NFFC Rules Discussion For 2013

[TR]

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

I have no problem with that team being in first place...not really much different than teams in NFL making playoffs because of weak schedules/divisions and then going on to damage in the playoffs...just about getting in and peaking at the right time. I'm sure other teams in that league had chances to beat him if he's squeaking out all these wins..tells me they were just making poor lineup decisions that cost them against this lucky team...as somebody on this board says...MAKE YOUR OWN LUCK!

[Glenneration X]

Old argument replayed every season. The H2H component is always going to be a part of fantasy football, always will. All you have to do is look at any attempt any contest has made in the past to have a points only overall and the lack of interest it generated to know that to be fact.

[BillyWaz]

Old argument replayed every season. The H2H component is always going to be a part of fantasy football, always will. All you have to do is look at any attempt any contest has made in the past to have a points only overall and the lack of interest it generated to know that to be fact.

As much as I hate to say it, Glenn is exactly right. While I often HATE H2H, it is a necessary component.

What the NFFC does better than ANY other contest is the playoffs are based totally on points over 3 weeks, but rewards those owners who "sweep" H2H and points right after week 13.

Best playoff system in the business.....bar none, IMO.

[chriseibl]

Old argument replayed every season. The H2H component is always going to be a part of fantasy football, always will. All you have to do is look at any attempt any contest has made in the past to have a points only overall and the lack of interest it generated to know that to be fact.

As much as I hate to say it, Glenn is exactly right. While I often HATE H2H, it is a necessary component.

What the NFFC does better than ANY other contest is the playoffs are based totally on points over 3 weeks, but rewards those owners who "sweep" H2H and points right after week 13.

Best playoff system in the business.....bar none, IMO.

agree with this. head to head is definitely not the fairest system. i don't like that it adds an element of luck that playing everyone each week would eliminate.

but i don't know how you make a national contest popular without presenting people fantasy football in a form that people are used to. at least we do have a 3RR and KDS which drove me to the NFFC in the first place.

[Marauders]

I know this was brought up earlier, but I'm all for the "All Play" being in weeks 12 and 13 instead of 1 and 2 for the online championship. As was mentioned, owners will be less impacted from other owners who give up on their teams at the end of the season.

[CALI CARTEL]

These are kinda ticky-tack, but I know they have been brought by myself or others at some point:

1. Raise the negative points on Turnovers for Offensive Players. -1 for an INT or FUM is meaningless, especially with PPR and high QB scoring system. The INT and FUM should be -2, to parallel the +2 for Defensive TO. At least these should be raised to -1.5, so it's at least a 4-1 ratio with TD's

2. Modify the Points Allowed scale on the defenses. I know what the initial intent was, to award points if teams gave up 17 or less -- however the new NFL scores more, so the scale needs to be adjusted. On Monday Night there was a graphic on the Panther's Offense, who's scored 18.9 pts per game and was 29th in the NFL in scoring. If the 29th team is averaging more points than the bottom of the Points Allowed scale, then something is off. I also don't like the break points on the current scale, why do the 4 pt tier end at 12 PA? If you have allowed 6 PA, your defense is in line for 8 fantasy points, but if they give up a single TD, they skip the entire 4 pt tier and drop down to 2 pts, that's not right. This would be much better for the current NFL:

Shutout = 12 pts (same)
2 to 6 PA = 8 pts (same)
7 to 13 PA = 4 pts (changed from 7 to 12)
14 to 20 PA = 2 pts (changed from 13 to 17)
*Tiers change/end at "Touchdown" scores of 7/14/21

3. Kick Block's get points in some leagues I've played in, I think they should be recognized here with at least a single point, but two points would be better. A Blocked Kick is way bigger than a TO usually, DEF/SPT should get something for those, especially if they don't return it for a TD (which would result in nothing to show for the Fantasy Defense).

4. Slight shift in Online Championship League Prize money from the $500/$500/$1100 setup to a $600/$600/$900 setup. So the top team in each league would receive $1500, while the runner up would receive $600 -- just a little flatter payout than the $1600/$500 setup.

[Coltsfan]

Cali Cartel,

I apologize if I should already know this but who are you? I can't always keep the real names straight with the board id's.

The NFFC actually awards more points for defensive scoring than the other contests. I think it's fine the way it is. And I really hate the -2 for interceptions or fumbles. I bet the a third of the interceptions aren't even the QB's fault. (Hail Mary's, WR falls down, WR run wrong route, WR tips a ball up in the air.) I'm sure there are more but that at least gets it started.

Consistency is good and I hope it stays the same for next year. Ultimately it's a game of numbers so it's up to us to analyze the numbers and project accordingly. Interceptions seem fairly random to me so that would just add another element of something you can't really account for.


Wayne

[kjduke]

Proposal for modified H2H ...

Since it isn't always fair, but because points-only and all-play leagues are dull, how about this for each h-2-h week ...

- the highest scoring losing team gets a Tie instead of a loss
- the lowest scoring winning team gets a Tie instead of a win

More fair than straight h2h, and actually more fun too.

[CALI CARTEL]

Cali Cartel,

I apologize if I should already know this but who are you? I can't always keep the real names straight with the board id's.

The NFFC actually awards more points for defensive scoring than the other contests. I think it's fine the way it is. And I really hate the -2 for interceptions or fumbles. I bet the a third of the interceptions aren't even the QB's fault. (Hail Mary's, WR falls down, WR run wrong route, WR tips a ball up in the air.) I'm sure there are more but that at least gets it started.

Consistency is good and I hope it stays the same for next year. Ultimately it's a game of numbers so it's up to us to analyze the numbers and project accordingly. Interceptions seem fairly random to me so that would just add another element of something you can't really account for.


Wayne

Hey Wayne,

My name is Ronny Mor, been playing here for about 5 years now, first time in anything bigger than the OC in FB -- but have been in Vegas for live Baseball (Main/DP/XII) each of the last 2 years, with 2-3 years of online/satellite games before that. Like many here, I started over at CDM in their salary cap games and merged into the live/league style games here.

On the turnovers my point was that -1 is meaningless in the long run. The impact of them would something at least mildly significant at -2, but at -1 it's like swatting a fly off my shoulder when my QB throws an INT, doesn't bother me at all.

Instead of raising the negatives to -2, I would actually prefer eliminating the negatives for Offensive Players, considering that Kickers and Defenses have no way to lose points -- but with them at -1, it be cleaner to just eliminate them altogether; anything would be better than -1 (0, -1.5, or -2 would all be more preferential to me).

[Coltsfan]

Proposal for modified H2H ...

Since it isn't always fair, but because points-only and all-play leagues are dull, how about this for each h-2-h week ...

- the highest scoring losing team gets a Tie instead of a loss
- the lowest scoring winning team gets a Tie instead of a win

More fair than straight h2h, and actually more fun too.

I think I read this 4 times before I got it. (yes i'm a Hoosier.) That great!!!


Wayne