Quitters ruin this contest....

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:08 am

Originally posted by Todd Zola:
The only point I wanted to make is I personally feel the manner a dormant team might affect H2H standings is less relevant to me than how it serves to prop up the free agent pool of that league.I think it really CAN still affect the teams who haven't scored as many points, yet are still fortunate to have a good enough record to be in the hunt for a league title.

For example, in the Classic, here's a breakdown of the records of the bottom half of the scorers:

9-0: 0
8-1: 0
7-2: 1
6-3: 10
5-4: 33
4-5: 34
3-6: 43
2-7: 18
1-8: 5
0-9: 5

I would venture a guess that those 44 teams over .500 would have a very keen interest in seeing their weekly H2H opponents not set their lineup and give them another easy win when H2H is really the only remaining chance they have to compete for a title?

And isn't the chance of letting even more weaker teams into the playoffs the more egregious "crime" than how many points are being grabbed this late in the season off the waiver wire, when most teams are back to full-strength now that the byes are almost done?

[ November 13, 2009, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:11 am

Originally posted by Bob Squad:
quote:Originally posted by TOXIC ASSETS:
Maybe TEXAS WILD is not quitting but legitimately forgot about the Thursday game. Almost happened to me in my local league. These Thursday night games are something that can easily be forgotten during the course of a busy week.

To me the problem is quite simple. STATS should program it so that it is impossible for a "bye week" player to remain in the lineup. Bye week players would be automatically relegated to the bench and the highest scoring player at that position, that is on the bench, would be put into the lineup. The owner would still have the option of changing things, but if the owner doesn't check his lineup, it would be done automatically. Great suggestion.

We can't fix the free agent pool and we can't make subjective lineup decisions for another owner, but IR, OUT and Bye Week players can be fixed in this manner.

Sportsbettingman,

Believe it or not, some of us don't even want to play AGAINST dead teams.

Bob [/QUOTE]This has been gone over before. If you let STATS make auto-adjustments for BYE weeks, IR, OUT, what about the owners who in the previous week had put in their lesser players due to bye weeks, but THIS week, they failed to put their better players back in? Isn't this possibly almost as bad? (i.e. leaving stud players on their bench because they were on bye LAST week)

bobsgym13 · Post by **bobsgym13** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:24 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
quote:Originally posted by Bob Squad:
quote:Originally posted by TOXIC ASSETS:
Maybe TEXAS WILD is not quitting but legitimately forgot about the Thursday game. Almost happened to me in my local league. These Thursday night games are something that can easily be forgotten during the course of a busy week.

To me the problem is quite simple. STATS should program it so that it is impossible for a "bye week" player to remain in the lineup. Bye week players would be automatically relegated to the bench and the highest scoring player at that position, that is on the bench, would be put into the lineup. The owner would still have the option of changing things, but if the owner doesn't check his lineup, it would be done automatically. Great suggestion.

We can't fix the free agent pool and we can't make subjective lineup decisions for another owner, but IR, OUT and Bye Week players can be fixed in this manner.

Sportsbettingman,

Believe it or not, some of us don't even want to play AGAINST dead teams.

Bob [/QUOTE]This has been gone over before. If you let STATS make auto-adjustments for BYE weeks, IR, OUT, what about the owners who in the previous week had put in their lesser players due to bye weeks, but THIS week, they failed to put their better players back in? Isn't this possibly almost as bad? (i.e. leaving stud players on their bench because they were on bye LAST week) [/QUOTE]Good point. I guess I'm back to public shame or banishment.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:46 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
[QUOTE]I think it really CAN still affect the teams who haven't scored as many points, yet are still fortunate to have a good enough record to be in the hunt for a league title.Yes, it CAN. But how many? And how "deserved" are those teams with respect to making the championship round?

Of course this drags in the H2H vs. points debate. Personally, I come from the camp that while the overriding strategy is to draft the best fantasy football players, I do believe there are subtle nuances to assembling a squad in a H2H league versus a total points league. So this boils down to your philosophy with respect to which is better, H2H or total points? Which is better, Budweiser or Sam Adams? Depends on how you measure better --one outsells the other, the other wins more taste test awards.

With that said, I believe the way to approach the NFFC is as a total points league, hence I do not wish to reward or try to aid a team fortunate to have a better record.

Originally posted by Sandman62:
[QUOTE]And isn't the chance of letting even more weaker teams into the playoffs the more egregious "crime" than how many points are being grabbed this late in the season off the waiver wire, when most teams are back to full-strength now that the byes are almost done? 1. Auto-lineups serve to benefit both weaker and stronger teams as a weaker team may get a loss because of switched out player in their opponents lineup, damaging their record. It goes both ways.

2. Completely disagree with your bye week point. This is the time where waiver wire pickups may be even MORE important as rosters get frozen for the money round run. Teams carrying 1 TE and 1 K may decide to get a backup in case of an injury. Plus of course there are always players emerging late in the season. This is where FAAB management plays a part and having a deeper FA pool to dive in to is a distinct advantage. The supply is greater and with dormant teams, the demand is less.

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:07 am

I agree that teams may grab some backups before the playoffs. But they're BACKUPS and will likely not see the starting roster unless the players the teams have gone w/ all season are injured. I still think that most people will be playing their already-rostered players as much as possible from here out. Anyone getting picked up off waivers this late in the game is somewhat of a desperation play. And having another team or two competing on the wire for these players isn't really going to make much of a difference; heck, even if a league has TWO deadbeat owners, there are still TWELVE more to try to block them on the wire each week.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:26 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
And having another team or two competing on the wire for these players isn't really going to make much of a difference; heck, even if a league has TWO deadbeat owners, there are still TWELVE more to try to block them on the wire each week. WRONG.

competing in a league with 14 owners is harder than competing in a league with 12 owners.

if i'm playing for money, put me in the league with 2 deadbeat owners.

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:41 am

that depends on the owners in each league now, oesnt it? even in a 14 tm league w/ 2 deadbeats, i suspecrt it's unlikely that many imact players are being acquired off waivers this late. and if they are, chances are they werent going to be stopped by those 2 extra owners (ie each week ghere are numerous pickups w/ no other bids)

aragon · Post by **aragon** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:21 am

I'm not sure there is a realistic way to do this, but the best way to motivate owners to set the lineups of their teams with no shot, is to offer weekly prizes beyond just the one overall winner.

Perhaps weekly prizes for each league winner.

You may have to take away from the league prize pool, but it may be worth it. More people winning a little extra money isn't a bad thing either.

Of course it means a litte extra administration and check writing for Fanball. But that's no problem.

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 am

What if many/most of the teams who quit do so because their teams are so awful that they don't think they'll score much more even week to week?

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:46 am

Originally posted by Phoneman:
I'm not sure there is a realistic way to do this, but the best way to motivate owners to set the lineups of their teams with no shot, is to offer weekly prizes beyond just the one overall winner.

Perhaps weekly prizes for each league winner.

You may have to take away from the league prize pool, but it may be worth it. More people winning a little extra money isn't a bad thing either.

Of course it means a litte extra administration and check writing for Fanball. But that's no problem. In a 14-team league, on average, 60+% of all owners will win a TOW during the year and 30-40% of all weekly TOW winners will have a record of .500 or below coming into the week.

A TOW prize helps the problem significantly, but you'll always have a loser or two, so it will never go away completely.

It also helps the FA wire as most guys will play until the end and sign FA's to win a TOW.

For this game, $50 TOW makes good sense, but not sure if taking away $650 from other prizes would be the right thing to do.