| General Fantasy Sports View the Forum Registry | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: Week 2 - Raw Points Posted by: mIST - [5351150] Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 03:40 Jerry Lawler: 2 + 5 + 30 = 37 HHH: 2 + 2 + 5 = 9 Eric Bischoff: 2 + 2 + 2 + 5 + 2 = 13 Chris Jericho: 5 + 10 = 15 Christian: 5 + 5 = 10 Steve Austin: 5 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 11 RVD: 10 Spike Dudley: 15 Rob Conway: 30 Bubba Ray: 5 D-Von: 5 Sylvain Grenier: 5 Rene Dupree: 5 Coach: 2 + 5 + 5 = 12 Al Snow: 2 + 5 + 15 = 22 Moolah: 2 + 30 = 32 Mae Young: 2 + 5 = 7 Victoria: 15 Randy Orton: 5 + 2 + 2 = 9 Mark Henry: 25 Rodney Mack: 25 Theodore Long: 5 Goldust: 12 Lance Storm: 12 Maven: 2 HBK: 2 The Hurricane: 2 Rosey: 2 Molly Holly: 2 + 25 + 2 = 29 Gail Kim: 2 + 25 + 2 = 29 Shane McMahon: 5 Kane: 5 Trish Stratus: 15 Lita: 5 Test: 15 Stacy: 5 Scott Steiner: 5 Val Venis: 30 Ric Flair: 2 Goldberg: 5 No main event points this week. | |||||||
| 1 | wiggs Donor ID: 13812714 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 09:52 |
I have a couple things from the scoring 1) flair should have 4 points 2 for then they were in the hallway talking to orton before the michael scene and 2 for when austin stopped them before the goldberg party 2) JR was missed for announcing the show. 3) Coach should only get 2 for his back stage and 2 for announcing the 1 match. I dont see how JR and king can announce the whole thing for 2 points, but coach and king get 5 for coming out to do 1 match. Then coach gets 5 more for coming out a second time. If he gets the 5 for punching JR then JR should get the 5 too, as he was as involved as coach. 4) shouldnt I get points for all the goldberg promos? They were part of the show. I am not sure about this, just asking. | ||||||
| 2 | Mike D Donor ID: 7851168 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 09:54 | Wiggs, the Goldberg promos were more like commercials in my opinion, and no points should be given. I have no idea if there is precedent for this, but that seems to make sense to me. | ||||||
| 3 | wiggs Donor ID: 13812714 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:00 | Mike D, that is fine, i wasnt sure about that one anyways. It was more of a question then a statement. I thought that points were given when they did the promo before he stated wrestling for the wwe, but i could be wrong. | ||||||
| 4 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:19 |
Re coach/JR/Lawler/Snow, I have Coach at 2+2+5, JR at 2+5, Lawler at 2+5+30, Snow at 2+2+15. JR and Lawler get 5 each for in-ring vignette points. Coach gets 5 for nailing JR. | ||||||
| 5 | mIST ID: 5351150 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:28 |
Ok for Flair. About JR: i never counted him as I don't count Cole on Smackdown. Maybe I should start :) | ||||||
| 6 | wiggs Donor ID: 13812714 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:29 | Mith, I can live with that. I thought JR would get points for getting attacked too, but either way, i didnt think coach should get 12. Thanks MITH | ||||||
| 7 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:35 | Personally - and I don't believe this is something that has come up before so this is completely off the cuff and debatable - I feel that interfering in a match or the show itself should be good for 5 points. If someone knocks over Lilian Garcia or the Spanish announcers to grab their chair (even if they fall over and never use the chair), that aggressor gets 5 points, but unless Lilian or los announcereros gets involved, we never award them extra points. Perhaps we should? I don't know. Post 4 is how I would have called it, but isn't necesesarily more right than someone else's different take. | ||||||
| 8 | Mike D Donor ID: 7851168 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:50 | Tough to balance all of this. Simply getting knocked out of the way so someone can grab your chair, a la Lillian, seems a tad extreme to be given 5 points. The overall purpose of the scoring system is to reward the people involved the most. I’d prefer we keep scoring slanted to the wrestlers as opposed to the absolutely insignificant person who happens to be sitting in a ringside chair. Imagine a waiver claim for Lillian. Oh the horror. | ||||||
| 9 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 10:54 | Hmmm. Maybe JR should get 2+5+5. | ||||||
| 10 | Species Sustainer ID: 569221717 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 11:00 |
You know you've had a bad week when: 1 - The combined output of three PPV-bound wrestlers pale in comparison to The Fabulous Moolah. (Shane 5, Christian 10, Steiner 5) 2 - Victoria has to job to The Fabulous Moolah. On a side note, Victoria's thong-looking tights looked pretty hot! Although she pails in comparison to my first loves, Stacy and Gail. Woo baby. | ||||||
| 11 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 11:02 | It suck for you Champ, but I thought the Moolah segment was pretty cool. Kudos to Victoria and especially to Moolah. | ||||||
| 12 | Mike D Donor ID: 7851168 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 11:08 | Agreed with Species about Victoria, on both issues (thong and job). Can’t believe I typed both of those in the same sentence. | ||||||
| 13 | Great One Donor ID: 298341017 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 12:41 | share... share... how about a picture of Victoria guys! :) | ||||||
| 14 | Tree Donor ID: 599393013 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 13:43 |
i'd like a pic too, since i missed that match. as for JR getting points for being beaten up, it's a hard call. did JR get points when Kane lit him on fire? does someone get points if they're found laying in a pool of blood backstage due to a "mysterious attacker?" i think, because it is part of an ongoing storyline, we have to do with JR what we would do in either of the above situations. he was an active participant, for sure, and not a lay-about like lillian "my record ain't sold at all, so i still have to do this crappy ring announcing gig" garcia... um, did someone say thong? victoria? and none of them, btw, are as hot as Lita. | ||||||
| 15 | Mike D Donor ID: 41831612 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 13:48 |
Tree, JR was interviewing Kane when he was set on fire, so that isn't a fair analogy, FWIW. Victoria. Thong. Yup. | ||||||
| 16 | Tree Donor ID: 599393013 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 13:52 | so i guess the question is whether JR getting attacked by Coach is a different segment then when he was announcing. | ||||||
| 17 | Mike D Donor ID: 41831612 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 14:01 | Right. And since he was sitting there at the announce table when it happened, I say it was the same segment. Different from JR getting up, walking into the ring and being attacked. | ||||||
| 18 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 14:23 |
No one had JR active, did they? So the incident is entirely irrelevant in terms of league scoring, which is good. But since it has come up, we should decide how to handle it. I tend to think that it isn't so much an issue of whether JR getting attacked by Coach is a different segment then when he was announcing. JR was announcing the whole show. He doesn't get another 2 points for every segment he announces in. He was announcing in the segments before the incident with coach, and then again in some more after the incident. He gets his two points no matter what. Now, if he were to leave the table and go into the ring, he'd get extra points. Weeks ago when King went to help Linda McMahon at the top of the ramp when Kane attacked her, we gave him points, didn't we? If not then I think we should have. I think the greater issue here is whether it makes a difference if the announcer does not leave the table. We've had many instances when the announcers would verbally interact with whoever was in the ring during a vignette and did not get points for participating in it, which I think is right. But imo, once JR was knocked over, he bacame part of the vignette. I think I was wrong in post 4 and that my suggestion in post 9 is probably the best way to handle it. | ||||||
| 19 | Mike D Donor ID: 41831612 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 14:39 | This league is awesome. Where else would it possibly matter whether JR left the table before being struck? | ||||||
| 20 | wiggs Donor ID: 0201411 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 15:05 | i have JR active. | ||||||
| 21 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 15:07 | Then all the more reason why this must be resolved. | ||||||
| 22 | Tree Donor ID: 599393013 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 17:25 |
"that's it, i quit!!" oops...sorry. i thought i was someone else (no names mentioned) for a minute... | ||||||
| 23 | Species Sustainer ID: 569221717 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 18:56 |
Just to help those that didn't see it.....(Victoria's outfit that is) Imagine black skin-tight leather hip-hugging pants that BARELY cover the top of the crack of her butt. Then imagine a similar-material thong coming up the crack to the straps that go around her hips (that are usually higher than most undergarments) and to the front, there it makes a "V" back to the hip-hugging pants. I'm not giving it justice.......but it was hot!! | ||||||
| 24 | Great One Donor ID: 298341017 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 19:37 | like how lita's thongs always stuck out, just with hotter material? | ||||||
| 25 | Mike D Donor ID: 23715270 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 19:40 | Yes, and yes. | ||||||
| 26 | Tree Donor ID: 228241222 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 20:21 | i love lita. | ||||||
| 27 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 217351118 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 20:25 | As much as Lita's bra and Victoria's thong are nice to talk about, we still have to ...uh ...what were we discussing? | ||||||
| 28 | Mike D Donor ID: 23715270 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 20:44 | I have no idea. | ||||||
| 29 | GoatLocker Sustainer ID: 60151121 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 21:03 |
Discussing, Well, I thought it was Lita and Victoria. And yes, what an outfit last nite. Cliff | ||||||
| 30 | Mike D Donor ID: 23715270 Tue, Sep 16, 2003, 21:07 |
 Here is the front | ||||||
| 31 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 217351118 Wed, Sep 17, 2003, 07:00 | OK, back to JR's points, does anyone have an issue with post 18? | ||||||
| 32 | Mike D Donor ID: 41831612 Wed, Sep 17, 2003, 12:02 | They must have moved that pic. | ||||||
| 33 | Tree Donor ID: 278211719 Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 14:37 | ok, so what did we decide? LOL i've got tally this bitch... | ||||||
| 34 | Mattinglyinthehall Sustainer ID: 1629107 Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 14:42 | Well, you know how I feel. Perhaps non-response should be taken as an answer of 'no' to my question in 31. | ||||||
| 35 | mIST ID: 3701817 Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 14:53 | Okay 2+5+5 | ||||||
| 36 | wiggs Donor ID: 13812714 Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 16:11 | 2 5 5 seems good to me | ||||||
| 37 | GoatLocker Sustainer ID: 60151121 Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 18:09 |
Good to me too. Cliff | ||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) | ||||||||