Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
After thinking about this a little further I am in favor of the following changes for 2010.
1. Add two more teams.
2. Change the playoffs to 6 teams, held during weeks 14, 15, and 16.
3. Change payout structure to 20% Regular season winner, 50% Playoff winner, 30% playoff runner-up. Maybe we could payout top 3 in playoffs, but I am very much in favor of rewarding the regular season winner.
4. Add special teams to the DEF position.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
I think I could get behind all of that, though I still think a first round bye is enough of a reward for the regular season. But if we decided to go that route, I'd say make it 20% for the playoff runner-up and 10% for 3rd place (i.e. have the 3rd place game mean something).
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena. ![[Image: ITgoyeg.png]](http://i.imgur.com/ITgoyeg.png)
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71581:date=Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think it's also worth noting that the money in this league is far too small to divide up that way. Our total pot is $250. If you're saying the pot will be split in half first based on regular season & playoffs, and then divided up further from there, you'll have a scenario where the winner of the playoffs will get all of like $60-75 after paying $25 to be in the league.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure I understand why that would be unfair. Are you suggesting the winner of the playoffs should get a lot more money than the points total winner?
If we go under the assumption that in almost all cases, the team with the highest point total is the actual "best" team, and that the playoffs are, at best, random and unfair, why shouldn't the person who puts together the best team be rewarded?
I guess it's a matter of opinion. I think the team with the most points at the end of the year deserves more reward than the team that wins the super bowl, simply because the super bowl tends to be far more arbitrary. PCB had the EIGHTH best team in the league, and has a 50/50 shot to be in the super bowl. It's great that he has that chance, but I don't know that we should be showering him with money because of quirks of scheduling.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71584:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:59 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 14 2009, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71581:date=Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think it's also worth noting that the money in this league is far too small to divide up that way. Our total pot is $250. If you're saying the pot will be split in half first based on regular season & playoffs, and then divided up further from there, you'll have a scenario where the winner of the playoffs will get all of like $60-75 after paying $25 to be in the league.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure I understand why that would be unfair. Are you suggesting the winner of the playoffs should get a lot more money than the points total winner?
If we go under the assumption that in almost all cases, the team with the highest point total is the actual "best" team, and that the playoffs are, at best, random and unfair, why shouldn't the person who puts together the best team be rewarded?
I guess it's a matter of opinion. I think the team with the most points at the end of the year deserves more reward than the team that wins the super bowl, simply because the super bowl tends to be far more arbitrary. PCB had the EIGHTH best team in the league, and has a 50/50 shot to be in the super bowl. It's great that he has that chance, but I don't know that we should be showering him with money because of quirks of scheduling.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, that's completely contrary to the way sports work. The Steelers won the Super Bowl a couple of years ago even though they were the #6 seed in the AFC playoffs, and they beat the #1, 2, & 3 teams in the AFC, & the #1 team in the NFC to do it. Who remembers that the Colts had the best record in the NFL that season? Based on what you were saying, they weren't the best team in the NFL, but who cares? Nobody says "well, the Steelers won the Super Bowl, but that doesn't really matter, the Colts went 14-2!"
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71585:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:07 AM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 09:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71584:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:59 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Dec 14 2009, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71581:date=Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think it's also worth noting that the money in this league is far too small to divide up that way. Our total pot is $250. If you're saying the pot will be split in half first based on regular season & playoffs, and then divided up further from there, you'll have a scenario where the winner of the playoffs will get all of like $60-75 after paying $25 to be in the league.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure I understand why that would be unfair. Are you suggesting the winner of the playoffs should get a lot more money than the points total winner?
If we go under the assumption that in almost all cases, the team with the highest point total is the actual "best" team, and that the playoffs are, at best, random and unfair, why shouldn't the person who puts together the best team be rewarded?
I guess it's a matter of opinion. I think the team with the most points at the end of the year deserves more reward than the team that wins the super bowl, simply because the super bowl tends to be far more arbitrary. PCB had the EIGHTH best team in the league, and has a 50/50 shot to be in the super bowl. It's great that he has that chance, but I don't know that we should be showering him with money because of quirks of scheduling.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, that's completely contrary to the way sports work. The Steelers won the Super Bowl a couple of years ago even though they were the #6 seed in the AFC playoffs, and they beat the #1, 2, & 3 teams in the AFC, & the #1 team in the NFC to do it. Who remembers that the Colts had the best record in the NFL that season? Based on what you were saying, they weren't the best team in the NFL, but who cares? Nobody says "well, the Steelers won the Super Bowl, but that doesn't really matter, the Colts went 14-2!"
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Kid, that analogy simply doesn't work. The Steelers won the super bowl because THEY played well enough to win. PCB beat me yesterday because the Bears defense (who have nothing to do with PCB's team) held Rodgers to zero touchdowns, and because the Raiders (who have nothing to do with my team) couldn't stop Ganther on the goal line twice. The Steelers beating 4 teams means they EARNED the super bowl win.
In real sports teams control what happens to them. In fantasy sports, we are subjects to the whims of scheduling. Put another way, it is completely conceivable (though not likely) that a team that comes in 9th every week in points can win our Super Bowl. Because they don't actually have to "play" anyone, they simply have to have the schedule work out that they are playing the one team each week that is worse than them.
In that respect, fantasy and the NFL are not comparable. No one in the world is dumb enough to think that the NFL team that puts up the most points in a season is entitled to anything. Does that mean point totals in fantasy shouldn't count for anything as well?
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71587:date=Dec 14 2009, 10:42 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 14 2009, 10:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71585:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:07 AM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 09:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71584:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:59 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Dec 14 2009, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71581:date=Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think it's also worth noting that the money in this league is far too small to divide up that way. Our total pot is $250. If you're saying the pot will be split in half first based on regular season & playoffs, and then divided up further from there, you'll have a scenario where the winner of the playoffs will get all of like $60-75 after paying $25 to be in the league.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure I understand why that would be unfair. Are you suggesting the winner of the playoffs should get a lot more money than the points total winner?
If we go under the assumption that in almost all cases, the team with the highest point total is the actual "best" team, and that the playoffs are, at best, random and unfair, why shouldn't the person who puts together the best team be rewarded?
I guess it's a matter of opinion. I think the team with the most points at the end of the year deserves more reward than the team that wins the super bowl, simply because the super bowl tends to be far more arbitrary. PCB had the EIGHTH best team in the league, and has a 50/50 shot to be in the super bowl. It's great that he has that chance, but I don't know that we should be showering him with money because of quirks of scheduling.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, that's completely contrary to the way sports work. The Steelers won the Super Bowl a couple of years ago even though they were the #6 seed in the AFC playoffs, and they beat the #1, 2, & 3 teams in the AFC, & the #1 team in the NFC to do it. Who remembers that the Colts had the best record in the NFL that season? Based on what you were saying, they weren't the best team in the NFL, but who cares? Nobody says "well, the Steelers won the Super Bowl, but that doesn't really matter, the Colts went 14-2!"
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Kid, that analogy simply doesn't work. The Steelers won the super bowl because THEY played well enough to win. PCB beat me yesterday because the Bears defense (who have nothing to do with PCB's team) held Rodgers to zero touchdowns, and because the Raiders (who have nothing to do with my team) couldn't stop Ganther on the goal line twice. The Steelers beating 4 teams means they EARNED the super bowl win.
In real sports teams control what happens to them. In fantasy sports, we are subjects to the whims of scheduling. Put another way, it is completely conceivable (though not likely) that a team that comes in 9th every week in points can win our Super Bowl. Because they don't actually have to "play" anyone, they simply have to have the schedule work out that they are playing the one team each week that is worse than them.
In that respect, fantasy and the NFL are not comparable. No one in the world is dumb enough to think that the NFL team that puts up the most points in a season is entitled to anything. Does that mean point totals in fantasy shouldn't count for anything as well?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Regular season success should mean something - playoff seeding and probably a first round bye for the top teams. Maybe a nominal amount for the top regular season team (something like 20% to the #1 team only).
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena.
Posts: 961
Threads: 22
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
my 2 cents - i know its unpopular but i actually like the playoffs going in weeks 15-17. everyone knows teams rest guys, build your team accordingly. i also think that byes for the top 2 in a 6 team playoffs suffices but i'm not going to complain if we throw a few bucks to the points total regular season winner. again, i think it adds a little complexity when you have to build your roster to do well in the late weeks of the season either by trades or the waiver wire, once you think you're going to be there in the end. if stuff like rodgers being shut out by the bears fucks up your team, then its bad luck. i know its not the case in this situation but i thought the packers were going to kill the bears, score early and then run the rest of the way anyways. this happens sometimes, brees had some real clunkers against shitty teams this year, it happens. the playoffs are somewhat of a crapshoot but i think that if we minimize it to 6 teams (especially if we go 12 team league next year) and give the top 2 a round 1 bye, we're doing enough for the top 2 teams. luck always plays some part in fantasy but for the most part, done like this instead of how we're doing it this year which is pretty dumb, whoever builds the best team for the playoffs will win the league, and maybe they'll get a little luck to do so, but they guessed right when putting in that line up as to who was going to get that luck.
Life is a bitch, but she's totally doable.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71593:date=Dec 14 2009, 12:14 PM:name=liner)-->QUOTE (liner @ Dec 14 2009, 12:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->my 2 cents - i know its unpopular but i actually like the playoffs going in weeks 15-17. everyone knows teams rest guys, build your team accordingly. i also think that byes for the top 2 in a 6 team playoffs suffices but i'm not going to complain if we throw a few bucks to the points total regular season winner. again, i think it adds a little complexity when you have to build your roster to do well in the late weeks of the season either by trades or the waiver wire, once you think you're going to be there in the end. if stuff like rodgers being shut out by the bears fucks up your team, then its bad luck. i know its not the case in this situation but i thought the packers were going to kill the bears, score early and then run the rest of the way anyways. this happens sometimes, brees had some real clunkers against shitty teams this year, it happens. the playoffs are somewhat of a crapshoot but i think that if we minimize it to 6 teams (especially if we go 12 team league next year) and give the top 2 a round 1 bye, we're doing enough for the top 2 teams. luck always plays some part in fantasy but for the most part, done like this instead of how we're doing it this year which is pretty dumb, whoever builds the best team for the playoffs will win the league, and maybe they'll get a little luck to do so, but they guessed right when putting in that line up as to who was going to get that luck.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But going with a week 15-17 schedule is going beyond planning and into pure luck. On draft day, are you telling me I shouldn't be taking Drew Brees or Payton Manning because they probably won't play more than a half of football during the week we have our super bowl? Should the super bowl winner be the guy who was "smart" enough to draft quarterbacks from shitty teams, because they have a better chance of playing on week 17 than really good players do?
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 961
Threads: 22
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
of course not, but if they're going undefeated late in the season you look ahead at the schedule and pick a guy up off of waivers that could help you in week 17. a lot of the time when guys are going to be resting in week 17, they'll also be resting in week 16. also, i didn't say it was the best way, or that the week 16 championship is wrong, just that i like going the full 17 weeks better. i've been playing fantasy football for a long time and i know i'm probably in the minority on this. just voicing my opinion. i wasn't really talking about draft strategies as the nfl is so crazy, you can't fully predict who's definitely going to do what. its more about the in-season waiver wire and trading stuff. obviously you want to draft the strongest team possible but i always think you have to be planning ahead towards the end of the season regardless because that's when the playoffs are. not so much shitty teams, but players on teams with something to fight for may be more valuable than guys on teams that get to coast the last few weeks. that's just the way it is
Life is a bitch, but she's totally doable.
Posts: 1,276
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Fantasy football is a crapshoot all year long. Hell... chitown had the second most points in the league and finished 6-7. I like liner's idea. So count me in the minority to then I guess.
Posts: 92
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Just my two cents:
I can get behind giving the regular season winner some of the pot and think 20% sounds fair. I'm all for more teams but still would like just a six team playoff, making the playoffs should be a real accomplishment, and playing week 17 or not really doesn't bother me one way or the other.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
I'm against playing Week 17 only because of the number of teams that may rest players that week. Yes, it's an issue before Week 17 for a team or 2 every year, but in Week 17, you might have 10 teams that are either resting players for the playoffs, or don't start players if they're playing a game that is irrelevant for both teams. There's no way to stack your roster in preparation for that.
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena.
Posts: 1,276
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Like Chitown the 17th week really does not bother me either way. I just really don't care. I also think the regular season winner should get some money but I am going to have to be sold on that team also getting a bye in the playoffs. I think it should be one or the other. If we do decide to pay the regular season winner a certain amount we may have to raise the entry fee though.
Posts: 2,806
Threads: 110
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71634:date=Dec 14 2009, 04:57 PM:name=stevestonescigar)-->QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Dec 14 2009, 04:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Like Chitown the 17th week really does not bother me either way. I just really don't care. I also think the regular season winner should get some money but I am going to have to be sold on that team also getting a bye in the playoffs. I think it should be one or the other. If we do decide to pay the regular season winner a certain amount we may have to raise the entry fee though.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd be fine raising the entry fee if it meant the regular season winner gets paid for it. I do think it sucks for BT that his team had an awesome year and the best record in the league and he's not getting anything for it. I'd like to see that changed next year.
"I'm not sure I know what ball cheese or crotch rot is, exactly -- or if there is a difference between the two. Don't post photos, please..."
- Butcher
Posts: 1,276
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=71644:date=Dec 14 2009, 05:58 PM:name=PcB)-->QUOTE (PcB @ Dec 14 2009, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71634:date=Dec 14 2009, 04:57 PM:name=stevestonescigar)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Dec 14 2009, 04:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Like Chitown the 17th week really does not bother me either way. I just really don't care. I also think the regular season winner should get some money but I am going to have to be sold on that team also getting a bye in the playoffs. I think it should be one or the other. If we do decide to pay the regular season winner a certain amount we may have to raise the entry fee though.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd be fine raising the entry fee if it meant the regular season winner gets paid for it. I do think it sucks for BT that his team had an awesome year and the best record in the league and he's not getting anything for it. I'd like to see that changed next year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah. I don't think anyone can argue that point.
|
