soi keeper fantasy football

[Coldneck]

I am fine with raising the entry fee. Maybe raise it to $35 and have the extra $10 go to the regular season winner. I'd actually be alright with raising it to $50 and working out the payouts accordingly. Whatever the majority wants is alright with me.

[Kid]

I think a primary issue that needs to be decided is whether to the regular season should lead to byes or direct payouts. As others have said, I'm ok with either, but don't really think it should be both. At that point, there's a double reward.

I'd personally prefer a 6-team playoff with no payout for the regular season, but either would be fine so long as we use a relatively small percentage of the overall payout based on the regular season.

[PcB]

There's no way it can be both, I think that would be way too much. You would get the money and then you'd have a 1 in 4 (I think, if we're doing 6 teams) chance of winning the Superbowl? I don't like it.

[liner]

this discussion is good. we just have a few things to vote on for next year. maybe we should do it soonish while its still fresh in our heads so we don't forget next year and then its too late

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=71669:date=Dec 14 2009, 07:42 PM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 07:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think a primary issue that needs to be decided is whether to the regular season should lead to byes or direct payouts. As others have said, I'm ok with either, but don't really think it should be both. At that point, there's a double reward.

I'd personally prefer a 6-team playoff with no payout for the regular season, but either would be fine so long as we use a relatively small percentage of the overall payout based on the regular season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


see, my argument is that winning the point total is a more impressive feat than winning the super bowl. Winning the point total means you have a good team. Winning the super bowl COULD mean you have a good team, or it could mean you got lucky with some matchups. It would also keep people interested in playing their best lineups through week 17.

as a side note if we go to the 6 team playoffs (which we should), you HAVE to give the first 2 team byes. Otherwise you have 3 teams left in the second round.

[PcB]

<!--quoteo(post=71692:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:19 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 14 2009, 09:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71669:date=Dec 14 2009, 07:42 PM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 07:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think a primary issue that needs to be decided is whether to the regular season should lead to byes or direct payouts. As others have said, I'm ok with either, but don't really think it should be both. At that point, there's a double reward.

I'd personally prefer a 6-team playoff with no payout for the regular season, but either would be fine so long as we use a relatively small percentage of the overall payout based on the regular season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


see, my argument is that winning the point total is a more impressive feat than winning the super bowl. Winning the point total means you have a good team. Winning the super bowl COULD mean you have a good team, or it could mean you got lucky with some matchups. It would also keep people interested in playing their best lineups through week 17.

as a side note if we go to the 6 team playoffs (which we should), you HAVE to give the first 2 team byes. Otherwise you have 3 teams left in the second round.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then why not a 7 team playoff with the overall points leader getting a bye in round 1? I don't like giving 2 teams a bye with only 6 teams in the playoffs.

[Coldneck]

<!--quoteo(post=71694:date=Dec 14 2009, 10:33 PM:name=PcB)-->QUOTE (PcB @ Dec 14 2009, 10:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71692:date=Dec 14 2009, 09:19 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Dec 14 2009, 09:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71669:date=Dec 14 2009, 07:42 PM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 07:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think a primary issue that needs to be decided is whether to the regular season should lead to byes or direct payouts. As others have said, I'm ok with either, but don't really think it should be both. At that point, there's a double reward.

I'd personally prefer a 6-team playoff with no payout for the regular season, but either would be fine so long as we use a relatively small percentage of the overall payout based on the regular season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


see, my argument is that winning the point total is a more impressive feat than winning the super bowl. Winning the point total means you have a good team. Winning the super bowl COULD mean you have a good team, or it could mean you got lucky with some matchups. It would also keep people interested in playing their best lineups through week 17.

as a side note if we go to the 6 team playoffs (which we should), you HAVE to give the first 2 team byes. Otherwise you have 3 teams left in the second round.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then why not a 7 team playoff with the overall points leader getting a bye in round 1? I don't like giving 2 teams a bye with only 6 teams in the playoffs.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Because Yahoo doesn't have that option. And a 7 team playoff is just silly.

[BT]

Just to be clear, I'm not pushing for best record getting money, but most points.

Secondly, I've been playing fantasy football forever (Joe Montana was my first pick, and I'm fairly certain that Rodney Holman, my third round pick that year was my first FFL mistake), and am currently in 5 leagues of varying types. In every other one I'm in, the first and second finishers get a bye, and the points winner gets cash. I'm not saying that is how we HAVE to do it, simply that it's pretty standard.

[PcB]

I'm pretty young, but I've been playing FF for a long time (Warren Moon was my first ever FF pick) and I'm in at least 3 leagues a year and I very rarely am in a league where there are 2 teams that get a bye. I'm not saying I'm totally against it, but that I'm just not really used to it.

If we institute all of these changes it just seems like we're devaluing the playoffs too much. You still have to have a good team to win in the playoffs, yes matchups may help, but they help every week of the season. The matchups are just more important in the playoffs.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=71703:date=Dec 14 2009, 10:11 PM:name=PcB)-->QUOTE (PcB @ Dec 14 2009, 10:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'm pretty young, but I've been playing FF for a long time (Warren Moon was my first ever FF pick) and I'm in at least 3 leagues a year and I very rarely am in a league where there are 2 teams that get a bye. I'm not saying I'm totally against it, but that I'm just not really used to it.

If we institute all of these changes it just seems like we're devaluing the playoffs too much. You still have to have a good team to win in the playoffs, yes matchups may help, but they help every week of the season. The matchups are just more important in the playoffs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Dude, by that definition, 80 percent of the teams in our league are "good teams". Teams 5-8 just advanced. The winner of our league is guaranteed to be a SUB .500 TEAM. That freaking devalues the playoffs far more than any changes we make for next year. This season is the poster child for why devaluing the playoffs isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[Kid]

5-6 & 8 advanced.

[Kid]

Here's my problem, BT, with your position. It seems to be entirely tied to the way your team finished this season. These rules were posted 4 or 5 months ago, and I don't recall your complaining. You joked about losing in the first round, but never said anything even then. It's only now that your team has gone out in the first round that you've raised it as a problem.

In having a year to look at this season, I think we could use some moderate tweaking. It seems like everyone who's posted is for some moderate degree of change - namely some small percentage of payout being based on the regular season or giving playoff byes to the top regular season teams. You're the only one advocating blowing up the entire system of payouts.

[PcB]

This is Bz posting under PcB (cause I'm too lazy to log out.)

I think that the best team in regular season should win their money back (but not both a bye and your money back.) Also, don't add Special Teams stats to the defensive stats. One season someone in our league had both the Bears D and Hester so essentially they were getting double points for singular events, for example, Hester getting a return TD and it counting as a defensive TD, too. If you don't have return yards/TDs as an individual player stat that ignore that last suggestion.

Also, if you expand next season count me in. Since it's a keeper just figure out the draft order and let the two new teams get the first four picks of what is available (assuming each team keeps two players.) You could also add a limitation to who is allowed to be kept by not allowing two of the same position as keepers per team thus opening up who is available. And I concede that my team will likely not be as good as anyone else because I will be joining a league with a shallow pool of available players due to it being a keeper league. It's like adding expansions.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=71709:date=Dec 14 2009, 11:15 PM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Dec 14 2009, 11:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->5-6 & 8 advanced.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


The screen I am looking at shows 7 over 2 as well, but I guess that wasn't the updated score.

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Here's my problem, BT, with your position. It seems to be entirely tied to the way your team finished this season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Kid, I'll say 2 things. one, every single rule change I have suggested is EXACTLY how we do it in every other league I am in. 3, every single rule change won't change the fact I am out of the playoffs, and out of the money, since none of the rule changes will be applied to this year. So unless you are suggesting we are all going to have the same teams that perform the exact same way a year from now, why the fuck would you accuse me of acting only in my self interest? It can't possibly help me this year. I have just as much chance of finishing in 7th place next year and not making the playoffs as I do of winning. I have just as much chance of winning the Super Bowl next year and not making as much money as I could have due to rule changes as anyone else does.



<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->These rules were posted 4 or 5 months ago, and I don't recall your complaining. You joked about losing in the first round, but never said anything even then. It's only now that your team has gone out in the first round that you've raised it as a problem.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yeah, except when I said before Thanksgiving that while I understood we can't change it for this year, the format sucks. Or had my team already lost in the first round on November 20? I find this whole thing fairly offensive. If you want to start throwing around accusations about this, if you are going to accuse me of doing anything other than offering my two cents like everyone else, at least get your facts straight. Everything I have said I would say if I was in last place, because AGAIN, that is how I've done it in every league I've played in. And that is exactly where I could be if and when these changes go through NEXT year. I'm not saying that is how we have to do it, but I should be allowed to offer my opinion, regardless of where I finished or regardless of how my team did in the playoffs.

[liner]

i just think we should put any change that is wanted up for a vote and the majority will win in each case. it seems we all play really different versions of the same game, are comfortable with those versions, and are each advocating for what makes us the most comfortable. this makes sense but we need to come up with majority rules rules and go from there. i'm in the byes or cash for the top 2 teams camp, that would be something we could vote on as well as 6 teams playoffs, 13 or 14 game regular season, adding spec teams to def, etc. to comment on what bzpcb said, that hester year was maybe a once in a lifetime thing, i've never played in a non-special teams league and i thought it was really weird when i found out that's what we were doing this year. i didn't even know it was ever done, to be honest.