Originally posted by ForLoveOfTheGame:
Glenneration X: I’ve agreed with a lot of your posts but lets be honest man, if you have that many injuries on a team it just isn’t going to be your year unless you drafted insanely well / lucky in the later rounds. If we’re going to try and keep teams involved who have that many injuries well then we’re going to have to send almost everyone to the playoffs. I’ve got a team that went like this:
1 Round) Andre Johnson 2) Darren McFadden 4) Jahvid Best 5) Mario Manningham 7) Danny Amendola and I’m going to finish just barely out of 2nd, about 20 - 30 points back. I’m not going to go to the playoffs but I wasn’t one of the best teams. It sucks but injuries are a part of the game (mostly unlucky part but you should KNOW the risk you’re taking with some guys, like McFadden and Best for example from my team). I just don’t see any way to let everyone with tons of injuries to stay involved, I mean can’t at least 3 or so teams from every league say they were killed by injuries?
ForLoveOf.....though I used one of my teams that have suffered injuries as an example to support my argument for the benefits of an expanded playoff format, protection against injuries was not the point I was trying to make nor was my personal story the reason for my thought process.
I'll relay another recent personal experience coming from a different persective. This time the NFFC format would have aided my cause. One of my FFPC Main Event teams won top points in its league. Although it scored 162 and 201 points during the playoff weeks, I had to settle for 3rd place playoff money because my opponent in week one of the playoffs scored 165. Utilizing the NFFC format, I would have been league champ and several grand richer.
However, there's another story in the FFPC of a team who started 1-6 and 9th in points after 7 weeks. That player though seemingly out of it continued to make free agent moves, some of his injured players returned, his slow starters came on, and he was able to turn around his season and made the playoffs. In the playoffs, his hot streak continued and he won the league. Now some may say this is what's wrong with an expanded playoff, that the best team didn't win. However, what constitutes the best team? He definately wasn't the best team the first seven weeks. Still, could there have been a better team the last six weeks? What makes the first seven weeks more important than the last six? Why shouldn't a team have the opportunity to work his team through slow starts and injury and build his team to be the best come playoff time? Isn't that an even more difficult skill than having drafted a great team and been lucky enough to never have too much of a cold patch or injuries? Shouldn't that ability have an opportunity at reward as well?
Even more importantly, doesn't that opportunity keep more slow starting teams fighting longer, keep the season alive and more fun for those teams longer, and make the investment of joining a contest more worth it whether you make the playoffs or not?
I honestly don't have a problem with the NFFC's format. I'm fine with having different formats for different contests since I play them all. There are also aspects to the NFFC's playoffs that I feel are the best around. The NFFC's 13-week season and the 3-week total points battle in the playoffs is far superior to the 11-week season and single week H2H formats offered elsewhere. I just think more should be involved in it each year. I think the more that are involved or even have a "chance" to be involved will get more satisfaction with their seasons and be more apt to return. This isn't about the players who will be here every year no matter what like myself, this is about those that have to think about it and convince themselves to return.
I'd also like to quickly address Joe and Gambler on the Chum Chum Club. I'm not really sure why a portion of this thread had to degenerate to a condemnation of the Club and Greg & Tom's supposed catering to it. I'm as guilty as anyone for having a bit of fun in the thread dedicated to the Chum Chum Club. However that's mostly due to my enjoyment at posting pictures and my long time love for movies in the Godfather genre. Godfathers I & II, Goodfellas, Scarface, Casino, etc. I mean seriously, does it get any better than that?
Still, I think the perception you two have is mistaken. I haven't been an NFFC participant that much longer than the two of you. I've only been here one year longer than you Joe and only two years longer than you Gambler. I haven't personally seen any indication that Greg and Tom only cater to the whims of veterans when making their decisions. In fact, I can personally state that in my first year, I was treated with more respect and my concerns addressed to such an extent that it became and remains the overriding factor in my ongoing loyalty to this contest. I received great customer service when I was a rookie two years ago just giving high stakes a try and I continue to receive great customer service today as a more established player.
As far as the Chum Chum Club itself, I don't believe there to be the underlying perception of this veteran clique that you two refer to....at least there never was in my viewpoint. Even as someone who frequented the boards frequently , I never even saw the term Chum-Chum my first year. The first time I read it was towards the end of last year when Snake and Billy were in the midst of one of their message board battles....and I had no clue what the hell Snake was referring to. Since then I hadn't heard it referenced again until the recent thread on the topic....and now I finally know who is in the Club! And if those mentioned in the thread are the members, they're the least of our problems. Billy, Frank, KOQ, have anything but an elitist attitude as far as I'm concerned. Each has shown me nothing but good will and comaradarie since I've been a part of these contests. I've never seen them show anyone else anything but as well. Do they get their opinions across? Yes, because they're passionate about this game and thrive to make it better and are outspoken about their opinions. Joe, Gambler, you're no different. Good guys also, but passionate and outspoken. I'm no different. Many others are the same. There's nothing wrong with it, in fact it's a good thing.