Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by I Cojones:
Seriously though, the ultimate rule set can not eliminate all luck -- in fact, the luck of the accidental sleeper pick is one of the pure joys of FF and couldn't be eliminated anyway.
The goal should be to eliminate as much luck as possible, and I believe that is the motivating factor behind most of these ideas -- whether or not you agree with them. Well said Cojones. We're not trying to eliminate luck when it comes to who gets injured, who plays better than expected, etc. But scheduling-based luck is pure BS.
Schedule is set at the beginning of the yr, tm 1 plays tm 14 in wk 1, then tm 2 in wk 2, or whatever the formula is. Change the schedule around and standings could be upside down for some teams. That is just plain wrong for a game of skill.
If I sit down at a slot machine I understand the nature of the odds. I can sit there for 14 hrs and the second I leave it could hit a million bucks, or I could be that guy that just sat down. But FF is a game of skill and I want whoever wins to be either me because I had a great season or someone who had a better season than me. [/QUOTE]I'm not trying to throw cold water on this thread and the debate about taking random scheduling "luck" out of the equation, but as an NFL fan and as a die-hard fantasy football player, I realize that scheduling plays a factor in both games. Just from a Packers' point of view, here's the "luck" we've had while trying to win the NFC North:
1) The Packers played Steve McNair before he limped off to the sunset (a loss).
2) The Vikings played the Titans without Steve McNair (a win).
3) The Packers played the Vikings without Randy Moss (a win).
4) The Packers played the Rams at home (much easier, and a win).
5) Green Bay wins at Washington thanks to a ref's phantom call, thus nullifying a Clinton Portis TD and allowing another Ahman Green TD.
6) The Packers play at Philadelphia after a MNF game, a killer on the road after a MNF game (a deserved loss).
7) The Vikings play at Chicago as Brian Urlacher plays after missing two previous games with a calf injury (a loss).
Yeah, the schedule has played a factor in this race for the divisional title, too. It was random scheduling, but you play the cards you're dealt. Now I realize that the exercise here is taking out "luck" and making this an all-skill contest and thus I encourage more suggestions for the future. But in this respect fantasy football and the NFL mirror each other perfectly and I'm a little surprised that so many people are outraged about it.
Another angle to consider
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 36423
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Another angle to consider
Founder, National Fantasy Football Championship & National Fantasy Baseball Championship
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Another angle to consider
Just a few differences...
1. In the NFL, I play for more than one season
2. In the NFL, I don't get paid or not paid based on winning or losing EVERY game or scoring the most points. I get paid based on producing a 'solid' effort most of the time and winning on occasion.
3. In the NFL, all the players get paid more than $100,000 to play, even the scrawny punters.
4. In the NFL, I get a share of revenue from what other teams do, so even if my team is having a down year, I would benefit from Team New being on MNF every week.
I think the overwhelming weight of the luck in fantasy football is way too heavily felt by some teams through no fault of their own. And even beyond that I believe it happens for no particularly good reason and can be fairly taken out of the equation.
So, here's the question of the day for you, Greg:
Would it make the contest better, worse, or about the same if you adopted an all play or play2 each week type of schedule that would maintain matchups vs. all teams AND reduce the unwanted luck factors?
Better, Worse or About the Same?
Dave
1. In the NFL, I play for more than one season
2. In the NFL, I don't get paid or not paid based on winning or losing EVERY game or scoring the most points. I get paid based on producing a 'solid' effort most of the time and winning on occasion.
3. In the NFL, all the players get paid more than $100,000 to play, even the scrawny punters.
4. In the NFL, I get a share of revenue from what other teams do, so even if my team is having a down year, I would benefit from Team New being on MNF every week.
I think the overwhelming weight of the luck in fantasy football is way too heavily felt by some teams through no fault of their own. And even beyond that I believe it happens for no particularly good reason and can be fairly taken out of the equation.
So, here's the question of the day for you, Greg:
Would it make the contest better, worse, or about the same if you adopted an all play or play2 each week type of schedule that would maintain matchups vs. all teams AND reduce the unwanted luck factors?
Better, Worse or About the Same?
Dave
The Wonderful thing about Dyv's is I'm the only one!
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 36423
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Another angle to consider
Like I said yesterday, Dyv, let's analyze all of the results after Week 13's games and see where the "inconsistencies" lie. In many respects, I believe the stats will show that the two best teams from each league are advancing to the playoffs. Not ALL of the best teams, but that's something we can cure with a few additional wild card teams. If the stats show that our system was terrible, then we need a complete overhaul.
Maybe the stats will show that the difference between the $5,000 winner and the $1,500 winner wasn't worth $3,500, and then that's something we can also change. So let's analyze the facts tomorrow.
Do I think an all play format is better for the NFFC? No. Do I think it is the most definitive way to determine the best h2h league champ? Probably. But it takes out the straight-up h2h format that is so familiar and common to fantasy football players.
Yes, play2 could be the cure-all you're looking for and maybe in 2006 or beyond everyone will agree to go with that. Two wins (or losses) per week isn't TOO drastic of a change and if explained properly it certainly could work. When you and KJ Duke have time, run the numbers for that and see how many leagues would have changed champions under that format. Only then will we know if this proposed format is worth changing to or not.
Maybe the stats will show that the difference between the $5,000 winner and the $1,500 winner wasn't worth $3,500, and then that's something we can also change. So let's analyze the facts tomorrow.
Do I think an all play format is better for the NFFC? No. Do I think it is the most definitive way to determine the best h2h league champ? Probably. But it takes out the straight-up h2h format that is so familiar and common to fantasy football players.
Yes, play2 could be the cure-all you're looking for and maybe in 2006 or beyond everyone will agree to go with that. Two wins (or losses) per week isn't TOO drastic of a change and if explained properly it certainly could work. When you and KJ Duke have time, run the numbers for that and see how many leagues would have changed champions under that format. Only then will we know if this proposed format is worth changing to or not.
Founder, National Fantasy Football Championship & National Fantasy Baseball Championship
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Another angle to consider
I think what I'm seeking is that Holy Grail... where the best 2 teams DO win. I'm actually opposed to adding wild cards just because that's simply admitting that we didn't get the 2 best teams from each league originally.
We can scan over those numbers and do some tear down after tonight. My own league is the perfect example going in:
First place team, Gigglin Marlin has lost his matchup to finish at a very good 10-3. I'm 9-3 going into tonight's game where I'm down by 13 points going into MNF. I have Julius Jones and my opponent has Seattle Defense so it could go either way tonight.
If I win, I get the league 1st place. The interesting thing is that Gigglin Marlin falls from 1st place to 3rd place as another team has just 5 pts. less than me and 100 more than Marlin.
It may 'work out', but all that perfection and support or rebuttal for the system as it is right now hinges on the performance of Julius Jones vs. Seattle Defense.
As it stands right now, if I don't win tonight then the team currently 14th overall doesn't make the playoffs.
Just doesn't seem right that it should hinge like this - even if it DOES work out... (and believe me I hope it does !)
Catch up more as we get some conclusions...
Dave
We can scan over those numbers and do some tear down after tonight. My own league is the perfect example going in:
First place team, Gigglin Marlin has lost his matchup to finish at a very good 10-3. I'm 9-3 going into tonight's game where I'm down by 13 points going into MNF. I have Julius Jones and my opponent has Seattle Defense so it could go either way tonight.
If I win, I get the league 1st place. The interesting thing is that Gigglin Marlin falls from 1st place to 3rd place as another team has just 5 pts. less than me and 100 more than Marlin.
It may 'work out', but all that perfection and support or rebuttal for the system as it is right now hinges on the performance of Julius Jones vs. Seattle Defense.
As it stands right now, if I don't win tonight then the team currently 14th overall doesn't make the playoffs.
Just doesn't seem right that it should hinge like this - even if it DOES work out... (and believe me I hope it does !)
Catch up more as we get some conclusions...
Dave
The Wonderful thing about Dyv's is I'm the only one!
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 36423
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Another angle to consider
Dyv, I think your league speaks perfectly for the setup. If your team IS the best in that league, then it should win this week and finish 10-3. If it doesn't, then we're not going to blame this Week 13 matchup, are we???
Yes, Gigglin Marlin could go from $5,000 to $500 tonight. It comes down to the final night of the final regular season game. Man, what a great league you have. Seems like a pretty good contest to me.
Adding wild cards doesn't admit a flaw. You could still finish 14th overall in points and finish third in the all-play format. That team could still go 110, 110, 210, 200, 105, 200, etc. and not finish any better in the all-play format than straight h2h, correct? Even in the all-play format there could be Top 10% teams being left out of the playoffs and I wouldn't want that.
We're on the same page with this, so let's see how things play out. Good luck tonight to everyone with championships riding on the line.
Yes, Gigglin Marlin could go from $5,000 to $500 tonight. It comes down to the final night of the final regular season game. Man, what a great league you have. Seems like a pretty good contest to me.
Adding wild cards doesn't admit a flaw. You could still finish 14th overall in points and finish third in the all-play format. That team could still go 110, 110, 210, 200, 105, 200, etc. and not finish any better in the all-play format than straight h2h, correct? Even in the all-play format there could be Top 10% teams being left out of the playoffs and I wouldn't want that.
We're on the same page with this, so let's see how things play out. Good luck tonight to everyone with championships riding on the line.
Founder, National Fantasy Football Championship & National Fantasy Baseball Championship
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Another angle to consider
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
I'm not trying to throw cold water on this thread and the debate about taking random scheduling "luck" out of the equation, but as an NFL fan and as a die-hard fantasy football player, I realize that scheduling plays a factor in both games. Yeah, the schedule has played a factor in this race for the divisional title, too. It was random scheduling, but you play the cards you're dealt.
Now I realize that the exercise here is taking out "luck" and making this an all-skill contest and thus I encourage more suggestions for the future. But in this respect fantasy football and the NFL mirror each other perfectly and I'm a little surprised that so many people are outraged about it. Greg, there is a major difference between scheduling luck in the NFL and FF.
What you are describing as scheduling luck really has more to do with injury luck, which is beyond control in either game.
There is no way to adjust for scheduling in the NFL because 50% of the game is defense, unlike FF. Likewise, you don't need to adjust for it in the NFL you have an opportunity, from a performance standpoint, to stop the other team from scoring and win any game. Thus, the game is still determined by team performance.
But scheduling in FF is no more than a random number assignment. It has NOTHING to do with performance. In the NFL any luck relating to schedule is completely beyond control, in FF it is completely within your control.
I'm not trying to throw cold water on this thread and the debate about taking random scheduling "luck" out of the equation, but as an NFL fan and as a die-hard fantasy football player, I realize that scheduling plays a factor in both games. Yeah, the schedule has played a factor in this race for the divisional title, too. It was random scheduling, but you play the cards you're dealt.
Now I realize that the exercise here is taking out "luck" and making this an all-skill contest and thus I encourage more suggestions for the future. But in this respect fantasy football and the NFL mirror each other perfectly and I'm a little surprised that so many people are outraged about it. Greg, there is a major difference between scheduling luck in the NFL and FF.
What you are describing as scheduling luck really has more to do with injury luck, which is beyond control in either game.
There is no way to adjust for scheduling in the NFL because 50% of the game is defense, unlike FF. Likewise, you don't need to adjust for it in the NFL you have an opportunity, from a performance standpoint, to stop the other team from scoring and win any game. Thus, the game is still determined by team performance.
But scheduling in FF is no more than a random number assignment. It has NOTHING to do with performance. In the NFL any luck relating to schedule is completely beyond control, in FF it is completely within your control.
-
ultimatefs
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:00 pm
Another angle to consider
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Like I said yesterday, Dyv, let's analyze all of the results after Week 13's games and see where the "inconsistencies" lie. In many respects, I believe the stats will show that the two best teams from each league are advancing to the playoffs. Not ALL of the best teams, but that's something we can cure with a few additional wild card teams. If the stats show that our system was terrible, then we need a complete overhaul.
Maybe the stats will show that the difference between the $5,000 winner and the $1,500 winner wasn't worth $3,500, and then that's something we can also change. So let's analyze the facts tomorrow.
Do I think an all play format is better for the NFFC? No. Do I think it is the most definitive way to determine the best h2h league champ? Probably. But it takes out the straight-up h2h format that is so familiar and common to fantasy football players.
Yes, play2 could be the cure-all you're looking for and maybe in 2006 or beyond everyone will agree to go with that. Two wins (or losses) per week isn't TOO drastic of a change and if explained properly it certainly could work. When you and KJ Duke have time, run the numbers for that and see how many leagues would have changed champions under that format. Only then will we know if this proposed format is worth changing to or not. Can't wait to see the boards when in the same league, on the same week, team 150 plays 160 and 170, and team 89.5, plays 88 and 62. The Fantasy Gods will strike and make sure this happens.
Like I said yesterday, Dyv, let's analyze all of the results after Week 13's games and see where the "inconsistencies" lie. In many respects, I believe the stats will show that the two best teams from each league are advancing to the playoffs. Not ALL of the best teams, but that's something we can cure with a few additional wild card teams. If the stats show that our system was terrible, then we need a complete overhaul.
Maybe the stats will show that the difference between the $5,000 winner and the $1,500 winner wasn't worth $3,500, and then that's something we can also change. So let's analyze the facts tomorrow.
Do I think an all play format is better for the NFFC? No. Do I think it is the most definitive way to determine the best h2h league champ? Probably. But it takes out the straight-up h2h format that is so familiar and common to fantasy football players.
Yes, play2 could be the cure-all you're looking for and maybe in 2006 or beyond everyone will agree to go with that. Two wins (or losses) per week isn't TOO drastic of a change and if explained properly it certainly could work. When you and KJ Duke have time, run the numbers for that and see how many leagues would have changed champions under that format. Only then will we know if this proposed format is worth changing to or not. Can't wait to see the boards when in the same league, on the same week, team 150 plays 160 and 170, and team 89.5, plays 88 and 62. The Fantasy Gods will strike and make sure this happens.
Jules is a Dirt bag and makes my luck.
Another angle to consider
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
When you and KJ Duke have time, run the numbers for that and see how many leagues would have changed champions under that format. Only then will we know if this proposed format is worth changing to or not. Greg, there is some bias still in yr-end numbers because teams that got buried early because of scheduling no doubt threw in the towel early and are less likely to perform as well in the later weeks. We really can't adjust for that, just recognize that it is a flaw.
Secondly, I think the stats will show that most of the best teams made the playoffs. That doesn't mean the system shouldn't be better. Does anyone want to be the 1 team that gets screwed?
Finally, I can't get the numbers I need from the web site to analyze all of the lges. If STATS could get me weekly scores for each lge I could easily run a few scoring scenarios and either email you or post the results.
When you and KJ Duke have time, run the numbers for that and see how many leagues would have changed champions under that format. Only then will we know if this proposed format is worth changing to or not. Greg, there is some bias still in yr-end numbers because teams that got buried early because of scheduling no doubt threw in the towel early and are less likely to perform as well in the later weeks. We really can't adjust for that, just recognize that it is a flaw.
Secondly, I think the stats will show that most of the best teams made the playoffs. That doesn't mean the system shouldn't be better. Does anyone want to be the 1 team that gets screwed?
Finally, I can't get the numbers I need from the web site to analyze all of the lges. If STATS could get me weekly scores for each lge I could easily run a few scoring scenarios and either email you or post the results.
-
ultimatefs
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:00 pm
Another angle to consider
Originally posted by Dyv:
I think what I'm seeking is that Holy Grail... going into tonight's game where I'm down by 13 points going into MNF. I have Julius Jones and my opponent has Seattle Defense so it could go either way tonight.
If I win, I get the league 1st place. The interesting thing is that Gigglin Marlin falls from 1st place to 3rd place as another team has just 5 pts. less than me and 100 more than Marlin.
It may 'work out', but all that perfection and support or rebuttal for the system as it is right now hinges on the performance of Julius Jones vs. Seattle Defense.
As it stands right now, if I don't win tonight then the team currently 14th overall doesn't make the playoffs.
Just doesn't seem right that it should hinge like this - even if it DOES work out... (and believe me I hope it does !)
Catch up more as we get some conclusions...
Dave LOL... yankin your chain Dave.... What would have happened if you beat the team with 2nd least points?
I think what I'm seeking is that Holy Grail... going into tonight's game where I'm down by 13 points going into MNF. I have Julius Jones and my opponent has Seattle Defense so it could go either way tonight.
If I win, I get the league 1st place. The interesting thing is that Gigglin Marlin falls from 1st place to 3rd place as another team has just 5 pts. less than me and 100 more than Marlin.
It may 'work out', but all that perfection and support or rebuttal for the system as it is right now hinges on the performance of Julius Jones vs. Seattle Defense.
As it stands right now, if I don't win tonight then the team currently 14th overall doesn't make the playoffs.
Just doesn't seem right that it should hinge like this - even if it DOES work out... (and believe me I hope it does !)
Catch up more as we get some conclusions...
Dave LOL... yankin your chain Dave.... What would have happened if you beat the team with 2nd least points?
Jules is a Dirt bag and makes my luck.
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 7222
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 6:00 pm
Another angle to consider
Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
what about playing against every team in your league every week. if you have the top score you go 13-0 for the week. if you have the second best score you go 12-1 and so on... doesn't that tip the scale to skill? I would be in your corner the whole way on this one Gekko! [/QUOTE]sounds like there could be a market for this format. hmmm...
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
what about playing against every team in your league every week. if you have the top score you go 13-0 for the week. if you have the second best score you go 12-1 and so on... doesn't that tip the scale to skill? I would be in your corner the whole way on this one Gekko! [/QUOTE]sounds like there could be a market for this format. hmmm...
Is my "weekend warrior" prep better than your prep?