survey

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:31 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
I was proposing in the survey to add more teams to post-season league play for third place money without taking money away from the league champ and the league runner-up, the two teams that dominated for 13 weeks. Again, I thought the feedback was in favor of making sure we reward the best teams rather than just making sure teams don't quit during the regular season. Couldn't we accomplish both of these things as follows:

Currently
H2H Champ $2,500
Points Champ $2,500
H2H vs. Points Champ $2,500
3rd Place $1,250
Total Payout $8,750
Maximum Prize $5,000

Revised
H2H Champ $2,000
Points Champ: $2,000
League Playoff Winner: $2,500
League 2nd Place $1,500
League 3rd Place $750
Total Payout $8,750
Maximum Prize $6,500

League Playoffs would run in Weeks 14-16, just as they are now, but with 4 or 6 teams vying for the additional prize money.

fflmaster · Post by **fflmaster** » Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:48 pm

Greg,

I appreciate the survey, but have to say it is very flawed.

I cannot answer some of the questions either yes or no.

Would I prefer the current 13 week system? Yes, but I also want a playoff during weeks 14-16 with more then TWO teams via for money.

You can have the best of both worlds. Pay individual prizes then have playoff for part of the money as stated earlier.

Some question contradict each other.

The problem with this survey is it will skew the numbers to look the way you prefer and it is not really an open survey. There are not enough options in the answers.

[ January 19, 2012, 09:00 PM: Message edited by: fflmaster ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:49 pm

We can certainly do ANY scenario with payouts. So the suggestion above is to reward EVEN MORE the dominant teams. I'm not against that, but it seems like it would favor the veteran players, although it may be a wrong assumption. Besides being tougher to explain, will it help us grow to the masses or favor the strong veteran HSFF players?

Basically it's redistributing $1,000 that would have gone to the second place team (and maybe only $500 if he won either either regular season title) and allowing first place to win some of that along with 3 or 4 or 5 other teams. It's not a bad idea, but again is it a plan that grows our participation level because of the new structure? Does it attract players? I'll listen to the feedback and we'll add it to what we learn from the survey results.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:00 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
We can certainly do ANY scenario with payouts. So the suggestion above is to reward EVEN MORE the dominant teams. I'm not against that, but it seems like it would favor the veteran players, although it may be a wrong assumption. Besides being tougher to explain, will it help us grow to the masses or favor the strong veteran HSFF players?

Basically it's redistributing $1,000 that would have gone to the second place team (and maybe only $500 if he won either either regular season title) and allowing first place to win some of that along with 3 or 4 or 5 other teams. It's not a bad idea, but again is it a plan that grows our participation level because of the new structure? Does it attract players? I'll listen to the feedback and we'll add it to what we learn from the survey results. I'm not sure why it would be tougher to explain. 13 week season, top 4 (or 6) teams get in the league playoffs. Top H2H, top points get paid and make the overall. Both the WCOFF and FFPC had similar setups. The only differences is that the NFFC would keep its 13 week regular season and run its league playoffs concurrently to the Overalls instead of prior to it. I don't think it's that complicated.

Also as far as rewarding the best teams, I always felt that was a myth. The fantasy regular season is only a "part" of the full NFL season, not the whole season, nor the most important part. The regular season is being rewarded here, just not overcompensated. Under this scenerio, just like the Packers and Saints needed to prove they were the best when it counted, so will our regular season champions.

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:21 pm

I was always a huge supporter of the team with the most points deserves to win the majority of the money. (And I fully realize that this team would many times have the best record as well.) But lately I have come around in my thinking on this. Teams can start out slow, incur injuries, or just have some bad luck on sit/start decisions. But by the end of the year they put together a power house team through players getting healthy and good waiver wire work.

This is why I"m more open to have more $ being awarded through a playoff system. I like the idea of a playoff for a league prize that might include more teams. With more teams having a shot at this I believe leagues will be competitive for a longer period of time and everyone with a chance of the playoffs will enjoy the league much more - even if they don't make it.

Wayne

Jersey Dawg · Post by **Jersey Dawg** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:14 am

I have to say I understand Greg's position here. Those of us who have played the NFFC for years have helped make changes to the rules year after year. We helped get KDS and 3RR, two changes many of us like (I'm sure some don't too). But, these changes make it somewhat more difficult to sell to the masses, and that's before KOQ's suggestion of letting 4-6 teams duke it out between weeks 14-16.

That raises another question... is the league champ really the best team if it happens to be the 6th best team for 13 weeks having a nice 3 week run from weeks 14-16? Heck, some of the top seeded NFL teams are already resting their studs in the 2nd half of week 16 games. That alone hurts teams with those players.

Pete

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:18 am

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but I did take a call yesterday from someone who said if I want to grow the NFFC I need to go back to the KISS formula (Keep It Simple Stupid). He said I've catered to every new idea brought up by our die-hards and in the end maybe I've hurt the potential growth of the NFFC. I don't disagree. I do believe that KDS and 3RR have made the contest better and our previous survey showed that our customers like these additions. But do they help us grow the event overall?

That's what we have to deal with if we're going to grow this contest to the levels all of you want us to grow it to.

thegambler · Post by **thegambler** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:38 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
I was proposing in the survey to add more teams to post-season league play for third place money without taking money away from the league champ and the league runner-up, the two teams that dominated for 13 weeks. Again, I thought the feedback was in favor of making sure we reward the best teams rather than just making sure teams don't quit during the regular season. Couldn't we accomplish both of these things as follows:

Currently
H2H Champ $2,500
Points Champ $2,500
H2H vs. Points Champ $2,500
3rd Place $1,250
Total Payout $8,750
Maximum Prize $5,000

Revised
H2H Champ $2,000
Points Champ: $2,000
League Playoff Winner: $2,500
League 2nd Place $1,500
League 3rd Place $750
Total Payout $8,750
Maximum Prize $6,500

League Playoffs would run in Weeks 14-16, just as they are now, but with 4 or 6 teams vying for the additional prize money. [/QUOTE]nice post....i really like this one. i know i have brought up a few stinkers, for playoffs, but this one is a keeper to me. i would leave it at 4 teams making the playoffs. this would defintely keep more teams involved to the end....and i think, help grow the nffc

thanks KOQ

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:41 am

I"m good with KOQ's breakdown. I probably like 4 teams in the playoff although 6 would be more exciting for more teams.

Wayne

Chi_Town_FEW · Post by **Chi_Town_FEW** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:50 am

All are interesting ideas. The KISS suggestion from a caller is true. While I don't expect to see any changes to the Classic or Primetime the online championships price point makes it open to an expanded playoff. My reasoning while I am sure flawed is the smaller price, 4 teams for the same price as one Primetime or Classic, the player will be more inclined to the "playoff risk" (strong regular season shot down in flames by one bad week).
All that said my suggestion would be to run one or two of the varied playoff formats, 3 and 4 for prize money, 4 team, 6 team playoff as satellites for $125 and just see how they play out. I am sure you could fill one of each.