. [Commish's comment: This coming from a GM who carried Greg Comella and/or Damon Washington on his roster for the majority of the season.]
BKotC (JoePa): This is a rule I would like to see. I think it will open up some strategy, and allow some owners to try to employ 3 WRs to see if they can win that way. Now, if your RB goes out, you are in Huge trouble. It could lead some teams to make bad choices, like benching the second RB before a 100yd/3 TD game in place of a wide receiving stiff. I think it will be a better game.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): No
Jersey Juggernauts (John): Seems fine to me. It will give the GMs much more flexibility and free up more runnng backs.
SCBoP (Ali): Since NFL teams can do this, so should RFL teams be able to.
BUBE (Wang): I think we should give it a try. Weekly d chart submissions will be slightly more complex. Each team will need to indicate each week whether they want to stick with 2 and 2, whether they definitely want 1 and 3, or whether they'll go either way - depending on how the RB/WR combined depth works out.

What other rule changes would you like to see next season?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): None that I can see.
Boobies! (Cals): Requirement for all GMs: contribute an article or commentary to at least 1 WIR next year. We can assign your week of responsibility at draft time.
Dude (Clark): I think we should move the roster size down to 11. Or if some GMs do not come back, settle down with the GM spots to 14 max. Or split the league like the NFL. This would be great to have two conferences. [Commish's comment: Again... I feel dibs priority plays too much of a factor as it is.]
Invasive Species (Stan): Steamroller should be based on 17 weeks of record, not 13 or 14 like today. [Commish's comment: Should we really overturn 12 years of RFL tradition with this rule change?]
Uffdalators (Kevin): Drop the TE position, and allow TEs to be drafted and started as WRs. That way people will draft a good TE as their #1 or #2 WR, but others won't have worry about that position, either in the draft, in their lineups or whether they'll get beat by some freak day by an obscure TE. [Commish's comment: My last 2 playoff runs have ended due directly to a 6 from Joebob's KMangum and a 9 from Gary's ACrumpler. But I don't think there was anything wrong with that.]
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): None
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): Possibly a new TE yardage point basis, bringing about a new thrill to the RFL's weakest producing position. [Commish's comment: Along the lines of what Kevin wrote above, we need to be careful about overcompensating for the TEs. They actually came along quite well this past season. And I expect them to continue to improve next year.]
BKotC (JoePa): The only rule change I would make is ''No rule changes within 1 month of Draft Day.'' I like the rule we put in, but it should never have been done on Draft Day.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): None
Jersey Juggernauts (John): I say we use real money to buy players from each other!
SCBoP (Ali): None that I can think of. The one that jumps out at me though is 11 players on each roster. I can see both sides of the argument.
BUBE (Wang): I would like to see the Playoff matchups determined by higher seeds picking their opponents.
For example... BUBE won the Steamroller this past season, so they would get pick #1 in choosing their quarterfinal opponent. Let's say that the Minions' Rams (MFaulk, IBruce, TCanidate) would be out on a bye in Week 15. So even though the Minions finished #2, BUBE might want to take their shot at the Ram-less Minions in the quarters - rather than potentially facing the full Minion club down the road. The #3 seed (HaHT) would then get to choose their quarterfinal opponent. Let's say that Richard feels that #7 SCBoP are clearly the most beatable team remaining (yes, Moss is dangerous... but the rest of the lineup isn't so scary). So then we have #1 vs. #2 and #3 vs. #7 set. #4 Dude is next. Clark feels #6 Uffdalators is the strongest Week 15 team remaining - with #8 EGD also being too dangerous a threat. So Clark picks #5 Boobies! as their quarterfinal opponent. That leaves Uffdalators vs. EGD as the 4th quarterfinal matchup. The process could be repeated in the semifinal round.
This proposed rule change seems to be the most fair way to reward the teams earning higher seeds in the Playoffs. No team is getting any artificial points over another team, but being able to ''pick your poison'' each round should prove to be most interesting. ;-)

What info/feature would you like to see added to the WIR next season?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): Record vs the spread [Commish's comment: This isn't the Vegas Gold Sheet!]
Boobies! (Cals): See above. Also, let's make sure we get each league GM interviewed once. The 17th interview can go to, say, Wally or Drew Wagner. I'd particularly like to hear about the new GMs. In those interviews, enough of this RFL strategy BS, I want to know the person behind the name! Interviewers should delve into the persona that makes each RFL franchise unique.
Dude (Clark): I would like a bigger build up to the games some how. Maybe a more in-depth look at all games, not just GOTW. [Commish's comment: One tidbit about the selecting of each GOTW... the WIR Editorial Staff is asked NOT to pick a game where projecting the starting lineups might tip off a ''snoozing'' GM as to which players will be out on a bye (or with a nagging injury) the coming weekend.]
Invasive Species (Stan): Maybe PPG instead of (in addition to?) season totals. Then folks might have appreciated the studliness of Rhodes, Richey, Alexander, etc.
Uffdalators (Kevin): The WIR is perfect the way it is.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): None
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): A section with a brief overview of the week's trash talk.
BKotC (JoePa): I am extremely happy with the WIR. I am amazed with all that we get!
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): None
SCBoP (Ali): A ''Commentary'' section. This can be highlights of some of the more animated e-mail discussions during the previous week.
BUBE (Wang): As I have mentioned already (and as a few of you have mentioned above)... I would like to see more GMs show more initiative in expressing themselves via WIRs. I think the GM Profiles have nearly run their course, so it'd be nice if someone could come up with a new way to get into each GM's psyche.

Which player were you ecstatic to've drafted?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): NONE
Boobies! (Cals): I guess I am pleased at how Antowain Smith turned out. I would have drafted Bill Schroeder as a steal, but for some reason I thought he was taken and I didn't ask. Damn! Also happy to have D. Culpepper.
Dude (Clark): SHAUN ALEXANDER
Invasive Species (Stan): Terrell Owens
Uffdalators (Kevin): Tim Brown, who's a stud that pulled double coverage and allowed Rice to shine this year.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): Peyton. I like when I have a lower round pick step up big, but no one did.
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): WARNER! MVP baby!
BKotC (JoePa): Bill Schroeder
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Rod Smith
Jersey Juggernauts (John): James Thrash.....at least in week 2. Then HE SUCKED!
SCBoP (Ali): Charlie Garner
BUBE (Wang): I was really happy to have David Boston (#4 WR overall) make me look good in picking him in the 4th round. Even though he put up some nice numbers for JoePa in 2000 (#18 WR), it seemed like everyone else's expectations were much lower than mine for Boston this past year - judging from the silence at Draft HQs right after my pick. The guy's a monster, and - thanks to the inadequacies of RMoore, FSanders and MJenkins - Boston was fighting double-teams all season long. I also got really lucky with LaDainian (6th round) and ATrain (11th).

Which player would you never draft again?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): LAMAR SMITH
Boobies! (Cals): Mike Alstott
Dude (Clark): EDDIE GEORGE
Invasive Species (Stan): That guy who caught the 1st touchdown pass in last year's Super Bowl for Baltimore [BStokley], James Allen, Bryson/Morris.
Uffdalators (Kevin): Hasselbeck.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): Rickey Dudley
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): Terrell Davis
BKotC (JoePa): Do I have to say it? His initials are F.T.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Can never say never but probably D. Levens
Jersey Juggernauts (John): James Thrash!...and Trent Green.
SCBoP (Ali): Randy Moss...the guy's a f'ing idiot!
BUBE (Wang): You might think I'd say Keyshawn here... but if he's available again at pick #45, I just might pick him again. Instead... I'd have to say that I'd never waste a draft pick (9th round, no less!) on Jeff George again. Then again... he might never be in the position to be drafted again.

What is your final assessment of your team name?

Blue Collar Workers (Brad): Fits my team to a tee.
Boobies! (Cals): Lame. Bring back End Zone Bones!!!
Dude (Clark): Perfect for my state of mind (no job)
Invasive Species (Stan): Probably a bit too derivative. It only made sense to fellow treehuggers. The rest may have been mildly disturbed. Invasive Species include Fire Ants, Salt Cedar, Hydrilla, Deer (when the wolves are killed off), etc. Prior to the draft I had just come back from a conference about them and spent all of 15 seconds coming up with the name.
Uffdalators (Kevin): Not my best team name but a family favorite.
Everyone Go Deep (Gary): I want to keep it for next year
Pimps de la Nast (Shiv): Unoriginal, possibly the reason for my pathetic season. Nasty Pimps were okay, but Pimps de la Nast just plain sucked.
Black Knights of the Charles (JoePa): I liked it, but the WIR Editorial Staff did not have as much fun with it as they did with last year's Black Ops. I need to give it some thought for taking my team name in a whole new direction next season.
Mahatma's Minions (Joebob): Truly effective
Jersey Juggernauts (John): Has a nice ring to it. Will have to come up with something more obscure next year.
Short-Changed Bastards of Persia (Ali): It went well with the state of the Iranian people in 2001. They went to the polls and voted for their president and members of parliament, only to see these officials be reduced to cow dung by political hardliners. The RFL team was also ''short-changed'' by a GM who was still up in the clouds following his championship season, and had an ''anal-cranial inversion'' during the draft.
Brooding Unicorn Blithe Elephant (Wang): Had I known that Cals would go the ''obvious'' route after announcing my team name, I would have used a different one! In the end... I enjoyed the multiple subtle ''inside'' layers of BUBE - it's just too bad I came up 1 win short in my quest to go 16-1 and claim the Double Dip.

©1999-2002 RFL Inc.
All rights reserved.

Revised: January 28, 2002