NFFC Rules Discussion For 2013

[HOF]

I would much rather see the ALL PLAY be at the final two weeks of the season so that the guys that are no longer keeping up with their teams do not factor into vital head to head match ups.

Only real rule I would like to see changed.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I'm all for all play from 11-0 to 0-11, by far the fairest way to do it imo. Then if someone starts a bunch of guys on byes or gives up, everyone benefits from it equally instead of the lucky owners who play him after he's given up. Its also more fair for when you have a lot of players on bye the same week like my teams from this year: Many, MANY players from Dallas and Detroit so my week 5 lineups were a joke, the teams who got to play me that week had a huge advantage vs the other teams who played me any other week.

I agree with what Billy said "I think the NFFC needs an element like H2H to keep more teams involved" but that's a HORRIBLE reason to do it. Should eliminate the luck factor as much as possible. I'm in a classic league where the team like 10th or 11th in points is 8-2 and in first place. We're playing for $7,000 so that's a complete joke and just pure luck, nothing about that team deserves 1 cent much less what he could win (nothing against who the owner is, who is on his team, just talking from a points to head to head luck thing). Last year I had a league where the guy dead last in points had the best record until the last week, he was that close to the luckiest fantasy football season I've ever seen. Hell I'd even be for a rule where you AT LEAST have to finish in the top 4 or 5 in points to be allowed to win head to head, anything less and you just got crazy lucky. As usual, just my 2 cents

Jared, let's see if that h2h record holds up over 13 weeks. As you know, I always analyze every single league to see where each h2h leader is ranked in points and on average 55+% of league champs will also be their league's points leader. Last year most league champs were also in the Top 3 in points. There are exceptions, of course, but the 13-week regular season usually helps weed out the luck factor.

As for the NFFC using H2H, well, it wasn't just a business decision, it's what most fantasy football leagues use. And if set up correctly, the best teams can have the top records, too. Again, there are exceptions to every rule, but we try to reward the best teams based on total points and record and for now we do believe this setup is fun and fair. Yes, there are other options we could use, but we've already been accused of having "niche rules" that the masses can't understand. Remember, 3RR and KDS were designed to make the playing field even fairer for NFFC owners, but being mainstream isn't so bad, either.

I'll post how draft spots are faring thanks to our rules, how our league leaders in points and h2h are doing and if we see terrible discrepencies we will change things. But not every change is a perfect one and as I've learned not every commissioner decision is a perfect one, either. But we do our best to be fair on every decision.

[Sandman62]

Two thoughts on this:

1) "on average 55+% of league champs will also be their league's points leader" ...

Which obviously means that in nearly half of all leagues, they will not be.

"how our league leaders in points and h2h are doing and if we see terrible discrepencies"

As others have said, the issue isn't usually about the #1 points leader, or even #2; it's that too often, #3 or 4 in points is shutout of the playoffs while #5, #8 (i.e. my Classic league this year ), #12, etc. makes it in on H2H record. But I really don't see any way around this. I commend the NFFC for getting this about as right as possible by letting 2/3 of the playoff teams in via points. If you were to change the H2H rule to mandate some minimum points ranking, then you might as well just remove H2H - but then have to deal with all the issues with that (i.e. points only leagues are boring).

2) "I'll post how draft spots are faring thanks to our rules"

I know you like to post all the different draft spots and how many teams are winning from each, and it is interesting data to review. But I really think that the number of teams who are winning is much less a result of any draft system, and much more just about the randomness/luck inherent in fantasy football. I'm pretty sure just about any league operators could post similar data for their draft system and, given similar-sized sampling, we'd see the same dispersion. It's been detailed many times that there seems to be about a 50:50 chance of 1st-round drafted players (especially RBs and WRs) performing to preseason expectations. Ditto for the rest of the draft. So even for teams whose 1st-round pick succeeds, if their next few round picks don't, then their team probably doesn't succeed either. That alone tends to make 1st round draft position less important to overall success than simply how fortunate owners are with their 1st-round (and later) picks, irrespective of what position they drafted them from.

[Coach JP]

All play seems like a must have for a league of this type.

As for the NFFC using H2H, well, it wasn't just a business decision, it's what most fantasy football leagues use. And if set up correctly, the best teams can have the top records, too. .

'Most leagues use h2h' -- That's fine and dandy, but this is a CHAMPIONSHIP type format where we pay a lot of money, we should be ahead of the curve and not just muddling around because others do it as well. There's nothing wrong with being an innovator as you've shown in your prior decisions to make this such a fun site to play at.

I know points dictate the end of championship results, but that doesn't mean that first place in a league isn't a worthy prize. In the online formats, points will only guarantee you $500, while a head to head record guarantees you $1600. Right now in my league, the seventh highest scoring team is leading the league because he's had favorable matchups.

I know fantasy is a lot of luck, but there is no way that mediocrity should be awarded the highest prize in the league while the highest scoring teams have to hope they play people on the right weeks. David Hughes team has been remarkable and is beating every other Online team by 30 points, yet he's 3rd in his own league and will have to settle for $500, hoping his team stays hot in weeks 14-16. It seems remarkable the #1 team out of 1900 teams is hoping for some luck to go his way so he can win $1600.

Continue to be innovators, recognize that the h2h format is old and does not work, and switch to all play for 2013. The best thing you can do is poll your participants, since they don't care what other sites do and want what's best for them.

[bockman1]

The all play or total points format has been brought up in all the different HSFF leagues. In all cases the majority have favored a combination of H to H and total points and I am in that camp that you need to use both. If you want to innovate something do away with how defenses are scored and go to a points allowed scoring system for them.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I know points dictate the end of championship results, but that doesn't mean that first place in a league isn't a worthy prize. In the online formats, points will only guarantee you $500, while a head to head record guarantees you $1600. Right now in my league, the seventh highest scoring team is leading the league because he's had favorable matchups.

This isn't accurate if you are talking about the Online Championship. The H2H champion and the Total Points champion after Week 13 each receive $500 and if one team is in first place in both categories it automatically wins $1,600. The second most total points would then finish second and win $500. Best head-to-head record only nets $500 and puts you in position to win the remaining $1,100.

We equally value H2H and Total Points. I think our setup is the fairest that way. If you want to come up with All Play or 11 Wins per week or any other number of Matchup Equations you can do that. You might call that innovative, but to some it also might be unenjoyable. I don't know if it's more enjoyable or not, I'm just saying that innovative and "niche" to one person isn't always desirable to the masses.

Anyway, my point was to correct your statement above. We reward H2H and Total Points equally and best H2H record DOES NOT net you $1,600 in the NFFC Online Championship.

[JETS SB]

After doing a little research into the Classic and Primetime leagues, I came up with a few examples on H2H vs Points, with regards to teams making into the championship round with poor H2H scores, and teams making it with low points totals. To my surprise, its not as bad as I first thought.

After taking into consideration the top 15% earning a playoff spot and obviously all league H2H winners, league point winners, and also league 2nd place point winners, here are some tidbits, if the season ended today...

In the Classic, the worst H2H record for teams making the Championship round : 2 Teams at 4-7
In the Classic, the best H2H record for teams NOT making the Championship round: 8 teams at 8-3
In the Classic, teams with the lowest overall pts total, making the championship round: 177th & 193rd overall (Both 8-3)

In the Primetime: the worst H2H record for teams making the Championship round: 1 Team at 5-6
In the Primetime: the best H2H record for teams NOT making the Championship round: 3 Teams at 8-3
In the Primetime: team with the lowest overall pts total, making the Championship round: 163rd overall (8-3)

What this tells me is clearly, we have a good system. Sure its not foolproof, but we do reward teams with high points totals more than we reward teams with luck on their side in H2H. The fact there is a total of 11 teams at 8-3 who would not make the Championship round today, in itself, is very telling. And the teams at 4-7 who just had a bad schedule, are being rewarded, which is fair.

I believe the current system is very fair. I do believe changing the "all play" weeks to the end of the season will help in making sure the best teams do get into the playoffs by avoiding the H2H games with teams that don't keep up with their teams, but I think the rest of it is very fair and reasonable and I do not believe a "Points only" or a 11-0 and 0-11 format with no H2H throughout the entire season will prove enjoyable by most. I have seen both formats and have played in these leagues and it is just not the same... We have a great system.. Change the all-play to the last 2 weeks and I think we are good... IMO

[Greg Ambrosius]

I believe the current system is very fair. I do believe changing the "all play" weeks to the end of the season will help in making sure the best teams do get into the playoffs by avoiding the H2H games with teams that don't keep up with their teams, but I think the rest of it is very fair and reasonable and I do not believe a "Points only" or a 11-0 and 0-11 format with no H2H throughout the entire season will prove enjoyable by most. I have seen both formats and have played in these leagues and it is just not the same... We have a great system.. Change the all-play to the last 2 weeks and I think we are good... IMO

Thanks for the research and insight Alan. I will say again, however, that we did begin the Primetime with All Play in Weeks 12 and 13 and ran it that way for 2 years. People asked to have them earlier in the year when EVERYONE is competing for Wins, so we moved the All Play to Weeks 1 and 2 when EVERYONE is setting their lineups.

I'm open for this discussion, but think about All Play in Weeks 12 and 13 right now. You are 8-3 and 1st in Points. The guy ahead of you is 9-2 and 2nd in Points. You need him to lose a game these last two weeks to win the entire $6,000 after Week 13. Right now it's possible that he is playing someone who isn't eagerly setting his starting lineup or picking up free agents, but it's also possible that he does have one tough matchup down the stretch. In All Play, it's much easier for this owner to just finish in the Top 6 these last two weeks and get two Wins while a couple of owners probably aren't All In with their lineup decisions. It's much tougher for you to make up one game in the W-L column with All Play in Weeks 12 and 13.

I might be wrong, but that's what we learned from having All Play late in the season when we first devised the Primetime in 2008 and 2009. I'm not trying to downplay your suggestion, just giving an example of why it is currently in Weeks 1 and 2 when all owners have full rosters going and full attention to their starting players.

[JETS SB]

I believe the current system is very fair. I do believe changing the "all play" weeks to the end of the season will help in making sure the best teams do get into the playoffs by avoiding the H2H games with teams that don't keep up with their teams, but I think the rest of it is very fair and reasonable and I do not believe a "Points only" or a 11-0 and 0-11 format with no H2H throughout the entire season will prove enjoyable by most. I have seen both formats and have played in these leagues and it is just not the same... We have a great system.. Change the all-play to the last 2 weeks and I think we are good... IMO

Thanks for the research and insight Alan. I will say again, however, that we did begin the Primetime with All Play in Weeks 12 and 13 and ran it that way for 2 years. People asked to have them earlier in the year when EVERYONE is competing for Wins, so we moved the All Play to Weeks 1 and 2 when EVERYONE is setting their lineups.

I'm open for this discussion, but think about All Play in Weeks 12 and 13 right now. You are 8-3 and 1st in Points. The guy ahead of you is 9-2 and 2nd in Points. You need him to lose a game these last two weeks to win the entire $6,000 after Week 13. Right now it's possible that he is playing someone who isn't eagerly setting his starting lineup or picking up free agents, but it's also possible that he does have one tough matchup down the stretch. In All Play, it's much easier for this owner to just finish in the Top 6 these last two weeks and get two Wins while a couple of owners probably aren't All In with their lineup decisions. It's much tougher for you to make up one game in the W-L column with All Play in Weeks 12 and 13.

I might be wrong, but that's what we learned from having All Play late in the season when we first devised the Primetime in 2008 and 2009. I'm not trying to downplay your suggestion, just giving an example of why it is currently in Weeks 1 and 2 when all owners have full rosters going and full attention to their starting players.

In your example, with "all play" at the end of the season, most likely both teams win, both teams make the Championship round, both teams get paid for their 1st and 2nd place accomplishments, and they playoff for the additional league winnings. But, in that same example, with H2H at the end of the season, if the 8-3 team is playing a team that hasn't set his lineup, while the 9-2 team plays a team that is competing and loses, both teams will then tie in H2H, giving the entire title to the 8-3 (9-3) team, while the team that was 9-2 (9-3), finishes in 2nd at best, without the chance of a division title, just because he was unlucky enough to face a team that actually set his lineup. As I said, nothing is foolproof, but I do believe that having the "all play" at the end of the season, rewards the best teams.

[gorgo]

I like the combo of h2h and total points it is a fair compromise. I personally think it should be h2h solely considering all the people complaining about losing to luck whiners who do not wish to give credit where credit is due The skillfully executed FAAB move to shaft an opponent is the icing on the cake in fantasy especally when its a league leader. The twice weekly FAAB bids gives a much greater amount of room to manuver your team makeup from week to week. The owners who complain about losing to luck should remember the words of Nic Cage in National Treasure " I get Lucky a lot" also that in the end this is gambling anyway so luck has to be part of it all .Bigger bench would be nice