I don't think this is going to be contentious, but we should have a formal vote. We've had a few days to discuss and now it's time for a vote on the first of the three issues that were brought up earlier.
So, please vote: Should the injury setting be changed from "Average" to "Low" for the 2016 season and beyond?
Zev
I vote yes.
ReplyDeleteI am going to abstain from this vote. I do not think it will make much of a difference, but I will not stand in the way of the league vote. I have just crafted my team to be successful even with injuries with backups for SP Gerth and 2B Burton performing when the starters went down with injuries. Therefore, it will not make much difference for me if we go to less frequent injuries or if we stay at the current level. As I have said before, there will still be injuries, and they will still suck (in my opinion even more, which I know is not shared by many others) with the lower setting.
ReplyDeleteWe did this before and a majority of the voters said yes and nothin was enacted. Let's keep this one moving. Yes, of course.
ReplyDeleteYes I agree.
ReplyDeleteSeattle votes yes.
ReplyDeleteGlad I checked back. That, by my count, makes it 5-0 (with one abstention) for changing the setting. One more and we'll have a majority of owners and we can put this one to bed.
ReplyDeleteWho's next?
Saskatoon votes Yes.
ReplyDeleteAnd there we go! That makes the vote, at a minimum 6-0-1 and we do it.
ReplyDeleteLet's move on to the next thing, then. Finances, wasn't it? What happened to the proposal that was enacted last season? That never got implemented.
Following up on what Nate said, what was implemented last season with finances? Was it just a one time paayment to teams based on how much their Media contracts should have been? Is it going to happen again this offseason? I think we need to make sure the fix is put in before we roll over to next season...
ReplyDeleteI guess we can consider this one passed.
ReplyDeleteMy understanding was that the changes we made last year were one-time changes. Hence my proposal in the previous post for a permenant system.
Of course, you're free to suggest changes to my proposal, trash it, or make one of your own. I'm open to suggestions.
Zev
And some of my confusion about the financial situation is cleared up. I assumed the changes we made last year were intended to be permanent - a permanent boost to certain teams' media revenues and their budgets.
ReplyDeleteI'd suggest we tackle the scheduling issues before financial changes (Zev's improved schedule and/or the proposals for realignment, three divisions, interleague play, etc.), as I think that's easier to resolve than the financial issue. But, I obviously leave that up to Zev to decide.
I had assumed the financial changes were permanent as well.
ReplyDeleteWell, I missed the vote, but would have voted "yes."
ReplyDeleteCan we talk about the three division / one wild-card thing? I very strongly favor this proposal.
Let's leave the discussion regarding financial and scheduling issues to separate threads, please.
ReplyDeleteSince the injury vote has finished, let's leave this thread be.
Remember Frank, vote early and vote often.
ReplyDelete