NFFC Message Boards

Why is a pick only -1? If it were -2 like it should be, I would have won instead of lost since I was going against Romo.

And don't tell me "Because that was the poll results." With the average QB throwing for 350 yds/game these days and with 6 pts for passing TD, it has to be -2!

Agree totally. In fact I would take it a step further: -3 for an INT.

HossJWW wrote:Why is a pick only -1? If it were -2 like it should be, I would have won instead of lost since I was going against Romo.

And don't tell me "Because that was the poll results." With the average QB throwing for 350 yds/game these days and with 6 pts for passing TD, it has to be -2!

How about "because it has been in the rules for years - the same rules you knew about when you signed up and drafted"?

A case could be made that, in this pass-heavy era, 5 points per 100 yards passing is too much and could be 4, like most other leagues and that 6-pt passing TDs are too much and could be 4. But we knew what we signed up for. Not much sense complaining about it now, unless you're just making a suggestion for next year.

KenGill wrote:Agree totally. In fact I would take it a step further: -3 for an INT.

if you throw 3 int's you get the death penalty and get a zero.

I still think the "progressive system" that KOQ came up with is best.

Don't remember exactly, but something like.....

1 INT- -1
2 INT- -3
3 INT- -6
4 INT- -8
5 INT- -12

Something along those lines, but basically the premise is you don't get screwed over a 2 INT game (after all, many INT's are not the QB's fault), but when you have a game like Romo's last night, you get penalized a lot (which you should IMO).

HossJWW wrote:Why is a pick only -1? If it were -2 like it should be, I would have won instead of lost since I was going against Romo.

And don't tell me "Because that was the poll results." With the average QB throwing for 350 yds/game these days and with 6 pts for passing TD, it has to be -2!

Avg yards is about 240, which is 5.5 points less than you suggest. Average INT's is close to 1 per game, so raising it would take away 1 point per game. Per your analysis, the average QB would have to throw 6.5 INT's per game rather than 1 to have the impact you suggest.

As for Romo, at least 2 of his picks were completely on his WRs and a third was on his blockers which collapsed causing a fumble-ception. His game wasn't nearly as bad as it appeared.

Dez Bryant,meanwhile, was horrible but still put up 20+ points. Where's the outrage over that ??? If would be better justice to pin a -2 on him for an INT caused by running the wrong route, plus a couple more minuses for huge drops right through his fat fingers. Ogletree deserved one too for letting a perfectly thrown ball clank off his face directly to a defender.

If we are getting into the "why is that in the rules?" discussion, here's one that has bothered me of late:

Why is it 6 points for a TD, be it one yard or 99, yet a kicker gets bonus points for anything over 30 yards? Makes no sense!

Okay, one more. In non-NFFC leagues where QBs get 4 points per TD pass...but get 2 points for throwing a 2-yard 2-point conversion. Why??????

BillyWaz wrote:I still think the "progressive system" that KOQ came up with is best.

Don't remember exactly, but something like.....

1 INT- -1
2 INT- -3
3 INT- -6
4 INT- -8
5 INT- -12

Something along those lines, but basically the premise is you don't get screwed over a 2 INT game (after all, many INT's are not the QB's fault), but when you have a game like Romo's last night, you get penalized a lot (which you should IMO).

People don't like minus points so I doubt it would ever fly. Still, by-and-large, this is much more representative of a QBs performance.

People don't like minus points so I doubt it would ever fly. Still, by-and-large, this is much more representative of a QBs performance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't that what we are trying to do here? Replicate real performance and translate it into fantasy team peformance?

King of Queens wrote:If we are getting into the "why is that in the rules?" discussion, here's one that has bothered me of late:

Why is it 6 points for a TD, be it one yard or 99, yet a kicker gets bonus points for anything over 30 yards? Makes no sense!

Okay, one more. In non-NFFC leagues where QBs get 4 points per TD pass...but get 2 points for throwing a 2-yard 2-point conversion. Why??????

Because what differentiates a one-yard from a 99-yard TD is the 9.8 point difference in yardage points. Kickers need a way to be rewarded for greater difficulty too.

Then again, if we really want to question kicker scoring, why not have another resounding chorus of a little song I wrote last year wherein I questioned why we even still use kickers, seeing most of the ones we end up using weren't even the ones we drafted?!

Here are this year's top 12 kickers so far, showing their kicker ADP:

Player Pts Avg K-ADP
1 Zuerlein 58.6 14.6 16
2 Hanson 56.7 14.1 19
3 Gostkowski 53.1 13.2 2
4 Tucker 48.5 12.1 13
5 Tynes 48.5 12.1 17
6 Akers 47.6 11.9 1
7 Walsh 46.7 11.6 25
8 Bryant 45.8 11.4 6
9 Barth 45.7 11.4 27
10 Gould 42.4 10.6 14
11 Dawson 41.8 10.4 18
12 Graham 39.7 9.9 12

The average kicker ADP of the current top 12 kickers was 14.2. As you can see, just 4 of the projected top 12 are actually among the top 12. The average ADP of the other 8: a whopping 18.6!

IMO, kickers truly are the same as playing poker with wild cards.