| 0 |
Subject: EMERGENCY VOTE: Score WWE vs. ECW Tonight?
Posted by: Species
- Leader [07724916] Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 15:40
Tried to get people going in the 'ECW Returns' thread, but we have the WWE vs. ECW special going tonight.
Given that it has WWE stars and is being broadcast on the same "main" network as RAW, I would vote to score tonight's show.
Please vote yes or no. |
| 1 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 15:40
|
For Great One:
Yes
|
| 2 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 15:41
|
Oh - forgot to add that the same rationale for scoring SNME would seem to apply equally here.
|
| 3 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 15:46
|
Yes
|
| 4 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 15:53
|
i vote yes. to me, this isn't part of the VincECW brand, but rather the Raw/Smackdown brands.
|
| 5 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 16:45
|
yes
|
| 6 | Bond, James Bond
ID: 4352469
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 17:12
|
yes
|
| 7 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 17:15
|
Motion passes. Show tonight will be scored.
Thanks guys.
|
| 8 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 18:26
|
Damn, Merrill Lynch caught on to my web page translator using IP addresses, firewall avoidance system... no more Rotoguru at work for me anyone, I am completely out of ideas.
|
| 9 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 19:03
|
Get a Blackberry with web access??
|
| 10 | blue hen
Leader
ID: 710321114
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 19:25
|
Actually, this site looks damn good on a blackberry (but better on a Treo).
|
| 11 | Tree
ID: 54528718
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 19:29
|
i've never been able to post on rotoguru using my treo. i can read, but can't post...
|
| 12 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Wed, Jun 07, 2006, 23:57
|
I need to get one or the other i guess (reccomendations? Treo?)... Its a serious disadvantage not having access til 6 at night, especially when a top RB pulls a hammy or some hot pickup comes along.
|
| 13 | Farn
Sustainer
ID: 451044109
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 00:07
|
I tivo'd the show. I may be able to score it, otherwise I won't score it until the weekend.
|
| 14 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 00:19
|
thats ANOTHER thing I want to get... TIVO...
|
| 15 | wiggs
ID: 9430208
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 11:31
|
this vote right here has pretty much sealed my decision on returning next season. Tree is completely anti ECW shows, but then we have this against ecw and it counts. If TBA wanted to have a show against wwe would that could too? or is this different because ECW is actually part of wwe?
|
| 16 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 12:51
|
Tree is completely anti ECW shows, but then we have this against ecw and it counts. If TBA wanted to have a show against wwe would that could too? or is this different because ECW is actually part of wwe?
i am against adding a third weekly show to our scoring system, because we didn't do it for Velocity, or Heat, or any other show.
i firmly believe we should include just the primary and secondary shows, as tradition has dictated, and if decide to start scoring another show, we might as well score them all.
this show was a WWE show.
|
| 17 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 16:12
|
wiggs, why does everything have to be the end of the world----or in this case, the league----for you? The whole leauge has been constructed from scratch, and voting on issues has taken place many, many times. There has been lots of disagreement, which is natural. But a lot of good things have been accomplished through discussion and disagreement.
|
| 18 | wiggs
ID: 9430208
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 17:25
|
Mike D, Because I feel the majority of the votes that take place in this league are not voted on for the best interest of this league. I think people vote for what is best for their team.
Do you think that the league benefits by removing a huge amount of superstar?
We are losing
RVD
Angle
Show
for sure and there have been rumors of about 6-10 other stars moving over there.
|
| 19 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 18:05
|
Tree is definitely wrong putting the ECW show and Heat/Velocity in the same breath. Heat and Velocity were filler and didn't have the level of guys on there that ECW does, didn't tour and have their own independent house shows, have their own championship belts, have thier own PPVs... did they?
When advertising someone would appear in a match or whatever - it was either RAW Superstar HHH or SD Superstar Paul London. Did they ever say Velocity Superstar Paul London? No. But they sure are saying ECWs Rob Van Dam etc etc.
Its a third brand - its equal to RAW/SD. Hell look at the WWE game - which can be used as a barometer on how WWE plans to approach things. And when they were still on TV, they awarded points for Heat/Velocity but the point amounts were half that Raw/SD. They are now even across the board for all 3.
ECW (WEEK 2, 6/1/06)
Effective for Week 3, the Fantasy Board has incorporated the new ECW brand into the WWE Fantasy Game! The June 7 ECW vs. WWE special and June 11 One Night Stand pay-per-view will both be scored in Week 3, with the special being scored similar to RAW or SmackDown and One Night Stand being scored as a regular pay-per-view. Starting in Week 4, the Tuesday night ECW television show will be scored, with scoring similar to a RAW or SmackDown.
Several ECW Superstars are now selectable for Week 3 at varying salaries; going forward, more will be added as necessary in the same way new RAW or SmackDown Superstars are added. No matter what brand they appear on, any Superstar in the Fantasy Game will receive points if they show up on another brand's show (i.e. John Cena at ECW One Night Stand).
|
| 20 | kev
Donor
ID: 043111845
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 18:11
|
I figure for the rest of this season, we shouldn't add it. I do believe though, for next season, it should be added. Maybe this is the time to...REDRAFT full rosters!!!
*huge pop*
Then, nobody is at a disadvantage...
Just my 2 pennies.
|
| 21 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 18:24
|
Absolutely... we can give it a test drive this summer and get a perfect plan by next season... though I don't want to redraft, I think with the expansion of rosters, they will be shook up enough.
|
| 22 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 20:45
|
Totally agree with kev.
|
| 23 | Tree
ID: 5555820
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 21:10
|
Tree is definitely wrong putting the ECW show and Heat/Velocity in the same breath. Heat and Velocity were filler and didn't have the level of guys on there that ECW does, didn't tour and have their own independent house shows, have their own championship belts, have thier own PPVs... did they?
i disagree. the guys on Velocity and Heat all had WWE contracts. the majority of guys in ECW didn't have WWE contracts until this happened.
and i'm sorry, but calling the guys on velocity "filler" is ludicrious. as recently as a month ago, folks like Lashley and Finlay were on Velocity, as were MNM, when they were tag team champs.
|
| 24 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Thu, Jun 08, 2006, 23:33
|
The guys on the Velocity weren't filler - rather the shows themselves were essentially the leftovers of the roster they couldn't cram into the other 2 hours...
Did Velocity/Heat have any of the following?
Velocity/Heat exclusive talent?(right now isn't a good example with all the reshuffling, but going forward...)
Velocity/Heat championship belts?
Velocity/Heat tour and house shows?
Velocity/Heat PPVs?
That's a BIG difference.
|
| 25 | Tree
ID: 154395
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 06:47
|
heck, if anything, to me, that's MORE reason to count Velocity and Heat - because they featured actual Smackdown and Raw wrestlers...
|
| 26 | Farn
Sustainer
ID: 451044109
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 08:30
|
Few things.
First off, I agree with wiggs to some degree. We have a lot of votes on here where managers vote completely in a self-serving manner. Its absurd but its the norm here.
Second, waiting until next season to score ECW? Sounds wrong to me. If its considered a 3rd brand now, not a minor league brand, then it should be scored now.
Third, I'm 100% against a redraft for next season. If we redraft to start next year and yet we still stick with the same draft pick trades we made this year I'd be retiring from the league. I make trades during a season under the assumption that the following year I will be retaining wrestlers I traded my draft picks for. If thats not the case there better be at least a full season warning. So if we do a full redraft for next year I can already tell you I'd be gone (assuming we honor draft pick trades from this year).
Oh, and scoring ECW vs. WWE? Wrong. 100% disagree with it. You either don't score it or you score all ECW shows. There should be no middle ground. So although I actually scored it let me be 100% clear that I think its wrong and once again, self-serving to some of those who voted for it.
|
| 27 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 10:13
|
First off, I agree with wiggs to some degree. We have a lot of votes on here where managers vote completely in a self-serving manner. Its absurd but its the norm here.
i disagree 100 percent. man, with Rey taking on Sabu the other night, and RVD later, to me, it looks like they're building toward getting Rey into ECW. and i would still be against scoring ECW.
Second, waiting until next season to score ECW? Sounds wrong to me. If its considered a 3rd brand now, not a minor league brand, then it should be scored now.
it's not a third brand. it's a completely different entity. at least that's how i feel about it. in Raw and Smackdown, you don't have guys "defecting" to the other brand, because it's not allowed. they have to be drafted, or allocated there, or what have you.
but people can defect to ECW?
Third, I'm 100% against a redraft for next season. If we redraft to start next year and yet we still stick with the same draft pick trades we made this year I'd be retiring from the league. I make trades during a season under the assumption that the following year I will be retaining wrestlers I traded my draft picks for. If thats not the case there better be at least a full season warning. So if we do a full redraft for next year I can already tell you I'd be gone (assuming we honor draft pick trades from this year).
i agree with you here. no redraft. people have spent too long, working on their teams.
Oh, and scoring ECW vs. WWE? Wrong. 100% disagree with it. You either don't score it or you score all ECW shows. There should be no middle ground. So although I actually scored it let me be 100% clear that I think its wrong and once again, self-serving to some of those who voted for it.
i'll be plain again. it wasn't an ECW show. this was a WWE show, that served to help jump start the ECW television program.
when the dust settles, i don't believe there will be any intermingling of the programs.
|
| 28 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 17:49
|
Good point, ECW was given draft picks just like when they do the draft lottery. Further solidifying the fact that its an equal 3rd brand.
|
| 29 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 17:57
|
Tree makes a good counterpoint on the WWE vs. ECW scoring issue. This was on USA Network, RAW's network, and was a WWE show to help promote a new TV show that will be on another network.
We don't have to redraft next year. We can still choose to implement scoring ECW, expand rosters, add ECW roster limits, etc during the "off season" if we want. I don't think ECW scoring is closed off forever, and I think the league simply said that implementing an in-season roster makeup change was not what was wanted.
|
| 30 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 18:00
|
Agreed. I'd love to include EC-Dub. Heck, it's been my team name for several years of playing.
|
| 31 | Bond, James Bond
Donor
ID: 4352469
Fri, Jun 09, 2006, 22:12
|
Also have sent my sentiments with adding ECW-- just not during our current season.
I would be in favor of expanding our rosters, if necessary, to include ECW talent for our next draft.
|
| 32 | Tree
ID: 5559109
Sat, Jun 10, 2006, 11:01
|
if roster expansion happens due to scoring ECW, i'd like to see it be no more than one guy. the idea of having a deep free agent pool will make the league even more challenging, because you'll actually have guys in the free agent pool scoring points...
|
| 33 | Bond, James Bond
Donor
ID: 4352469
Sat, Jun 10, 2006, 11:33
|
So what are you saying Tree? That you'd like to expand to 9 superstars per roster with 6 starting OR 9 superstars per roster with 7 starting?
Personally, I think we could probably expand to 10 superstars per roster with either 7 or 8 starting and still have a legitimate free agent pool.
|
| 34 | Great One
ID: 11139517
Sat, Jun 10, 2006, 11:53
|
I proposed earlier that we go from 8 to 10. Starting 8, and then the ECW slots would be flex spots so you wouldn't be absolutely forced to use ECW or if you don't want to, but it will a maximum of 2.
Starting Lineup
WWE, WWE, WWE, WWE, WWE, WWE, WWE/ECW, WWE/ECW
Then on the other hand, I guess if everyone is equal, who cares, you could have all 8 be ECW guys if you really wanted lol... though I don't think you'd want to.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|