Results of NFFC Rules Survey

[BillyWaz]

I personally don't think the -2 for INT is a big deal. Of course it will affect H2H, and yes, it will make the better QB even better. However, I don't think it adds that much more luck and randomness.

I mean it is a pretty good bet that Drew Brees will throw more than Tom Brady (I think we all know that).

In the FFPC, TE's are worth 1.5/PPR. Jimmy Graham was being drafted in the top 5 of some drafts. It's the scoring system and you have to adapt accordingly.

Personally I like these little twists in contests which make you think about having to draft a certain position earlier in normal. If you take the standard 4 pts/per passing TD and 1 PT for all receptions, then it pretty much turns back into a "I HAVE TO GET RB's TO WIN" (like back in the old days) .

Adjust to the scoring system and play in the contests that you like, don't play in the one's you don't. I know there are other factors of why people play places other than scoring systems (customer service, actual event, playoff system, payouts, etc.), but unless you start your own contest, it is virtually impossible to have one contest provide EVERYTHING you like.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I totally agree Billy.

The extra point for INTs will have more of a factor in H2H than total points as it should. Heck, we saw Brees and Stafford both have 5 INT games and they lost only 5 points. Now they will lose 10 points for those bad games.

The Top 25 QBs are between 8 and 16 INTs through 16 games, with outliers of 5 (RGIII) and 18 (Brees). So that's a half point per game at the most and not all good QBs have the lowest number of INTs. If you think it makes the better QBs more valuable, then move them up a bit, but INTs can happen at any time.

Here are the current stats:
Name, TDs, INTs, NFFC Pts, NFFC PPG
Brees, Drew (NO) 39 18 460.5 30.7
Brady, Tom (NE) 32 8 438.3 29.2
Rodgers, Aaron (GB) 35 8 436.3 29
Ryan, Matt (ATL) 31 14 412.7 27.5
Manning, Peyton (DEN) 34 11 411.4 27.4
Newton, Cam (CAR) 19 11 400.3 26.6
Romo, Tony (DAL) 26 16 385 25.6
Griffin III, Robert (WAS) 20 5 380.3 27.1
Luck, Andrew (IND)21 18 367.5 24.5
Stafford, Matthew (DET) 17 16 357.7 23.8
Dalton, Andy (CIN) 26 16 351.1 23.4
Freeman, Josh (TB) 26 16 345.9 23
Wilson, Russell (SEA) 25 10 341.5 22.7
Flacco, Joe (BAL) 22 10 329.3 21.9
Palmer, Carson (OAK) 22 14 18 327.5 21.8
Schaub, Matt (HOU) 22 10 308.2 20.5
Bradford, Sam (STL) 20 12 305.6 20.3
Fitzpatrick, Ryan (BUF) 23 16 300.4 20
Manning, Eli (NYG) 21 15 300 20
Rivers, Philip (SD) 24 15 299 19.9
Roethlisberger, Ben (PIT) 23 8 294.9 24.5
Cutler, Jay (CHI) 18 14 249.2 17.8
Tannehill, Ryan (MIA) 12 12 246.5 16.4
Weeden, Brandon (CLE) DP 14 17 245.4 16.3
Ponder, Christian (MIN) 15 12 245.2 16.3

[TR]

TR,

Same question for you. Do you believe that top end QB's would go higher in drafts or later in drafts if interceptions are raised to -2 points? They will be scoring less points so how will that affect their drafts positions?


Wayne

I'm not sure Wayne...personally I wouldn't take a top end QB high either way. I would much rather load up at other positions and grab an upside qb like Russell Wilson in later rd. In fact I think increasing the ints to -2 while leaving fumbles at -1 would increase the value of a running qb who doesn't throw many ints like russell wilson...I remember having alot of success with Donovan Mcnabb around 2003 in similar CBS scoring format...think he only threw 4000 yards maybe once

[KenGill]

Wayne, the change to more points deducted for INT's would definitely increase the value of the elite QB. You would have more incentive to draft the elite guy early on.

[BigBlueNation]

This was brought up earlier. Is there going to be any consideration of more qualifying teams for the OC individual leagues from two to three? I don't want to dilute the overall OC championship with more teams. I'm Ok with the existing overall OC setup, but I would like to see an additional qualifier for the league championship.

Case in point, I finished tied in the H2H and 3rd in TP. Tiebreaker and TP got me. I was in the top 15% which advanced me to the overall. The other two teams cashed in the regular season as H2H and TP champs, then played it out for the league championship. I went on to finish 40th overall, well above the other two teams that cashed for the league championship. But, of course, I won zero $$. I wonder how many other leagues had this same situation.

This is coming off as sour grapes, but I would like some ideas about extending the OC league championship to 16 weeks. I personally would like to see the H2H champ and top two TP teams advance for three weeks for the league prize. Go ahead and pay the regular season H2H and TP leader $500, then play the remaining weeks for league championship $1100.

I'm open for other suggestions, as my sole purpose is to award the best team for 16 weeks of play within each individual league.

[Sandman62]

I'm not sure Wayne...personally I wouldn't take a top end QB high either way. I would much rather load up at other positions and grab an upside qb like Russell Wilson in later rd. In fact I think increasing the ints to -2 while leaving fumbles at -1 would increase the value of a running qb who doesn't throw many ints like russell wilson...I remember having alot of success with Donovan Mcnabb around 2003 in similar CBS scoring format...think he only threw 4000 yards maybe once

Through the 13 regular season weeks, Wilson was the 18th NFFC QB. If ints were -2, he'd still be 18th.
http://nffcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.p ... Bs#p181747

That said, he did have a slow start the first 5 games, then came on strong, including over the fantasy playoffs. His 13-week PPG was 22.7, but over the last 10 games, it was 26.8, which over the full 16-week season would've been QB7. He also only failed to break 23 points just twice over the last 10 games (high floor). Seems a bit like Tebow - but with an arm and the ability to read defenses?

He could definitely be one to watch next year, but I doubt his improvement will have much to do with the move to -2 for ints.
http://nffc.stats.com/football/reports/ ... ayer=25785

[Coyote Streakers]

Not a fan of -2 points for INT at all. Would like to see them at -1.

[Sandman62]

Updated 2012 NFFC QBs - Effect of -2 Ints through full 16-week season (15 games):
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/2/9/3 ... 20Ints.pdf

[Henry Muto]

Another reason to hate points lost to fumbles rule. That fumble was Miller's fault.

R.Tannehill FUMBLES (Aborted) at MIA 8, RECOVERED by DAL-N.Hayden at MIA 8.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Another reason to hate points lost to fumbles rule. That fumble was Miller's fault.

R.Tannehill FUMBLES (Aborted) at MIA 8, RECOVERED by DAL-N.Hayden at MIA 8.

Wow CHAMP, you had to go back to late December to dig up a survey thread to say you hate minus 1 for a fumble?? We've had minus one for a fumble since the beginning of the NFFC and most other contests punish a lost fumble as well, but I feel your pain. Dammit for that rule, just dammit. There, even I feel better now.