Double-Decade league (70's and 80's) sign-up

[canauscot]

For the truly committed (or for those who should be); the double decade league;

Starting in either 70 or 71 (once we see the list), the league will follow the typical decade rules, with a few exceptions to make this work.
Starting with a 70's player doesn't retire on his last carded year in the BTT 70's game if he has a card in the 80's game and likewise a 80's player is available in 1980 regardless of his first carded year in BTT 80's if he has a card in the 70's game. The manager keeps ownership of that player as we transition from the 70's game to the 80's game. eg. Reggie will still be available in 78 and 79 in the 70's game even though his last carded year is 77 and Nolan will be available in 80-82 even though his first year is 83 in BTT 80's.

All the rest we can work out later.

1) canauscot
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)

alternate
13)
14)

[jsam9801]

1) canauscot
2) jsamia :shock:
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

9)
10)
11)
12)

alternate
13)
14)

[Billings Ballers]

1) canauscot
2) jsamia Shocked
3) Billings Ballers
4)
5)
6)
7)

9)
10)
11)
12)

alternate
13)
14)

[BC Manager]

For those of you in the original Decade league (including jsamia), I will be running a double-decade league as well. I'm not taking sign ups as all the spots are reserved for current Decade owners. Just wanted to let you know, though there's no reason you can't do both.

[YountFan]

BC, you're going to run 2 decade leagues?

[BC Manager]

No, just one Double-decade league. I already signed up for someone else's 70s Decade league.

[jsam9801]

Thanks, BC. Assuming that we get enough interest, I will do both. :D

What the heck, I can take out another mortgage! :shock:

[1st Command Commando]

OK, I will go for it.
sog

1) canauscot
2) jsamia Shocked
3) Billings Ballers
4) sogcomando - MN (if required)
5)
6)
7)

9)
10)
11)
12)

alternate
13)
14)

[rutkap]

I think that there might be issues getting enough players before the 77 AL expansion. at least the NL already did their expansion in 69 or it would be even more unmanageable.