Originally posted by 3INTBOY/BFDFANTASY.com:
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. they most certainly did earn those points
Possible future change in Playoff round
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 7222
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 6:00 pm
Possible future change in Playoff round
Is my "weekend warrior" prep better than your prep?
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by 3INTBOY/BFDFANTASY.com:
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. they most certainly did earn those points [/QUOTE]Actually GG ... 3INT is actually proposing adding a 6.5x into the equasion (starting with 1/2 your points in the playoffs) ... it's pretty aggressive ... and I got some heat for talking about a 2x or 3x ... lol
UYT
quote:Originally posted by 3INTBOY/BFDFANTASY.com:
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. they most certainly did earn those points [/QUOTE]Actually GG ... 3INT is actually proposing adding a 6.5x into the equasion (starting with 1/2 your points in the playoffs) ... it's pretty aggressive ... and I got some heat for talking about a 2x or 3x ... lol
UYT
Hakuna Matata!
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by 3INTBOY/BFDFANTASY.com:
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. they most certainly did earn those points [/QUOTE]Actually GG ... 3INT is actually proposing adding a 6.5x into the equasion (starting with 1/2 your points in the playoffs) ... it's pretty aggressive ... and I got some heat for talking about a 2x or 3x ... lol
UYT [/QUOTE]I see 3INT's point, but it would be "a cold day in you know where" when ANY high stakes contest would adopt anything more than 3X your average.
That would deter more than 1/2 of the participants IMO, and the goal is to add more people, not go backwards.
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by 3INTBOY/BFDFANTASY.com:
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. they most certainly did earn those points [/QUOTE]Actually GG ... 3INT is actually proposing adding a 6.5x into the equasion (starting with 1/2 your points in the playoffs) ... it's pretty aggressive ... and I got some heat for talking about a 2x or 3x ... lol
UYT [/QUOTE]I see 3INT's point, but it would be "a cold day in you know where" when ANY high stakes contest would adopt anything more than 3X your average.
That would deter more than 1/2 of the participants IMO, and the goal is to add more people, not go backwards.
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 36392
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by 3INTBOY/BFDFANTASY.com:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by BubbasHouse:
My vote would be to increase the factor - to 2x or even 3x. I think the point made using Jules as the example is very valid. Clearly the best team after 10 weeks (and possible after 13) - and the best team should have better than 1x average.
i agree with having it increased to 2X [/QUOTE]Originally posted by FISHER:
Greg,
Personally I think that the current system is perfectly fine. I would really dislike any change at all going forward.
If the Colts go 16-0 in regular season, and they lose in the 2nd week of playoffs....too bad. Sorry guys, you are both way off here.
The format to crown a champion is not H2H, so the 16-0 and lose in the playoffs doesn't apply.
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. We should all have a starting point based on points earned. Giving some multiple of that is arbitrary. Why not 1.25? or 2.5? or 3?
It's an unearned arbitrary number that has no quantifiable value.
Here's the short version of the long proposal that I made to the WCOFF, and I did the numbers a while back. But trashed them.
The problem right now: Both events take the regular season average POINTS SCORED and reduce them down to 1 weeks value. The problem with that is both leagues award the ultimate winner based on Points scored. So why reduce the value of 13 weeks down to 1 week average? By doing it in it's current form you only give the regular season that makes up 80% of the seasons points 25% of the Champions Total!
Here's the math: 16 weeks/13 week regular season=81%
Championship Round is the 4 weeks: Reg Season Avearge plus 3 Championship weeks.
What's the solution:
Getting to the Championship round (not playoffs) is 50% of the battle. So simply cut the regular season total in half. Enter the Championship Round with 50% of your regular season total and add each week from there.
Does that give the highest scoring teams more than the lower scoring teams from the regular season? YES! and they deserve it. BUT: it doesn't overly compensate OR give arbitrary points out.
EX: Current Leader has:1773
Team #32 has 1440
Team 1 would have:886
Team 32 would have 770
So it would take a BIG jump for the team that finished in the final guaranteed spot to catch the Top Team.
Why is that ok? Because if team 1 has excelled in both the regular season and the Championship Round, then they DESERVE to win it all.
This is the extreme example. All those other teams would not start down 116. They would be closer based on their scores in the regular season.
This would give equal weight to being good in both the Regular Season and Championship Round.
Like I stated earlier in the post, I had numbers for the WCOFF, but trashed them, because no one wanted to hear the word CHANGE. It sends people into panic mode....
Enjoy. I am ready to take the heat...
3' [/QUOTE]Wow, that's aggressive Lou. That's really giving the regular season champions a head start towards the $100,000. I'm not against any proposal, but I think you do want to give the playoff teams a fresh start if you can without giving so much love towards the league they competed in this year. Providing the weekly scoring average helps a little (remember, Josh Ferenc led the NFFC in scoring during the regular season last year and then won the $100,000 by just 2.09 points), but it doesn't tilt the scales so much towards league bias.
The Championship Round is a 400-meter crapshoot not a marathon, no doubt about it. But every playoff contender has a legitimate shot at the grand prize and it's hard to imagine a better scenario than that. May the best team win it all!
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by BubbasHouse:
My vote would be to increase the factor - to 2x or even 3x. I think the point made using Jules as the example is very valid. Clearly the best team after 10 weeks (and possible after 13) - and the best team should have better than 1x average.
i agree with having it increased to 2X [/QUOTE]Originally posted by FISHER:
Greg,
Personally I think that the current system is perfectly fine. I would really dislike any change at all going forward.
If the Colts go 16-0 in regular season, and they lose in the 2nd week of playoffs....too bad. Sorry guys, you are both way off here.
The format to crown a champion is not H2H, so the 16-0 and lose in the playoffs doesn't apply.
Giving a team 2 x's their average is also no good, and here's why.
They didn't earn those points, and therefore don't deserve them. We should all have a starting point based on points earned. Giving some multiple of that is arbitrary. Why not 1.25? or 2.5? or 3?
It's an unearned arbitrary number that has no quantifiable value.
Here's the short version of the long proposal that I made to the WCOFF, and I did the numbers a while back. But trashed them.
The problem right now: Both events take the regular season average POINTS SCORED and reduce them down to 1 weeks value. The problem with that is both leagues award the ultimate winner based on Points scored. So why reduce the value of 13 weeks down to 1 week average? By doing it in it's current form you only give the regular season that makes up 80% of the seasons points 25% of the Champions Total!
Here's the math: 16 weeks/13 week regular season=81%
Championship Round is the 4 weeks: Reg Season Avearge plus 3 Championship weeks.
What's the solution:
Getting to the Championship round (not playoffs) is 50% of the battle. So simply cut the regular season total in half. Enter the Championship Round with 50% of your regular season total and add each week from there.
Does that give the highest scoring teams more than the lower scoring teams from the regular season? YES! and they deserve it. BUT: it doesn't overly compensate OR give arbitrary points out.
EX: Current Leader has:1773
Team #32 has 1440
Team 1 would have:886
Team 32 would have 770
So it would take a BIG jump for the team that finished in the final guaranteed spot to catch the Top Team.
Why is that ok? Because if team 1 has excelled in both the regular season and the Championship Round, then they DESERVE to win it all.
This is the extreme example. All those other teams would not start down 116. They would be closer based on their scores in the regular season.
This would give equal weight to being good in both the Regular Season and Championship Round.
Like I stated earlier in the post, I had numbers for the WCOFF, but trashed them, because no one wanted to hear the word CHANGE. It sends people into panic mode....
Enjoy. I am ready to take the heat...
3' [/QUOTE]Wow, that's aggressive Lou. That's really giving the regular season champions a head start towards the $100,000. I'm not against any proposal, but I think you do want to give the playoff teams a fresh start if you can without giving so much love towards the league they competed in this year. Providing the weekly scoring average helps a little (remember, Josh Ferenc led the NFFC in scoring during the regular season last year and then won the $100,000 by just 2.09 points), but it doesn't tilt the scales so much towards league bias.
The Championship Round is a 400-meter crapshoot not a marathon, no doubt about it. But every playoff contender has a legitimate shot at the grand prize and it's hard to imagine a better scenario than that. May the best team win it all!
Founder, National Fantasy Football Championship & National Fantasy Baseball Championship
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 7222
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 6:00 pm
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
Actually GG ... 3INT is actually proposing adding a 6.5x so teams haven't earned 2X their weekly avg, but somehow they earned 6.5X????? lou - i graduated high school. your logic doesn't work on me.
Actually GG ... 3INT is actually proposing adding a 6.5x so teams haven't earned 2X their weekly avg, but somehow they earned 6.5X????? lou - i graduated high school. your logic doesn't work on me.
Is my "weekend warrior" prep better than your prep?
Possible future change in Playoff round
Keep in mind the team with the top overall points or even the top 5 teams all are partly where they are through some good fortune they got from within their own individual league. Where as some other owner who fought his way into the post season finishing 29th might not have had that same good fortune. Giving a slight head start to teams at the top of the list is a reasonable reward. Making it too big can be unfair simply because each league has it's own set of unique circumstances.
This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for.
[ November 20, 2006, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: renman ]
This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for.
[ November 20, 2006, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: renman ]
-
TradeStar28
- Posts: 2169
- Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 6:00 pm
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by renman:
Keep in mind the team with the top overall points or even the top 5 teams all are partly where they are through some good fortune they got from within their own individual league. Where as some other owner who fought his way into the post season finishing 29th might not have had that same good fortune. Giving a slight head start to teams at the top of the list is a reasonable reward. Making it too big can be unfair simply because each league has it's own set of unique circumstances.
This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for. If I agreed with this anymore it would be a sin!
ok, next proposed rule change thread starts now! What's on the plate? lol
Keep in mind the team with the top overall points or even the top 5 teams all are partly where they are through some good fortune they got from within their own individual league. Where as some other owner who fought his way into the post season finishing 29th might not have had that same good fortune. Giving a slight head start to teams at the top of the list is a reasonable reward. Making it too big can be unfair simply because each league has it's own set of unique circumstances.
This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for. If I agreed with this anymore it would be a sin!
ok, next proposed rule change thread starts now! What's on the plate? lol
2012 - FI$HER - Flying High Again
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 36392
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by FISHER:
quote:Originally posted by renman:
Keep in mind the team with the top overall points or even the top 5 teams all are partly where they are through some good fortune they got from within their own individual league. Where as some other owner who fought his way into the post season finishing 29th might not have had that same good fortune. Giving a slight head start to teams at the top of the list is a reasonable reward. Making it too big can be unfair simply because each league has it's own set of unique circumstances.
This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for. If I agreed with this anymore it would be a sin!
ok, next proposed rule change thread starts now! What's on the plate? lol [/QUOTE]BBDS!!
quote:Originally posted by renman:
Keep in mind the team with the top overall points or even the top 5 teams all are partly where they are through some good fortune they got from within their own individual league. Where as some other owner who fought his way into the post season finishing 29th might not have had that same good fortune. Giving a slight head start to teams at the top of the list is a reasonable reward. Making it too big can be unfair simply because each league has it's own set of unique circumstances.
This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for. If I agreed with this anymore it would be a sin!
ok, next proposed rule change thread starts now! What's on the plate? lol [/QUOTE]BBDS!!
Founder, National Fantasy Football Championship & National Fantasy Baseball Championship
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
-
D-Day Heroes
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:00 pm
Possible future change in Playoff round
Redman This is why I am a big fan of fattening up individual prizes from within leagues and having a sprint at the end of the season for the big big prizes something extra to aim for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I agreed with this anymore it would be a sin!
ok, next proposed rule change thread starts now! What's on the plate? lol Fisher
*** Individual Prizes with a slight play-off advantage is the way to Go. *** Which Basically means that Greg and Tom , Got it right to begin with, how about that, told you guys to leave it to the Proffessionals..! Listen I think the best analogy, is Golf. Thats right Golf, which I am not a very big fan of BTW, But here's why. Isn't this where the term " Making the Cut " comes from..? Well, guess what, thats the perfect way to describe making the play-off round in fantasy leagues. " You Made the Cut ", Now take your individual " Regular Season " prizes with your 1.5 x average into the Play-Offs, and Good-Luck.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I agreed with this anymore it would be a sin!
ok, next proposed rule change thread starts now! What's on the plate? lol Fisher
*** Individual Prizes with a slight play-off advantage is the way to Go. *** Which Basically means that Greg and Tom , Got it right to begin with, how about that, told you guys to leave it to the Proffessionals..! Listen I think the best analogy, is Golf. Thats right Golf, which I am not a very big fan of BTW, But here's why. Isn't this where the term " Making the Cut " comes from..? Well, guess what, thats the perfect way to describe making the play-off round in fantasy leagues. " You Made the Cut ", Now take your individual " Regular Season " prizes with your 1.5 x average into the Play-Offs, and Good-Luck.
" When you are in any contest you should work as if there were - to the very last minute - a chance to lose it. "
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Possible future change in Playoff round
Originally posted by D-Day Heroes:
Listen I think the best analogy, is Golf. Thats right Golf, which I am not a very big fan of BTW, But here's why. Isn't this where the term " Making the Cut " comes from..? Well, guess what, thats the perfect way to describe making the play-off round in fantasy leagues. " You Made the Cut ", Now take your individual " Regular Season " prizes with your 1.5 x average into the Play-Offs, and Good-Luck. In golf (I'm not a big fan either), if you make "the cut", you bring ALL your strokes into Saturday (in this case it would be a 13 x average if it was the NFFC).
I agree with everyone that it need to be less. I just want Tiger to be rewarded for going into Saturday with a 13 stroke lead and not have everyone basically starts from scratch IMO.
Good point with the golf. Cut Tigers lead to three or two ... but not one.
Listen I think the best analogy, is Golf. Thats right Golf, which I am not a very big fan of BTW, But here's why. Isn't this where the term " Making the Cut " comes from..? Well, guess what, thats the perfect way to describe making the play-off round in fantasy leagues. " You Made the Cut ", Now take your individual " Regular Season " prizes with your 1.5 x average into the Play-Offs, and Good-Luck. In golf (I'm not a big fan either), if you make "the cut", you bring ALL your strokes into Saturday (in this case it would be a 13 x average if it was the NFFC).
I agree with everyone that it need to be less. I just want Tiger to be rewarded for going into Saturday with a 13 stroke lead and not have everyone basically starts from scratch IMO.
Good point with the golf. Cut Tigers lead to three or two ... but not one.
Hakuna Matata!