Let’s say you’re an NFL player competing in a fantasy league with six fellow pros and some guy who won a contest. How early would you draft yourself? Would you pass because of value or conflict of interest?

In the 2009 edition of the NFL Players fantasy league, three of the seven NFL competitors drafted themselves. Carolina running back DeAngelo Williams joined his own team with the final pick of Round 1 in the eight-team collection. Dallas receiver Roy Williams added himself in the fifth round, three rounds after selecting former teammate Calvin Johnson as his No. 1 receiver. Jets running back Leon Washington plucked himself from the board in Round 11, just two rounds from the end.

Chicago running back Matt Forte never got the chance to lead his own team, as Miami back Ronnie Brown snapped him up a pick earlier in the first round. Forte did draft a league-high three teammates, however, choosing QB Jay Cutler in the fifth round, TE Greg Olsen in the sixth and fantasy leaguemate Robbie Gould in the eighth. Gould might have made the draft’s smartest pick by selecting the Bears defense. That should help to protect from at least some of the harassment that might befall other kickers.

In perhaps the ultimate warning sign against his own fantasy value in 2009, Brown passed on himself through four rounds before Roy Williams finally selected him. Houston linebacker and 2008 league champion Cato June couldn’t draft himself because of the format but also had no interest in the Texans defense or any of his new teammates, apparently.

The lone non-football player in the league, contest winner Dave Stasinski, had to like drafting with a group that allowed him to make selections such as Washington running back Clinton Portis in Round 6 and Buffalo back Marshawn Lynch in the 13th and final round.

The full draft can be viewed at NFLPlayers.com via the link provided above.

No matter what you think of Matt Forte’s fantasy prospects for the coming season, he seems excited for it to get here.

The Bears’ second-year running back will be one of seven NFLers in this year’s incarnation of the fantasy competition put on by NFL Players, the marketing and business arm of the players association.

“I plan on going all-in,” Forte said in an interview with Mark Donnelly of NFLPlayers.com. “This is my first time so I have to get the full experience. I think I have a lot of spare time to do some things. I plan on doing all that fantasy stuff after practice. I think I’m going to get hooked and start playing every year.”

Forte said he got some pointers from friend and Jacksonville running back Maurice Jones-Drew, whom he said plays “a lot” of fantasy football. Forte must be catching on quickly, though, because he also said he doesn’t trust the advice of a fellow fantasy player. (Jones-Drew competed in the 2008 edition.)

The competition pits seven football players — Ronnie Brown (Miami), Robbie Gould (Chicago), Leon Washington (N.Y. Jets), DeAngelo Williams (Carolina), Roy Williams (Dallas) and 2008 champ Cato June (Houston), along with Forte — and one contest winner against each other. This is the first time in the three years of the production that a non-NFL participant has been welcomed.

Roy Williams happens to be a fantasy veteran, though he’ll have to hope he learned his lesson last time. The receiver finished last in the NFL Players league’s inaugural season in 2007.

“Consistency is the key and I didn’t have it,” Williams said of his loss, in an interview with NFLPlayers.com. “It’s very hard to put your lineup together when you’re trying to guess and sometimes I caught myself guessing a lot of weeks.”

(If he’s looking for consistency, let’s hope he’s not relying on himself at receiver.)

It’s nice that this event gives a taste of the fantasy game to actual players, who might otherwise just know fantasy as the only thing that fans seem to ask them about these days. We’ll try to keep an eye on who comes out on top this time around.

The choice by Yahoo! to file suit against the NFL Players Association in the same federal court circuit that has ruled favorably in two previous fantasy sports cases makes sense not only as a way to keep things on friendly ground, but also to avoid a Florida district that has been unkind in the past. An FSB.com review of the various court filings, however, suggests that the venue might not be as important as you’d think.

Obviously, the Eighth Circuit — which includes both the Minnesota district court that found for CBS and the eastern Missouri court in which the CBC case was filed — is the logical choice for any fantasy company logging such a licensing challenge.

On the other hand, a 2000 suit brought by Gridiron.com against the NFLPA in the southern district of Florida ended with a ruling in favor of the NFLPA’s licensing rights. The fact that the NFLPA chose this same district in which to file a countersuit last year against CBS makes it clear that the group likes its chances there based on that Gridiron.com ruling.

That countersuit, of course, was swept out as part of the decision in CBS’ favor back in March — which remains under appeal - so we won’t know how the Florida court might have ruled this time around. The key difference, though, is that the Gridiron.com case centered on the use of player likenesses — photos — whereas those since have made official mention only of player statistics and information.

In the 2000 suit, Gridiron.com apparently signed contracts with “over one hundred and fifty” NFL players for the rights to their likenesses in its fantasy football game and posited that it didn’t need to pay licensing fees to the NFLPA for those rights. The NFLPA — which had specific exclusive licensing deals with about 97 percent of the league’s players at the time — had little trouble defeating that notion in court.

The decision says only that Gridiron.com could not use six or more player photos without owing fees to the NFLPA and makes no specific mention of player stats or biographical or other info. The filings submitted by CBC, CBS and Yahoo, however, make no specific mention of player likenesses and instead focus on stats and information.

The 2007 ruling in CBC’s favor against MLB Advanced Media was appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, which refused to even hear the appeal in 2008, thus upholding the decision. The CBS case decided back in March reached the same result, finding that the fantasy sports producer doesn’t owe licensing fees for the use of stats and player information. Although the appeal remains outstanding in that case, it’s tough to imagine a reversal in light of the CBC precedent.

Now, I have slightly less legal training than Sam Waterston, but the precedential groundwork laid by those two cases would seem to make it hard for an opposite ruling in any similar suit to stand through appeal — if it were even handed down in the first place. If the Supreme Court isn’t even willing to review the decision that player statistics and information reside in the free public forum, what grounds do south Florida judges or any others have to say otherwise?

The exclusive rights to player photos make sense. An individual should be able to benefit from profits related to use of his or her likeness. The facts, however, are free. Maybe a ruling to that effect in the Yahoo! case will end assertions to the contrary.

(Note: Hat tip to loyal FSB.com reader Randal Burgess for calling the Gridiron.com case to our attention.)

According to the Yahoo! filing in U.S. District Court in Minnesota on Monday, the company tried to resolve or clarify its issue with the NFL Players Association in the two weeks before taking the fight to court.

Here is the timeline as it appears in the court papers (with events paraphrased) …

May 21 – Yahoo! spoke with NFLPA representatives about its assertion that licensing agreements would no longer be necessary for use of player stats and other information, in light of the recent ruling in CBS v. NFLPA.

May 26 — Yahoo! contacted the NFLPA again and asked for written confirmation of the association’s position on whether a licensing agreement would be required. The NFLPA declined.

May 28 — The NFLPA appealed the CBS ruling.

May 29 — Yahoo! wrote to the NFLPA to address the lack of written confirmation of the NFLPA’s position, in light of the CBS appeal. Yahoo! asked for a “simple representation” by June 1 that the NFLPA wouldn’t sue the company for operating its fantasy football game without a new licensing agreement. The NFLPA refused to meet that deadline and instead sought to plan a discussion for later in the week.

June 1 — Yahoo! filed suit.