Leave the NFFC AS IS

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:20 am

ForLove......I understand your points. There's certainly a purity to the current NFFC Playoff setup that's difficult to dispute. However, my point was and remains much simpler than what you and I have made it.

When so many teams are out of the hunt so early in the season and the fun that's anticipated as one of the returns on such a large investment is so short lived for so many, is that the best way to grow this contest?

I've given my opinion, others have given theirs. It's up to Greg and Tom to determine what's best for their game. Either way, I'll be here to play it.

Good luck to everyone the next three weeks. This is the most exciting part of the season. Let's have fun with it.

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:59 am

Originally posted by ForLoveOfTheGame:
BWazz:
I DON’T want to expand to more teams playing for the money but your proposal is BY FAR the best idea in my opinion. There is no reason to add more luck factor with more head to head teams, 1 HTH team and 3 points teams, at least that makes sense to me.

Looks like we’re playing heads up for a few online titles… I hope you get 2nd in the overall standings if you know what I mean hehe!

Good luck

I agree with you Jared, but I have a feeling things are expanding no matter what. It really wasn't my idea as they use this format in the auction and Supers (or at least very similar), and I too feel it gives an extra 2 teams in this case an opportunity to get in and play for some money, but eliminates the "all too lucky" H2H for 3 weeks.

Dominating the regular season and then losing to someone because you had ONE bad week or ran into a buzzsaw simply isn't rewarding the best team. If someone beats me in total points over a 3 week stretch.......I have nothing but respect for them, and they should get the money.

As for us going "toe to toe", it should be fun. Would of liked to have Forte and Fred Davis on that one team, as I felt it had a chance to make some noise, but those are the breaks. How about we split the leagues, and I will take 2nd overall to your first!

Good luck buddy!

ForLoveOfTheGame · Post by **ForLoveOfTheGame** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 7:30 am

Sandman62: While I don't remember exactly (is there a way to see exactly where you were in points through 8 weeks?) I believe I was around 5th. But either way, I can go through all my online teams and post all the data from my slowest teams that made the playoffs if you'd like? Its not impossible to make the playoffs with a slow start here.

Glenn: We just disagree on a simple point, I think only the TOP teams should be rewarded, you think more teams should have a chance to stay involved and a shot at that money I think the top teams should win. What would be wrong with the 3rd through 6th place teams playing for a 3rd place prize? More teams would be involved then, no? No worries if we disagree, I'm sure this won't be the last time.

NFFC seems to be growing just fine to me, Primetime went from 50k to 100k this year with rumors of 200k next year? Online added around 250 teams right? Classic slipped but it only had one weekend, expand that and more onlines and it'll be fine (if people truly want a 14 team format which I question bc of so few sign ups for the 14 team OC)... and lets not forget all this was with a lockout! Hell, I didn't even sign up for anything until that was settled and FF is my favorite thing in the world! I think the numbers at NFFC next year will be huge

Bwazz: You said "Dominating the regular season and then losing to someone because you had ONE bad week or ran into a buzzsaw simply isn't rewarding the best team." I couldn't possibly agree more and this is why I play at the NFFC, I sure hope it doesn't change!

We can split first and second in the championship bracket for all I care! I just don't want to see yet ANOTHER epic collapse by my team in week 16... I'm not sure anyone in the history of FF has a worse week 16 average than me

That I have 0 Aaron Rodgers has me pretty nervous... I'm hoping the Bears D slows him down on Christmas night, or a massive snow storm! lol! Do you have Rodgers at all? Good luck man, not that you'll need it!

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 7:55 am

My point was just that some holes are deeper to dig out of than others. Making he playoffs after being 5th in points thru 7 games is a bit easier than from 10th in points.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:01 am

Good post Jared and I agree with you on almost everything you said (except the part about the Bears shutting down Rodgers on Christmas Night!!

). That isn't happening my man!!

But yes, I do agree that our best days are ahead of us.

I don't think anyone should worry that the NFFC will change its format drastically in 2012 and beyond. The discussion to keep more teams involved and to possibly have a Week 14-16 playoff for third place money or some of the other league money is a worthy, worthy discussion. I'm interested, especially for the Primetime. But the data also shows that we are rewarding the best teams in all of our formats, the h2h champs are NOT winning because other teams are quitting, and the best teams are advancing to the Championship Rounds. I'd hate to take a penny away from any of these teams that have qualified for this year's playoffs. They've earned it this year and the data proves that.

However, the suggestions made within the various threads prove that we can tweak our game a bit and add more value to it. In looking at past WCOFF results and the FFPC, it looks like between 2.3 and 2.4 teams per league make their Championship Rounds. This year in the NFFC Primetime it's 2.13 teams per league making our Championship Round. Could we find a way to increase that to 2.5 or even 3.0 teams per league without hurting the value of the Championship Round? Sure we could. Did it hurt the Classic Championship Round when we expanded from 2 teams qualifying per league to 3? Not at all. In fact, it might not hurt to expand the Wild Card qualifiers in that contest as well in 2012.

So that's one area we are looking at. Making a three week fight for third place playoff money might add value, but I want to look at the numbers first. Making our games more consistent with playoff qualifiers, scoring (RBs = PPR), etc., will be looked at. Expanding our prizes and our two-weekend offerings is being looked at. There are tweaks we are looking at, but not a complete overhaul of the system. I couldn't be prouder of the way our games rewarded the top teams than I am now, so an overhaul won't be happening. We have the ability to grow our contests and we will.

We will take all of your input from the two surveys we plan to send out (first one is going out today, I believe) and make smart decisions. But much of what you see now is likely returning to the NFFC in 2012.

ForLoveOfTheGame · Post by **ForLoveOfTheGame** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:17 am

Sandman, I agree that is a deeper hole than I had to dig out of. That's a mighty deep hole to overcome. Yes it would be harder to do here on this format obviously but not completely impossible

Greg, I didn't say the Packers couldn't win... how about the Pack wins 17 - 10 and Rodgers throws one TD? =) haha!

Here is what I would be concerned with in the Primetime Greg if you let a 3rd team in the Championship Round. This year we have 64 teams in playing for the 100k. Lets pretend 3rd place made it also, we'd have around 90. Then next year with no lockout and a doubled grand prize you might have double the entrees! So double the playoff teams would put it around 180. Pretty much in lottery territory at that point. But it will probably always continue to grow so it's just going to get bigger and bigger. Maybe extending the wild card % a little would work better?

But I agree with you, always willing to LOOK at everything and see if anything needs to be tweaked, if something does then change it!

Love everything you guys do here, keep up the good work!

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:24 am

What about instead of doubling the entries and prize fund, just have TWO contests, each for $100k? If you can afford to do both, feel free. But at least for those who only want to do one, the odds of winning aren't doubled.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:47 am

Originally posted by ForLoveOfTheGame:
Here is what I would be concerned with in the Primetime Greg if you let a 3rd team in the Championship Round. This year we have 64 teams in playing for the 100k. Lets pretend 3rd place made it also, we'd have around 90. Then next year with no lockout and a doubled grand prize you might have double the entrees! So double the playoff teams would put it around 180. Pretty much in lottery territory at that point. But it will probably always continue to grow so it's just going to get bigger and bigger. Maybe extending the wild card % a little would work better?
I don't see it being a lottery at that point and in fact I don't remember anyone in the WCOFF Championship Round complaining about the number of teams in line for the $300,000 grand prize or anyone complaining now about the number of teams in both FFPC Championship Rounds. Those type of posts don't appear on those boards; but they seem to be here whether we're growing or decreasing. Change is tough for everyone, but we all have the same goals in mind: Continue to grow the number of teams and the prize money.

If we grow the way we hope to, there are going to be more teams competing in the Championship Rounds in all of our contests than we have now. That's part of growth. So win now because it's going to get harder in the future, I promise!!

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:50 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
What about instead of doubling the entries and prize fund, just have TWO contests, each for $100k? If you can afford to do both, feel free. But at least for those who only want to do one, the odds of winning aren't doubled. We have two contests now at $100,000 each!!! The fact that we want to grow one of those contests beyond our current level shouldn't be seen as a negative folks. It should be seen as a positive. Let's stay on the right course together. BIG PRIZES BRING BIG INTEREST, no matter what has been said before on these boards!!

We're not going to splice up our contests into smaller pieces. We're going to GROW!!

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:54 am

Originally posted by ForLoveOfTheGame:
Glenn: We just disagree on a simple point, I think only the TOP teams should be rewarded, you think more teams should have a chance to stay involved and a shot at that money I think the top teams should win. What would be wrong with the 3rd through 6th place teams playing for a 3rd place prize? More teams would be involved then, no? No worries if we disagree, I'm sure this won't be the last time. I have no problem with that proposal. I believe that was the initial proposal offered by KOQ or some variation of it by KJ Duke. Either way, there are several different options out there that could accomplish leaving most of the money in the hands of the best finishes but at the same time keep more players in it and thus more interested. I'm sure Greg and Tom are considering all these options and will choose what they feel will work best for all of us and their contest next year.

By the way, I just read Greg's post and figure you must be Jared Danielson. I was wondering who you were. Now I know why you only want to pay the best seasons.
Just kidding. Well only partially as I see your name all over the leaderboards.

Great job this year and good luck in the Championship rounds.