NFFC RULES (suggestions for the future)

bill · Post by **bill** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:37 am

I really like the rules at the NFFC and it is one of the reasons I chose to participate here. Obviously, there are a lot of different ways to look at things in fantasy football and it is hard to find a consesus to change any long standing rules. But, I would like to throw out some ideas for consideration. No major rule change suggestions here, just some fine tuning.

1. Allowing an individual to get credit for a TD on a punt or kick return is ok with me. It would add more strategy to drafting certain players and I see no downside to adding this rule.
Why shouldn't Tedd Ginn Jr. get some fantasy credit for the return TD's a couple weeks ago? I used to be against this because I thought if you owned the Miami D/SPT and Ted Ginn Jr. you would get credit for the TD twice. But we have this happen all the time if you own a QB and WR from the same team so I would have no objection to allowing a player like Devin Hester or Darren Sproles to get credit for a kick return TD.

2. If Steelers offense gives up a TD why count the points against the Steelers D/SPT? If the D or Special Team is not even on the field why should a play by their offense be counted against them?

3. Every league I have been in outside the NFFC has always included yards against in the D scoring. Isn't yards against one of the most important ways to judge the success of a D?
Here is an example:
0-150 yards against 4 points
151-225 yards against 3 points
226-300 yards against 2 points
301-375 yards against 1 point
376-450 yards against 0 points
over 450 yards against -1

If a D gets a 3 and out with no yardage that is almost like getting a turnover. Shouldn't yards against matter at least a little to our scoring?
Sometimes a D will have a great game
by NFL standards; few turnovers and sacks but under 200 yards against and under 10 points. Our fantasy scoring does not give much credit for a D that gives up few yards and few points if they have few sacks and turnovers.

4. Would like to see the points against carried out further so a D that gives up 40 points does not receive the same credit as a D that gives up 18. Maybe something like this:

shutout 12pts
2-7 9 pts
8-12 5 pts
13-17 3 pts
18-23 1 pt
24-30 0
over 30 -1

5. In 2 leagues I run, this year I added a penalty for missed field goals:
0-25 yards -1.5
26-35 yards -1
36-45 yards -.5
Kicker A is 2 for 2 from 40 yards
Kicker B is 2 for 4 from 40 yards
Should they receive the same fantasy points??

6. My strongest suggestion (in my opinion) is to play doubleheaders each week of our regular season.
This will help even out the odds of having bad luck in losing the head to head match-ups when you score high point totals. In one of my NFFC leagues I am 5th in total points but 11th in head to head record. I added doubleheaders to the leagues I run and it has worked out great. It really does increase the odds that a teams W/L record will be more reflective of the points they score each week.

7. A roster spot was added this year. In the past, I have always enjoyed the strategy of choosing free agents. Now the rosters have become so large that there is usually little to choose from in the free agent pool. I would be for dropping one roster spot to increase the quality of the free agent pool.

Henry Muto · Post by **Henry Muto** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:58 pm

How about be able to play a TE in the WR slot

Make each TE have a TE/WR option so if you want to start a 2 or 3 TE's you can. So you can start 2 TE's, 3 RB's, 2 WR's or 3 TE's, 3 RB's and 1 WR if you want.

pizzatyme · Post by **pizzatyme** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:56 pm

Not sure if this has been discussed before, but I'd like to ask why you can't move the flex player to his normal position after he has played?

ie, WR in the flex plays on Thursday. We want to be able to move him to the WR slot to allow us the flexability of moving another position player to the FLEX.

pizzatyme · Post by **pizzatyme** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:48 am

Greg,

In the 14 team Classic, we have what we call a Head-to-head competition. My question is, why is the first tie-breaker based on total points?

Why wouldn't the first tie-breaker between 2 teams be their H2H result?

And why wouldn't it be H2H between 3 teams as well?

Otherwise, I think the H2H is improperly weighted. Too much luck of the draw to make it worth $2500 and too little weighting when it comes to tie-breakers.

Therefore, my suggestions would be:

1) Go to a 4 team playoff with 2 of the seeds based on H2H and 2 based on total points.

2) Make the first tie-breaker be the H2H result between teams.

I'm guessing one of the arguments against my 2nd suggestion will be that it's too random when one team may have played another when their team had more players on a BYE. My response to that is why use H2H at all then? It's all random.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:15 am

Hello Russ,

You should go to the WCOFF message boards.
They have the exact rules you are requesting for their contests and the feedback on the H2H tiebreaker for the H2H seeding has been ferociously negative.

I do think four seeds would be a positive development that would help teams that may have had injury issues early but finished up strong.

Glenn

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:59 am

Originally posted by Just Russ:
Greg,

In the 14 team Classic, we have what we call a Head-to-head competition. My question is, why is the first tie-breaker based on total points?

Why wouldn't the first tie-breaker between 2 teams be their H2H result?

And why wouldn't it be H2H between 3 teams as well?

Otherwise, I think the H2H is improperly weighted. Too much luck of the draw to make it worth $2500 and too little weighting when it comes to tie-breakers.

Therefore, my suggestions would be:

1) Go to a 4 team playoff with 2 of the seeds based on H2H and 2 based on total points.

2) Make the first tie-breaker be the H2H result between teams.

I'm guessing one of the arguments against my 2nd suggestion will be that it's too random when one team may have played another when their team had more players on a BYE. My response to that is why use H2H at all then? It's all random. Russ, as Glenn said, this is already being VERY well debated somewhere else. My feeling has been and still is that total points is a better indicator through 13 weeks of the season of the best team than a h2h fantasy matchup that could happen when one team has a lot of players on a bye and another team does not. I do not believe that that one single matchup is a better indicator of the better team if two teams end the season with the same h2h records. Total points is the better indicator there.

I do not see us changing this tie-breaker procedure in the NFFC. Thanks for the suggestion though.

pizzatyme · Post by **pizzatyme** » Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:18 pm

Greg,

Fair enough. While I know fantasy does not equal reality, here are the Tie-breaker rules direct from NFL.com:

TO BREAK A TIE WITHIN A DIVISION
If, at the end of the regular season, two or more clubs in the same division finish with identical won-lost-tied percentages, the following steps will be taken until a champion is determined.

Two Clubs
Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs).
Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games.
Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
Strength of victory.
Strength of schedule.
Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.
Best net points in common games.
Best net points in all games.
Best net touchdowns in all games.
Coin toss

I know in the NFL one team doesn't have to play another while their players are on a BYE, there certainly will be occasions where one team will have more injured players than their opponent.

Just a pipe dream, thanks for listening.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:38 am

I hear ya Russ and I think WCOFF used the same logic for their tie-breakers this year. But we aren't using a defense to stop our opponent in fantasy football and thus it's not the same as the NFL. All we can do as fantasy owners is put the best starting lineup in each week and score as many points as possible for 13 weeks. If after 13 weeks our h2h record is tied for first, the best possible tie-breaker is total points, since that is the only control we had over. We couldn't stop our opponent in Week 6 when three of our guys were on bye.

We are seeing first hand how both rules work in two different contests. Again, I like our tie-breaker better and will definitely keep it this way for 2010.

I like all well-thought ideas and this is one of them. It makes sense. But in fantasy football, I just feel strongly about total points being the deciding factor in all ties.