Rules Proposals For 2008

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:26 am

Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by JohnZ:
quote:Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
Here's a proposed change that will never fly. We need to go to a Bonzai draft. 3RR just doesn't go far enough to even the playing field.

The winner of both NFFC and WCOFF drafted from the #1 slot and had LT.

Say what you want, but not even monster years from teams that had Brady/Moss/ADP or some combination of the 3 could compete when it came down to it.

I know this will be the unpopular suggestion as most fall in marching order, but I wanted to offer it. ummmm.. the guy that won here had monster week from NYG, Stecker, K.Watson and D.Anderson. They all outscored (play 4+ qtrs in 2 weeks) LT, Week 16. Three of those guys were FAAB bids. What in the HELL does that have to do with the DRAFT, 3RR, or BONZAI?

He did not win because he drafted first. He won because he managed his team best and his players came through when it counted.
[/QUOTE]Couldn't agree with this more John. LT WAS NOT the reason that he won the 100K. All the 3RR naysayers will say 3RR didn't matter, but as I have stated before, it is ONE year.

Give it some time, and then we will see if 3RR truly works or not. NO ONE would like to be judged on their ability solely after one season, yet some people want to judge 3RR after just one.

I simply don't get it.

[/QUOTE]What is not to get? LT was a major part of the reason their team got the the Championship round. I'm not saying he is the reason they won.

I'm also not judging 3RR after only 1 season.

Management made a choice to go to 3RR for a reason. They could have just as easily chosen Bonzai. I'm sure you'd be defending Bonzai just the same if they had chosen it.

Many of us have played 3RR and Bonzai. Many prefer Bonzai. That doesn't mean everyone would. It also doesn't mean 3RR is wrong.

I just don't feel that 3RR goes far enough to balance the draft. Especially in a 14 team format.

Curious Billy, have you ever played in a league using Bonzai? If so, what was your experience with it?

Go Gettas deserves ALL of the credit for winning this season. I am not trying to take anything away from them.

All I was doing is proposing a rule change.

Like I said in my previous post, there are those on this board that will defend the management's decisions, regardless of what they may be. Therefore, nothing that anyone offers to the contrary will be well received.

Take my suggestion with a grain of salt. But, I'd be remiss if I didn't suggest it and later "whined" about the format. [/QUOTE]Russ,

Your post DID sound like you were saying that because they picked #1 is the reason they won. With last year LT #'s you could say that, but Go Gettas won this thing with good management skills (WW/lineup), and to a much lesser degree (IMO) LT.

As far as Bonzai, I have never heard of it. It MIGHT even the playing field more, but maybe not. One thing I do know is that there is only one other high stakes contest out there that has 3RR, and NO OTHER (that I know of) offers KDS.

If your "would support anything management suggests comment" was directed towards me, tha is fine. What I do know is this is the ONLY high stakes league that puts up a post for suggested rule changes each year. For me, that is GREAT customer service, where the owners care what the players want, and aren't in it just to "turn a buck".

As for why I like 3RR (with KDS- very important), it is different. I just finished my 21st fantasy football season and with the exception of year 2 in a local league where we repicked EACH round (yes, I know it is crazy- crazier is that out of 15 rounds one guy picked 1st 8 times!!!!) and acution leagues, I have done the "serpentine thing" FOREVER until this year.

Would I like Bonzai???, probably so. Honestly it just sounds like an extension of 3RR, but if you know of any high stakes Bonzai leagues out there I would love to hear about them.

If you want, shoot me a PM.

Thanks Russ!

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 8:51 am

Originally posted by JohnZ:

I've seen a lot of winners and losers over the years and it obviously irks me when people discredit the champion in ANY formsorry i didn't realize it sooner, but now i know why your pushing your opinion so much...YOU HAD LT THIS YEAR!!!

bald is beautiful · Post by **bald is beautiful** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 8:57 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
I like the -2 for qb int and the elias scoring change deadline move to thursday night. For the first time in my life, I agree with Gekko.

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:35 am

The scoring change is a no-brainer. To build on what Alex said, the scores need to be correct and these challenges should withhold their final scores unttil this information is released.

I agree that if the QBs are going to get 6 pts for a TD pass then the minus 2 is appropriate for throwing an INT even if it is not their fault.

Another one to add as was mentioned by FantasyFreakinFootball.com earlier this year and debated much further back is the change to have the FA bidding go to an EBay like version where you get the player for one dollar more than the highest lesser bid.

Example: I bid 465 on Natrone Means and you bid 3, I get him for 4 and not 465.

This way you get the player for the minimum amount while still risking the maximum you care to bid. I see no downside to a change like this and feel it is appropriate for these challenges.

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:52 am

Originally posted by Ted's Cracked Head:
Another one to add as was mentioned by FantasyFreakinFootball.com earlier this year and debated much further back is the change to have the FA bidding go to an EBay like version where you get the player for one dollar more than the highest lesser bid.

Example: I bid 465 on Natrone Means and you bid 3, I get him for 4 and not 465.

This way you get the player for the minimum amount while still risking the maximum you care to bid. I see no downside to a change like this and feel it is appropriate for these challenges. I actually like the system the way it is Rob, as it adds another element of strategy to the game.

There are MANY people out there who spend far too much on free agents each week, and that helps those who have a good idea of how much someone is worth.

While I agree this isn't an exact science, and we all have spent more on a player than needed, again, the better owners will still be able to manage their money better over the long haul.

Also, it is a great feeling when you outbid someone by just $1 or $2 on a player and get them!

renman · Post by **renman** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:38 am

Rob,

Just to play devils advocate, the fact that some may significantly overbid on a player in FAAB can make things interesting.

If someone bid $220 on a guy that no one else in the league saw much value in (next highest bid $12), should he be punished for the overbid or saved by his overbid being erased?

Which makes for a more interesting game?

I kind of agree with Billywaz about this. I enjoy making just the right bid... and the only reason I enjoy it is because I know how it feels to overbid and have tasted that too. I think trying to project what a guy will go for an then identifying how aggressively I want to go for him or how much I am willing to risk is part of the fun/strategy.

[ December 26, 2007, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: renman ]

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 12:25 pm

I prefer -1 on the int's.

I would like a modified main event play-off for the auction leagues and ultimate.

In week 1 seeds 3-6 have a one week play in for the championship. The two winners advance to a three week run to win the championship. Every team uses their average score for the first 13 weeks. In week 14, the #1 and #2 seeds scores will count along with the scores of the two winning team from the two play-in games. Three out of the four teams will cash.

With this format it rewards the top two teams, but gives the other four teams a shot.

[ December 26, 2007, 06:30 PM: Message edited by: CC's Desperados ]

renman · Post by **renman** » Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:29 am

CC's,

The more I think about it the more I like -1 on int's as well. I like that QB's have great value in the NFFC. As I stated earlier, that high value and scoring potential results in QB's occasionally being taken high and owners need to weight the advantages of grabbing a Manning or Brady or Romo next year in the 1st round and being short an RB or WR. I like that these decisions have to be made.

I find this more fun than how in the past many draft boards could easily be predicted.

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:38 am

Originally posted by renman:
Rob,

Just to play devils advocate, the fact that some may significantly overbid on a player in FAAB can make things interesting.

If someone bid $220 on a guy that no one else in the league saw much value in (next highest bid $12), should he be punished for the overbid or saved by his overbid being erased?

Which makes for a more interesting game?

I kind of agree with Billywaz about this. I enjoy making just the right bid... and the only reason I enjoy it is because I know how it feels to overbid and have tasted that too. I think trying to project what a guy will go for an then identifying how aggressively I want to go for him or how much I am willing to risk is part of the fun/strategy. Put me in this camp as well. It takes more thought under the current system IMO... although I don't think owners would jack their bids up all the time and hope for a lesser price. It would only take one time of 2 teams doing that to realize the downside.

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:49 am

If I could change one thing about the auction it would be the playoff qualifiers. I think it's lame to award the final 2 spots to the 2 remaining best records.

I wonder how many 6-7 teams have missed the playoffs to 7-6 teams that they outscored by more than 50 points overall.

We all understand the randomness of H2H. I'm not opposed to rewarding a good record but not the final 2 spots. Make the H2H qualifiers have to win more than 7 ganes for crying out loud.

How about the top 3 spots go to:

1)Best record
2)Points
3)Record
4)Points
5)Points
6)Points

One year I had the 5th highest point total and didn't make the playoffs because of thie current format. I outscored every playoff team every week and got notta because I didn't qualify.

Anyone else have this happen?

What are the cons to changing this?