Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
So a team that sucks so bad it has given up all hope...now miraculously agrees to be extorted $100 more and needs to be a top scoring team in the final few weeks to get that money back???
Fat chance that is popular and fatter chance that changes anything re: quitters. Actually Lance, it does help the problem, but does not eliminate it.
In almost every league I ran last week, Snelling was picked up by the worst or second worst team and 18% of the TOW's Week 11 were won by teams ranked 10th or lower (14 teams) AFTER they won the TOW.
People do try harder with a TOW prize. [/QUOTE]I'm kind of playing around here...(sorry Renman)...but aren't the ones with the most free agent coin at the end, commonly the worst teams who failed to use that money earlier and are merely crab-pot cock-blocking? [/QUOTE]I'm sure you've already over spent your faab Lance and have not much left, so how could that be true?
It's 50/50 in my leagues....A lot of good teams budget for being top 3 in faab left about right now to pick up a key end guy or block.
Quitters ruin this contest....
-
ultimatefs
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:00 pm
Quitters ruin this contest....
Jules is a Dirt bag and makes my luck.
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
So a team that sucks so bad it has given up all hope...now miraculously agrees to be extorted $100 more and needs to be a top scoring team in the final few weeks to get that money back???
Fat chance that is popular and fatter chance that changes anything re: quitters. Actually Lance, it does help the problem, but does not eliminate it.
In almost every league I ran last week, Snelling was picked up by the worst or second worst team and 18% of the TOW's Week 11 were won by teams ranked 10th or lower (14 teams) AFTER they won the TOW.
People do try harder with a TOW prize. [/QUOTE]I'm kind of playing around here...(sorry Renman)...but aren't the ones with the most free agent coin at the end, commonly the worst teams who failed to use that money earlier and are merely crab-pot cock-blocking? [/QUOTE]I WAS GOING TO SAY "LANCE YOU HAVE TO BE PLAYING AROUND"
MONEY AT LEAST MOTIVATES MOST PEOPLE. AND I FEEL $200 A WEEK WILL DO THAT.
ALSO IT WOULD BE NICER TO HAVE A WEEKLY PRIZE EVERY WEEK BUT SINCE THIS THREAD IS DEDICATED TO THE "QUITTERS" PEOPLE DON'T TEND TO QUIT IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF WEEKS.
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
So a team that sucks so bad it has given up all hope...now miraculously agrees to be extorted $100 more and needs to be a top scoring team in the final few weeks to get that money back???
Fat chance that is popular and fatter chance that changes anything re: quitters. Actually Lance, it does help the problem, but does not eliminate it.
In almost every league I ran last week, Snelling was picked up by the worst or second worst team and 18% of the TOW's Week 11 were won by teams ranked 10th or lower (14 teams) AFTER they won the TOW.
People do try harder with a TOW prize. [/QUOTE]I'm kind of playing around here...(sorry Renman)...but aren't the ones with the most free agent coin at the end, commonly the worst teams who failed to use that money earlier and are merely crab-pot cock-blocking? [/QUOTE]I WAS GOING TO SAY "LANCE YOU HAVE TO BE PLAYING AROUND"
MONEY AT LEAST MOTIVATES MOST PEOPLE. AND I FEEL $200 A WEEK WILL DO THAT.ALSO IT WOULD BE NICER TO HAVE A WEEKLY PRIZE EVERY WEEK BUT SINCE THIS THREAD IS DEDICATED TO THE "QUITTERS" PEOPLE DON'T TEND TO QUIT IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF WEEKS.
-
ultimatefs
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:00 pm
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by Renman:
I want some feedback. I made this point earlier today but it was the last post on the previous page and I am not sure how many saw it...
We currently have AUTOMATED LINEUPS set for us each week. Each week, on Tuesday morning, we see our team and a lineup has been put in place. It is not like we have an empty team that requires us manually enter the players at each position to fill a lineup.
We all (or at least 99% of us) begin tinkering with our lineups (as early as Tuesday morning at work), often changing it countless times throughout the week. Why can't this automated Tuesday morning lineup be the highest averaging lineup among players that are not on BYE or listed as OUT? This immediately gets the one thing that drives people nuts about quitters cleaned up.
What is the downside to this? methodology.
Highest average isn't always the best player.
KBritt could be a better choice than others right now with a higher average.
And then someone will bitch about the wrong player(s) being selected.
And what about the guy that only has one K, D, TE on a bye that can't be replaced?
And then the cost to program this all for maybe five people that cause the problem?
I want some feedback. I made this point earlier today but it was the last post on the previous page and I am not sure how many saw it...
We currently have AUTOMATED LINEUPS set for us each week. Each week, on Tuesday morning, we see our team and a lineup has been put in place. It is not like we have an empty team that requires us manually enter the players at each position to fill a lineup.
We all (or at least 99% of us) begin tinkering with our lineups (as early as Tuesday morning at work), often changing it countless times throughout the week. Why can't this automated Tuesday morning lineup be the highest averaging lineup among players that are not on BYE or listed as OUT? This immediately gets the one thing that drives people nuts about quitters cleaned up.
What is the downside to this? methodology.
Highest average isn't always the best player.
KBritt could be a better choice than others right now with a higher average.
And then someone will bitch about the wrong player(s) being selected.
And what about the guy that only has one K, D, TE on a bye that can't be replaced?
And then the cost to program this all for maybe five people that cause the problem?
Jules is a Dirt bag and makes my luck.
Quitters ruin this contest....
sportbettingman,
You would be hard pressed to find someone who is more open to "joking around" than me. People may assume different when they read my serious tone here when I talk about the NFFC because I care about the product.. the event brings me 5 months of great pleasure (and pain) every year.. and has become a big part of my life and yearly routine...
SO when I see ways it can be better.. or things that hold it back... I think they are worth talking about. Especially on a message board which seems to me to be the ideal setting for such conversation, or even the purpose of a message board.
When I (and most others) talk about "quitter teams" we are talking specifically about the most egregious examples of where a player that is NOT PLAYING and everyone knew he was not playing well before the game... is in a lineup, guaranteed to give that team a ZERO, with viable options on the bench.. no matter how good or bad those options are.
That specific problem is what we want to (and I believe can) clean up. We are not talking about teams who have poor drafts, or come unprepared to draft day, or have bad roster management, or make poor lineup choices, or make poor faab bids, or do not work the free agent pool aggressive enough... those part of being a poor fantasy owner need to stay in the game and do not need to be controlled...
When league titles (and large sums of money) get impacted by the specific practice of a guaranteed zero in a lineup when there shouldn't be one, it soils the contest and if not dealt with, may run people away from the NFFC the following year.
That is a problem.
You would be hard pressed to find someone who is more open to "joking around" than me. People may assume different when they read my serious tone here when I talk about the NFFC because I care about the product.. the event brings me 5 months of great pleasure (and pain) every year.. and has become a big part of my life and yearly routine...
SO when I see ways it can be better.. or things that hold it back... I think they are worth talking about. Especially on a message board which seems to me to be the ideal setting for such conversation, or even the purpose of a message board.
When I (and most others) talk about "quitter teams" we are talking specifically about the most egregious examples of where a player that is NOT PLAYING and everyone knew he was not playing well before the game... is in a lineup, guaranteed to give that team a ZERO, with viable options on the bench.. no matter how good or bad those options are.
That specific problem is what we want to (and I believe can) clean up. We are not talking about teams who have poor drafts, or come unprepared to draft day, or have bad roster management, or make poor lineup choices, or make poor faab bids, or do not work the free agent pool aggressive enough... those part of being a poor fantasy owner need to stay in the game and do not need to be controlled...
When league titles (and large sums of money) get impacted by the specific practice of a guaranteed zero in a lineup when there shouldn't be one, it soils the contest and if not dealt with, may run people away from the NFFC the following year.
That is a problem.
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
Originally posted by Renman:
[qb] I want some feedback. I made this point earlier today but it was the last post on the previous page and I am not sure how many saw it...
We currently have AUTOMATED LINEUPS set for us each week. Each week, on Tuesday morning, we see our team and a lineup has been put in place. It is not like we have an empty team that requires us manually enter the players at each position to fill a lineup.
We all (or at least 99% of us) begin tinkering with our lineups (as early as Tuesday morning at work), often changing it countless times throughout the week. Why can't this automated Tuesday morning lineup be the highest averaging lineup among players that are not on BYE or listed as OUT? This immediately gets the one thing that drives people nuts about quitters cleaned up.
What is the downside to this? methodology.
Highest average isn't always the best player.
Who cares, it is better than a guaranteed ZERO.
KBritt could be a better choice than others right now with a higher average.
Who cares? this isn't about truly handicapping what the best play is or making deep decisions for a team. This is about eliminating a ZERO while fielding a viable lineup that is on said quitter teams roster.
And then someone will bitch about the wrong player(s) being selected.
No one with competitive integrity should be complaining. I have personally contacted people over the years in leagues that I sensed were going to start a bye week player against me. Sometimes it has cost me games. If someone from that bench beats you, THAT TEAM/ROSTER beat you. That is way more "fair" TO THE LEAGUE than you getting a free win vs a team that quit.
And what about the guy that only has one K, D, TE on a bye that can't be replaced?
Again, we are not here to manage teams.. If the quitter team has no viable option on his bench then so be it. This is about teams that have obvious viable options on the bench sitting unused. That specific issue causes hugely negative experiences in fantasy football.
And then the cost to program this all for maybe five people that cause the problem?
I am no computer expert but bet the cost would be very minimal. I bet the cost is way less than the 1400 entry fee the NFFC may not get back the following year due to an owner being turned off by a quitter team ruining his NFFC experience. Remember, the site already sets a lineup for us each week.
I appreciate your feedback and opinions and devils advocate examples.... I hope you appreciate my differing opinions.
Originally posted by Renman:
[qb] I want some feedback. I made this point earlier today but it was the last post on the previous page and I am not sure how many saw it...
We currently have AUTOMATED LINEUPS set for us each week. Each week, on Tuesday morning, we see our team and a lineup has been put in place. It is not like we have an empty team that requires us manually enter the players at each position to fill a lineup.
We all (or at least 99% of us) begin tinkering with our lineups (as early as Tuesday morning at work), often changing it countless times throughout the week. Why can't this automated Tuesday morning lineup be the highest averaging lineup among players that are not on BYE or listed as OUT? This immediately gets the one thing that drives people nuts about quitters cleaned up.
What is the downside to this? methodology.
Highest average isn't always the best player.
Who cares, it is better than a guaranteed ZERO.
KBritt could be a better choice than others right now with a higher average.
Who cares? this isn't about truly handicapping what the best play is or making deep decisions for a team. This is about eliminating a ZERO while fielding a viable lineup that is on said quitter teams roster.
And then someone will bitch about the wrong player(s) being selected.
No one with competitive integrity should be complaining. I have personally contacted people over the years in leagues that I sensed were going to start a bye week player against me. Sometimes it has cost me games. If someone from that bench beats you, THAT TEAM/ROSTER beat you. That is way more "fair" TO THE LEAGUE than you getting a free win vs a team that quit.
And what about the guy that only has one K, D, TE on a bye that can't be replaced?
Again, we are not here to manage teams.. If the quitter team has no viable option on his bench then so be it. This is about teams that have obvious viable options on the bench sitting unused. That specific issue causes hugely negative experiences in fantasy football.
And then the cost to program this all for maybe five people that cause the problem?
I am no computer expert but bet the cost would be very minimal. I bet the cost is way less than the 1400 entry fee the NFFC may not get back the following year due to an owner being turned off by a quitter team ruining his NFFC experience. Remember, the site already sets a lineup for us each week.
I appreciate your feedback and opinions and devils advocate examples.... I hope you appreciate my differing opinions.
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
Well done jerk off.
Pete had a baby boy Saturday night. That's great news for him, but is it an excuse for quitting a contest in midstream? Unless he hatched the baby himself, I think he could've taken 30 seconds to set his lineup. [/QUOTE]maybe he sets his lineups every Sat night or Sunday morning and had something more important this weekend. ya think?
I've played against Pete in several leagues over the past decade and I've never seen anything like this.
This attack on Pete is unwarranted.
Wow, I guess if you play high stakes fantasy football, you can't ever go to the hospital over the weekend. Heaven forbid.
Make sure your wife only has kids on a weekday. [/QUOTE]He didn't bother to pick up a kicker on a bye in week 10, either.
He is in last place of our league (and 6 from the bottom in the overall standings).
Although he obviously has more important stuff going on right now (congrats by the way! ), I don't think it is out of line to assume he has left his team for dead. [/QUOTE]Correct Billy...
Maybe he missed the switch to Wed trans Week 10.
I bet dozens of people did that.
That does not mean he quit.
How much FAAB did he spend Week 9?
take a look and tell me if this indicates a quitter?
TIA. [/QUOTE]I never said he was a quitter, John.
I basically said based on the last two weeks AND the fact he is buried in last place, the chances of him quitting on his team are equal (or more) to him just having two emergencies two consecutive weeks where he disregarded his lineup.
Maybe he remained active in Week 9 with FAAB, then after that knew his wife was due soon, and said "screw it" for the rest of the year?
That seems logical, doesn't it?
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
Well done jerk off.
Pete had a baby boy Saturday night. That's great news for him, but is it an excuse for quitting a contest in midstream? Unless he hatched the baby himself, I think he could've taken 30 seconds to set his lineup. [/QUOTE]maybe he sets his lineups every Sat night or Sunday morning and had something more important this weekend. ya think?
I've played against Pete in several leagues over the past decade and I've never seen anything like this.
This attack on Pete is unwarranted.
Wow, I guess if you play high stakes fantasy football, you can't ever go to the hospital over the weekend. Heaven forbid.
Make sure your wife only has kids on a weekday. [/QUOTE]He didn't bother to pick up a kicker on a bye in week 10, either.
He is in last place of our league (and 6 from the bottom in the overall standings).
Although he obviously has more important stuff going on right now (congrats by the way!
), I don't think it is out of line to assume he has left his team for dead. [/QUOTE]Correct Billy...Maybe he missed the switch to Wed trans Week 10.
I bet dozens of people did that.
That does not mean he quit.
How much FAAB did he spend Week 9?
take a look and tell me if this indicates a quitter?
TIA. [/QUOTE]I never said he was a quitter, John.
I basically said based on the last two weeks AND the fact he is buried in last place, the chances of him quitting on his team are equal (or more) to him just having two emergencies two consecutive weeks where he disregarded his lineup.
Maybe he remained active in Week 9 with FAAB, then after that knew his wife was due soon, and said "screw it" for the rest of the year?
That seems logical, doesn't it?
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
So a team that sucks so bad it has given up all hope...now miraculously agrees to be extorted $100 more and needs to be a top scoring team in the final few weeks to get that money back???
Fat chance that is popular and fatter chance that changes anything re: quitters. Actually Lance, it does help the problem, but does not eliminate it.
In almost every league I ran last week, Snelling was picked up by the worst or second worst team and 18% of the TOW's Week 11 were won by teams ranked 10th or lower (14 teams) AFTER they won the TOW.
People do try harder with a TOW prize. [/QUOTE]I'm kind of playing around here...(sorry Renman)...but aren't the ones with the most free agent coin at the end, commonly the worst teams who failed to use that money earlier and are merely crab-pot cock-blocking? [/QUOTE]Many owners will keep playing if there is something to win, particularly if it is meaningful. $200 is a nice prize for someone that had some bad luck or blew their draft - and they'd have 7 shots at it.
We have had debates here over bumping 2nd or 3rd place money up or down by a few hundred bucks that has caused outrage. I won't belive anyone who tells me that most of the players in this league will quit if there is a realistic $200 on the line each week over the 2nd half of the season.
Secondly, I am winning my main event but just got my a** kicked by the last place team who put up 160 pts this week. There are a lot of near-last place teams that have the ability to (and have) put up a monster week or two in every one of my leagues - anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their a**. Take a look at your own league.
[ November 24, 2009, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
So a team that sucks so bad it has given up all hope...now miraculously agrees to be extorted $100 more and needs to be a top scoring team in the final few weeks to get that money back???
Fat chance that is popular and fatter chance that changes anything re: quitters. Actually Lance, it does help the problem, but does not eliminate it.
In almost every league I ran last week, Snelling was picked up by the worst or second worst team and 18% of the TOW's Week 11 were won by teams ranked 10th or lower (14 teams) AFTER they won the TOW.
People do try harder with a TOW prize. [/QUOTE]I'm kind of playing around here...(sorry Renman)...but aren't the ones with the most free agent coin at the end, commonly the worst teams who failed to use that money earlier and are merely crab-pot cock-blocking? [/QUOTE]Many owners will keep playing if there is something to win, particularly if it is meaningful. $200 is a nice prize for someone that had some bad luck or blew their draft - and they'd have 7 shots at it.
We have had debates here over bumping 2nd or 3rd place money up or down by a few hundred bucks that has caused outrage. I won't belive anyone who tells me that most of the players in this league will quit if there is a realistic $200 on the line each week over the 2nd half of the season.
Secondly, I am winning my main event but just got my a** kicked by the last place team who put up 160 pts this week. There are a lot of near-last place teams that have the ability to (and have) put up a monster week or two in every one of my leagues - anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their a**. Take a look at your own league.
[ November 24, 2009, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:00 pm
Quitters ruin this contest....
...and the ones putting up 160 scores are not the type of teams that quit.
Honestly...your plan essentially steals $100 from each team, and says...see if you can win it back and double up toward the end of the season.
Sure...the teams that always play the season out will be the ones trying their best to win that stolen money back. But to say it will motivate a quitter is talking out of your ass.
Oh boy...I won $100 to put toward next season...really motivating.
Honestly...your plan essentially steals $100 from each team, and says...see if you can win it back and double up toward the end of the season.
Sure...the teams that always play the season out will be the ones trying their best to win that stolen money back. But to say it will motivate a quitter is talking out of your ass.
Oh boy...I won $100 to put toward next season...really motivating.
"The first man what makes a move can count amongst 'is treasure a ball from this pistol."
~Long John Silver
~Long John Silver
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
...and the ones putting up 160 scores are not the type of teams that quit.
Honestly...your plan essentially steals $100 from each team, and says...see if you can win it back and double up toward the end of the season.
Sure...the teams that always play the season out will be the ones trying their best to win that stolen money back. But to say it will motivate a quitter is talking out of your ass.
Oh boy...I won $100 to put toward next season...really motivating. Of course the team scoring 160 didn't quit! And if the teams who did quit - hadn't quit - they might be putting up those points too.
Also, like your choice of words Lance. Offering 100% payback on a high score prize you call "stealing", what then is getting 75% payback on the rest of your entry ... ?
And then finally, on the one hand I hear raising the entry by $100 is too much, then on the other hand offering a $200 prize per week isn't enough an incentive. Wrong, and wrong. Adding $100 to the entry but with 7 more chances to win money AND with 100% payback on that extra charge will not be a deterrent; and yes, The weekly prize will be a strong incentive. Moreover, it is the only good option for alleviating the problem of teams quitting late in the season.
...and the ones putting up 160 scores are not the type of teams that quit.
Honestly...your plan essentially steals $100 from each team, and says...see if you can win it back and double up toward the end of the season.
Sure...the teams that always play the season out will be the ones trying their best to win that stolen money back. But to say it will motivate a quitter is talking out of your ass.
Oh boy...I won $100 to put toward next season...really motivating. Of course the team scoring 160 didn't quit! And if the teams who did quit - hadn't quit - they might be putting up those points too.
Also, like your choice of words Lance. Offering 100% payback on a high score prize you call "stealing", what then is getting 75% payback on the rest of your entry ... ?
And then finally, on the one hand I hear raising the entry by $100 is too much, then on the other hand offering a $200 prize per week isn't enough an incentive. Wrong, and wrong. Adding $100 to the entry but with 7 more chances to win money AND with 100% payback on that extra charge will not be a deterrent; and yes, The weekly prize will be a strong incentive. Moreover, it is the only good option for alleviating the problem of teams quitting late in the season.
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:00 pm
Quitters ruin this contest....
Out of curiosity...could someone post the rosters of all these quitters? There must be plenty to choose from since this is such a big problem.
These quitters MUST have some killer rosters and even more killer bench players if auto-setting their lineup or offering prizes will make them challenge for weekly winner and take down the top teams they face late in the season.
Please post all these quitters rosters so I can either agree with you or laugh out loud.
These quitters MUST have some killer rosters and even more killer bench players if auto-setting their lineup or offering prizes will make them challenge for weekly winner and take down the top teams they face late in the season.
Please post all these quitters rosters so I can either agree with you or laugh out loud.
"The first man what makes a move can count amongst 'is treasure a ball from this pistol."
~Long John Silver
~Long John Silver