We have mostly long tenured owners these days. I am going to save my lengthy explanations of the history of our league and rule changes. I am hopeful everyone understands the great flexibility our league has shown as we have navigated all the changes over the last 30 years.

We have voted on big changes and many minor tweaks of an existing rule. I mostly use in-season feedback for proposed rule changes. There is relatively little competitive advantage these days using Fantrax with all the fantasy info available to owners. My goal is to reward an owner's fantasy skills while also providing the best league experience (including Commish role).

There are three proposed College rule changes we will vote on this year:

VOTE 1 (RL)
Rosters/Lineups

Our current roster format is 12 players, with 7 starters. Previously we added a 3rd optional player, but still had 7 starters. It has been proposed to increase both the roster size and number of starters in a lineup.

The proposal is as follows:
--Increase roster to 13 by adding a 3rd optional player (RB/WR)
--Increase starters to 8 by adding a starting optional player spot.
--Lineup would change to QB, RB(2), WR(2), Opt (RB/WR), K and Def.

To accommodate the extra roster spot, we would add 4 available college teams to the initial list of 40. (Colorado, Kansas State, Pittsburgh and Wisconsin) 

This proposed change would impact multiple areas. Owners would have greater roster flexibility, especially on the heavy bye weeks. The roster/lineup increase will likely more fairly reward owners that successfully manage their team throughout the entire season. In a 10 week regular season, a few good owner decisions can significantly impact the usually ultra tight college league. Another upside is team's having potentially another sub available in cases of a last minute player sitting out. (an upside Mike will agree with) A bigger roster/starting lineup is the reality of what fantasy sports tends to be these days.

There would be 10 less free agents available, hence, adding the four additional schools. The amount of quality free agents available varies significantly year to year. That is a reflection of the ever changing college game and not a major concern for me with this proposed change. Bye week challenges still exist. Team's need to manage their bye weeks, that will not change with this proposal.

The proposed change is as follows:
Expand rosters to 13 players with 8 starters.

RULE VOTE 1
A) Keep the current rule, 12 roster players with 7 starters.
B) Change rule to 13 roster players with 8 starters.

VOTE 2 (FA)
Free Agent Add/Drop Transactions- QB, K, and DEF

Since the college league started, our league has always had a limit of 3 free agent add/drop transactions at QB, K and DEF. When the rule was written the regular season was 8 weeks. This has been an ongoing debate for years now, with a 5-5 vote last year. It has been proposed to revisit this rule again as it is felt the limit of 3 is not appropriate for the amount of weeks in the season.

Despite that growth in regular season weeks, we have remained at a limit of 3 free agent QB, K and DEF transactions. We have 10 engaged teams and teams are maxing out their moves at a significantly higher rate in recent years. Increasing the limit to 4 will allow more flexibility in managing your team throughout the often volatile college season. There would still be a limit on free agent moves, thus limiting an owner from simply playing weekly matchups or as an ongoing bye week management resource.

While we are now back to 10 regular season weeks, the question remains.... is 3 the appropriate limit? Do we want to give a little more flexibility to manage your team, or stick with the longstanding limit of 3 moves?

The proposed change is as follows:
Increase free agent add/drop transactions from 3 to 4 at QB, K and DEF.

RULE VOTE 2
A) Keep the current rule, limit of 3 free agent add/drop transactions at QB, K and DEF.
B) Change rule, limit of 4 free agent add/drop transactions at QB, K and DEF.

VOTE 3 (IR)
Playoff IR Moves (K)

Once the playoffs start and rosters are locked, IR moves are permitted but you can only replace a player with a player from the same NCAA team. That had been a long standing rule that was changed during Covid, but changed back in 2024 by a 10-0 vote. A scenario played out last year that led to a discussion on a specific issue with the current rule.

The issue is at the K position. Basically, you can not make an IR move for K in the playoffs since we use team kickers. When seasons are on the line in the playoffs, any disadvantage could be crucial. Is it fair for a team to be stuck during the playoffs with the same NCAA team kicker, even with an injured primary K? Kicker is a specialized position and frequently the replacement K(s) have little to no experience. What if your other K is on a bye in the playoffs? You set your playoff roster in good faith but are now stuck without the ability to make an IR move. It is felt this is an unnecessary disadvantage for a team.  Allowing any K to be added in an IR move during the playoffs is the proposal.

The limited IR moves in the playoffs has worked as intended for many years. It is designed to prevent teams from claiming a player with a great matchup or on a recent hot streak in the final two playoff weeks. While K may be less impactful, the desired goal of the playoff IR rule is still you play with the team that got you to the playoffs.

The proposed change is as follows:
During the playoffs once rosters are locked, allow any K to be claimed in an IR move.

RULE VOTE 3
A) Keep the current rule, no IR change for a K allowed during the playoffs.
B) Change rule to allow an IR move for any K during the playoffs.