Single Team Theme 4 Decades

Owner name - Team selected / 1st choice / 2nd choice
1. franky35 - tba 3 free agents / 0 free agents
2. kenhutchings - Los Angeles/California Angels 5 free agents / 3 free agents
3. divad - StL Cardinals / NO FREE AGENTS / 3 Free Agents
4. jcheney2013 - Giants/3 free agents/0 free agents
5. Powellcrosleyjr - Reds / 3 FA / 0 FA
6. Bigdinkent - Red Sox / 3 / 5
7. davesodu - Rangers(Senators) 3 FA/ 5 FA
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

I may take some lumps in the 60s but hopefully I can salvage my pride and make the other decades work.

I may take some lumps in the 60s but hopefully I can salvage my pride and make the other decades work.

I hear you, as my situation is similar.

As I think about it, I would suggest that the free agent allowance be 5 for the 60s, then 3 for all of the other decades. One does have to admit that the player pool for the 60s is somewhat limited. I believe that would help to make the 60s more competitive.

I might be interested in this league if choosing a team were left a little more to chance rather than being the first ones to sign up.

Owner name - Team selected / 1st choice / 2nd choice
1. franky35 - tba 3 free agents / 0 free agents
2. kenhutchings - Los Angeles/California Angels 5 free agents / 3 free agents
3. divad - StL Cardinals / NO FREE AGENTS / 3 Free Agents
4. jcheney2013 - Giants/3 free agents/0 free agents
5. Powellcrosleyjr - Reds / 3 FA / 0 FA
6. Bigdinkent - Red Sox / 3 / 5
7. davesodu - Rangers(Senators) 3 FA/ 5 FA
8. fench33 - Dodgers - 5/3
9.
10.
11.
12.

MemphisJohn said:

I might be interested in this league if choosing a team were left a little more to chance rather than being the first ones to sign up.

I agree with Memphis John. I think it would be really hard to compete except for the top teams like; Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, Orioles, Reds and a few others. I would love to be able to jump in with the Cleveland Indians but it would probably be a futile exercise until we got to the 1990s.

I guess if I am not going to join I could have kept my large trap shut, but I just wanted you guys to know why some people are probably hesitant to jump in. It just seems with the rules the way they are only about half the teams will have a real fighting chance most decades. And what do you do if you do take The Indians and the few stars you have are on crappy years, there is no where to go, no free agents to pickup.

Owner name - Team selected / 1st choice / 2nd choice
1. franky35 - tba 3 free agents / 0 free agents
2. kenhutchings - Los Angeles/California Angels 5 free agents / 3 free agents
3. divad - StL Cardinals / NO FREE AGENTS / 3 Free Agents
4. jcheney2013 - Giants/3 free agents/0 free agents
5. Powellcrosleyjr - Reds / 3 FA / 0 FA
6. Bigdinkent - Red Sox / 3 / 5
7. davesodu - Rangers(Senators) 3 FA/ 5 FA
8. fench33 - Dodgers - 5/3
9. Delbird - Orioles - 3/0
10.
11.
12.

In regards to bad teams. When I choose the Reds I figured they would be good in the 60's-70's and not so good in the other decades. When I "built" a 80's team I found out that the cap helps make everything pretty even. The Reds were not much in the 80's and for certain the roster has some holes but, it wasn't as bad i thought it would be. Another point while the Reds were great in the 70's that means they are pretty pricey. Building a balanced team was about as difficult in the 70's as the 80's. The cap does what it is intended to do.

Owner name - Team selected / 1st choice / 2nd choice
1. franky35 - tba 3 free agents / 0 free agents
2. kenhutchings - Los Angeles/California Angels 5 free agents / 3 free agents
3. divad - StL Cardinals / NO FREE AGENTS / 3 Free Agents
4. jcheney2013 - Giants/3 free agents/0 free agents
5. Powellcrosleyjr - Reds / 3 FA / 0 FA
6. Bigdinkent - Red Sox / 3 / 5
7. davesodu - Rangers(Senators) 3 FA/ 5 FA
8. fench33 - Dodgers - 5/3
9. Delbird - Orioles - 3/0
10. The Conndor - Pirates 0/3

Oh, what the heck... I have returned. Thanks to Franky35 for taking my ball and rolling with it... I had a couple of hellish work weeks and just didn't keep on top of things after the first couple of days netted no responses to my original post. This league was not completely what I originally had in mind, but I am still on board with it. Just for the record, and because a couple of people asked... my original idea to limit people to a stadium, not just a franchise, interested me just because I thought it would be cool to stay in the same park for 4 different seasons with different player sets, that's all.

I do recognize and agree to some extent with Radagast's concern about the "first come, first serve" sign-up style. Personally, if someone else wants to take the Bucs from me in order to get in, I will switch out to someone else as long as it gets the league filled... the Bucs are my hometown team, but I would be fine with experimenting with someone else. I think it might also be worth getting back in touch with LMBombers... I think his original objection was opening up the free agent pool to everyone, which I completely agreed with, but it doesn't look like we are going that route.

Just in case I "space out" and stop communicating again... Uncle2Jonas@hotmail.com to get ahold of me.

Josh

I may take some lumps in the 60s but hopefully I can salvage my pride and make the other decades work.

I hear you, as my situation is similar.

As I think about it, I would suggest that the free agent allowance be 5 for the 60s, then 3 for all of the other decades. One does have to admit that the player pool for the 60s is somewhat limited. I believe that would help to make the 60s more competitive.

For what it's worth, I would be OK with this if it is found to be necessary, especially since we would not be using the DH in the 60s, thus meaning we would likely use the bench more. I am a bit of a "purist" with franchise leagues, but I do understand that it isn't always easy to work these things out.