Originally posted by thegambler:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
I was proposing in the survey to add more teams to post-season league play for third place money without taking money away from the league champ and the league runner-up, the two teams that dominated for 13 weeks. Again, I thought the feedback was in favor of making sure we reward the best teams rather than just making sure teams don't quit during the regular season. Couldn't we accomplish both of these things as follows:
Currently
H2H Champ $2,500
Points Champ $2,500
H2H vs. Points Champ $2,500
3rd Place $1,250
Total Payout $8,750
Maximum Prize $5,000
Revised
H2H Champ $2,000
Points Champ: $2,000
League Playoff Winner: $2,500
League 2nd Place $1,500
League 3rd Place $750
Total Payout $8,750
Maximum Prize $6,500
League Playoffs would run in Weeks 14-16, just as they are now, but with 4 or 6 teams vying for the additional prize money. [/QUOTE]nice post....i really like this one. i know i have brought up a few stinkers, for playoffs, but this one is a keeper to me. i would leave it at 4 teams making the playoffs. this would defintely keep more teams involved to the end....and i think, help grow the nffc
thanks KOQ [/QUOTE]None for me thanks! I like the way it is set up now and think it is fair. It's a payout that awards winning to the best team over the course of the entire season.
It's going to get very interesting to see what changes come about here and where folks spend their fantasy dollar$.
survey
survey
I agree with Jules. The 1st and 2nd place teams should be rewarded for dominating or outlasting the other teams through the 13 weeks. I don't like the idea of being in a league with the overall points champ and having a great season finishing second and only getting $1,500. If you win or finish second in your league you should get more than you paid in entry fees!
A couple of years ago the 1-800-godeep team was the last qualifier in the Classic playoffs. His team outscored everyone for the 3 week playoffs and some folks were mad and said it was a lottery?!? It is a lottery. You could have 3 fantastic weeks and still not win the grand prize.
The league prize money should not be a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chance.
Using KOQ's plan here's another scenario, your team dominates in points but someone else has a better record. You win $2,000. The sixth place team gets hot and wins the "playoff tournament". They win $2,500. How is that fair? I understand these plans are being proposed to bring in more people but if they are flawed why would people sign up?
I think the current system is the most fair. If I were to change anything it would be to lower the grand prize and give more money to league payouts. That way more customers would get a higher ROI. I know the $100,000 gets folks attention, but if you look at it realistically you have a 1 in 320 chance to win the $100,000 and a 1 in 7 chance to finish 1st or 2nd in your league.
A couple of years ago the 1-800-godeep team was the last qualifier in the Classic playoffs. His team outscored everyone for the 3 week playoffs and some folks were mad and said it was a lottery?!? It is a lottery. You could have 3 fantastic weeks and still not win the grand prize.
The league prize money should not be a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chance.
Using KOQ's plan here's another scenario, your team dominates in points but someone else has a better record. You win $2,000. The sixth place team gets hot and wins the "playoff tournament". They win $2,500. How is that fair? I understand these plans are being proposed to bring in more people but if they are flawed why would people sign up?
I think the current system is the most fair. If I were to change anything it would be to lower the grand prize and give more money to league payouts. That way more customers would get a higher ROI. I know the $100,000 gets folks attention, but if you look at it realistically you have a 1 in 320 chance to win the $100,000 and a 1 in 7 chance to finish 1st or 2nd in your league.
Pat Sorge
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 5262
- Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 6:00 pm
survey
Originally posted by Bullgod:
I agree with Jules. The 1st and 2nd place teams should be rewarded for dominating or outlasting the other teams through the 13 weeks. I don't like the idea of being in a league with the overall points champ and having a great season finishing second and only getting $1,500. If you win or finish second in your league you should get more than you paid in entry fees!
A couple of years ago the 1-800-godeep team was the last qualifier in the Classic playoffs. His team outscored everyone for the 3 week playoffs and some folks were mad and said it was a lottery?!? It is a lottery. You could have 3 fantastic weeks and still not win the grand prize.
The league prize money should not be a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chance.
Using KOQ's plan here's another scenario, your team dominates in points but someone else has a better record. You win $2,000. The sixth place team gets hot and wins the "playoff tournament". They win $2,500. How is that fair? I understand these plans are being proposed to bring in more people but if they are flawed why would people sign up?
I think the current system is the most fair. If I were to change anything it would be to lower the grand prize and give more money to league payouts. That way more customers would get a higher ROI. I know the $100,000 gets folks attention, but if you look at it realistically you have a 1 in 320 chance to win the $100,000 and a 1 in 7 chance to finish 1st or 2nd in your league. Wish that was the case, too. Don't think it'll ever happen.
I agree with Jules. The 1st and 2nd place teams should be rewarded for dominating or outlasting the other teams through the 13 weeks. I don't like the idea of being in a league with the overall points champ and having a great season finishing second and only getting $1,500. If you win or finish second in your league you should get more than you paid in entry fees!
A couple of years ago the 1-800-godeep team was the last qualifier in the Classic playoffs. His team outscored everyone for the 3 week playoffs and some folks were mad and said it was a lottery?!? It is a lottery. You could have 3 fantastic weeks and still not win the grand prize.
The league prize money should not be a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chance.
Using KOQ's plan here's another scenario, your team dominates in points but someone else has a better record. You win $2,000. The sixth place team gets hot and wins the "playoff tournament". They win $2,500. How is that fair? I understand these plans are being proposed to bring in more people but if they are flawed why would people sign up?
I think the current system is the most fair. If I were to change anything it would be to lower the grand prize and give more money to league payouts. That way more customers would get a higher ROI. I know the $100,000 gets folks attention, but if you look at it realistically you have a 1 in 320 chance to win the $100,000 and a 1 in 7 chance to finish 1st or 2nd in your league. Wish that was the case, too. Don't think it'll ever happen.
survey
Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by Bullgod:
I agree with Jules. The 1st and 2nd place teams should be rewarded for dominating or outlasting the other teams through the 13 weeks. I don't like the idea of being in a league with the overall points champ and having a great season finishing second and only getting $1,500. If you win or finish second in your league you should get more than you paid in entry fees!
A couple of years ago the 1-800-godeep team was the last qualifier in the Classic playoffs. His team outscored everyone for the 3 week playoffs and some folks were mad and said it was a lottery?!? It is a lottery. You could have 3 fantastic weeks and still not win the grand prize.
The league prize money should not be a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chance.
Using KOQ's plan here's another scenario, your team dominates in points but someone else has a better record. You win $2,000. The sixth place team gets hot and wins the "playoff tournament". They win $2,500. How is that fair? I understand these plans are being proposed to bring in more people but if they are flawed why would people sign up?
I think the current system is the most fair. If I were to change anything it would be to lower the grand prize and give more money to league payouts. That way more customers would get a higher ROI. I know the $100,000 gets folks attention, but if you look at it realistically you have a 1 in 320 chance to win the $100,000 and a 1 in 7 chance to finish 1st or 2nd in your league. Wish that was the case, too. Don't think it'll ever happen. [/QUOTE]I'm drastically cutting back on the huge grand prize leagues next year - I'll probably just do one total. I think that the big grand prize probably attracts new people to the contest but the low percentage of monies paid out at the league level probably hurts retention. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne
quote:Originally posted by Bullgod:
I agree with Jules. The 1st and 2nd place teams should be rewarded for dominating or outlasting the other teams through the 13 weeks. I don't like the idea of being in a league with the overall points champ and having a great season finishing second and only getting $1,500. If you win or finish second in your league you should get more than you paid in entry fees!
A couple of years ago the 1-800-godeep team was the last qualifier in the Classic playoffs. His team outscored everyone for the 3 week playoffs and some folks were mad and said it was a lottery?!? It is a lottery. You could have 3 fantastic weeks and still not win the grand prize.
The league prize money should not be a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 chance.
Using KOQ's plan here's another scenario, your team dominates in points but someone else has a better record. You win $2,000. The sixth place team gets hot and wins the "playoff tournament". They win $2,500. How is that fair? I understand these plans are being proposed to bring in more people but if they are flawed why would people sign up?
I think the current system is the most fair. If I were to change anything it would be to lower the grand prize and give more money to league payouts. That way more customers would get a higher ROI. I know the $100,000 gets folks attention, but if you look at it realistically you have a 1 in 320 chance to win the $100,000 and a 1 in 7 chance to finish 1st or 2nd in your league. Wish that was the case, too. Don't think it'll ever happen. [/QUOTE]I'm drastically cutting back on the huge grand prize leagues next year - I'll probably just do one total. I think that the big grand prize probably attracts new people to the contest but the low percentage of monies paid out at the league level probably hurts retention. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne
-
ForLoveOfTheGame
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 6:00 pm
survey
As someone who did a LOT of teams with the NFFC I can say without a doubt if you go to 6 teams playing for the league prize I'll be doing 0 teams with the NFFC in 2012. The grand prize is already close to a lottery, if you turn the regular season into one too I might as well go play black jack as I have about a 50% chance their too and I dont have to spend massive amounts of time study, drafting, updating, etc. I think 6 teams playing for the league money is a horrible idea, no offense meant to anyone.
4 teams playing for the league money is only slightly better to me. I clicked through a bunch of my leagues and pretty much every 4th place team had no business playing for 1st place money. Being able to talk very specifically about MY teams that finished in 4th or 5th place, only 1 of them would I consider good enough to possibly play for first place money as they suffered pretty good injuries but that's part of the game, you can't realistically keep every team in contention.
Like I've said, this year one team who was 12TH in points in one of my leagues was in first place in record until the very last week. If you allow more teams in to play for the 1st place money this team would have played for 1st place money!!! This is going in the wrong direction!!! NFFC is setup GREAT, keep it that way!
4 teams playing for the league money is only slightly better to me. I clicked through a bunch of my leagues and pretty much every 4th place team had no business playing for 1st place money. Being able to talk very specifically about MY teams that finished in 4th or 5th place, only 1 of them would I consider good enough to possibly play for first place money as they suffered pretty good injuries but that's part of the game, you can't realistically keep every team in contention.
Like I've said, this year one team who was 12TH in points in one of my leagues was in first place in record until the very last week. If you allow more teams in to play for the 1st place money this team would have played for 1st place money!!! This is going in the wrong direction!!! NFFC is setup GREAT, keep it that way!
survey
I don't really understand how having more teams in changes anything. There is still the same amount of money going out. Unless somebody is just so good that they only finish first or second then over time it really wouldn't matter. I'm just not understanding how it matters if you get paid a little less on firsts and a little more if you are top 4??? It all seems the same to me. But you definitely have more teams interested in the league for a longer period of time having a playoff system.
I"m not saying that I think it needs to be done. I just don't see what it hurts in having a playoff system.
Wayne
I"m not saying that I think it needs to be done. I just don't see what it hurts in having a playoff system.
Wayne
-
Glenneration X
- Posts: 1704
- Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:00 pm
- Location: Long Island, NY
survey
Many of the posts in the various playoff threads have me confused.
I've read posts complaining about the money dedicated to the overall prizes. I've read posts arguing against the need for playoffs. I've read posts that the head to head winners are lucky and undeserving unless they are also a high point scorer. I've read posts arguing that only the teams that score the most points are deserving of a substantial prize.
Yet these arguments are being made regarding an overall contest with a playoff system and H2H component.
If these aspects are not what's desired, why even bother playing an overall contest. Why not stick to WTA 16 week points only satellites. No overall to steal league prize money, no playoffs to reward a hot three week run, no H2H to reward undeserving and lucky winners. Believe me, I don't get involved with anything, let alone a fantasy football contest that's supposed to be fun, with that many attributes that I find a negative.
I've read posts complaining about the money dedicated to the overall prizes. I've read posts arguing against the need for playoffs. I've read posts that the head to head winners are lucky and undeserving unless they are also a high point scorer. I've read posts arguing that only the teams that score the most points are deserving of a substantial prize.
Yet these arguments are being made regarding an overall contest with a playoff system and H2H component.
If these aspects are not what's desired, why even bother playing an overall contest. Why not stick to WTA 16 week points only satellites. No overall to steal league prize money, no playoffs to reward a hot three week run, no H2H to reward undeserving and lucky winners. Believe me, I don't get involved with anything, let alone a fantasy football contest that's supposed to be fun, with that many attributes that I find a negative.
-
CoMoHusker
- Posts: 491
- Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:00 pm
survey
For what its worth, I'm a first year NFFC participant who only did the OC this year. Next year I have plans to do the Classic or Primetime or perhaps, both.
I agree with Bullgod that if anything were to change, I think lowering the Grand Prize in order to increase the league prize may prove to be beneficial. Obviously, everyone has a much better chance at the league money so a bigger ROI in that area makes sense to me.
It would also be a big turn off for me if as many as six teams were playing for the 1st place league prize money.
Other than that, I like the current contest set ups.
I agree with Bullgod that if anything were to change, I think lowering the Grand Prize in order to increase the league prize may prove to be beneficial. Obviously, everyone has a much better chance at the league money so a bigger ROI in that area makes sense to me.
It would also be a big turn off for me if as many as six teams were playing for the 1st place league prize money.
Other than that, I like the current contest set ups.
Go Big Red!
-
Jersey Dawg
- Posts: 816
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 6:00 pm
survey
It's interesting that the discussion turned a bit toward the grand prize vs. league prizes. I sort of like the idea of a big grand prize. However, I also know that several of my friends were quite shocked when I told them I won my league's championship and $5200. That sounded great until they asked how much my entry fee was. For $1400 in they were expecting a league prize of at least $8K because our local leagues give 50% of the pot to first place. When I explained there was a chance at $100K on top of the $5200 they understood better. However, i feel they still seemed to think I did not win enough. If that's what the average person thinks, then maybe a smaller grand prize makes some sense.
That said, Glenn's point about joining a satellite is all too true, or an ultimate. I get that too.
Pete
[ January 20, 2012, 10:12 PM: Message edited by: Jersey Dawg ]
That said, Glenn's point about joining a satellite is all too true, or an ultimate. I get that too.
Pete
[ January 20, 2012, 10:12 PM: Message edited by: Jersey Dawg ]
survey
Originally posted by Jersey Dawg:
It's interesting that the discussion turned a bit toward the grand prize vs. league prizes. I sort of like the idea of a big grand prize. However, I also know that several of my friends were quite shocked when I told them I won my league's championship and $5200. That sounded great until they asked how much my entry fee was. For $1400 in they were expecting a league prize of at least $8K because our local leagues give 50% of the pot to first place. When I explained there was a chance at $100K on top of the $5200 they understood better. However, i feel they still seemed to think I did not win enough. If that's what the average person thinks, then maybe a smaller grand prize makes some sense.
That said, Glenn's point about joining a satellite is all too true, or an ultimate. I get that too.
Pete The answer lies somewhere in between Glenn's response and $100,000k. Something like a 75k overall with added league prizes.
It's interesting that the discussion turned a bit toward the grand prize vs. league prizes. I sort of like the idea of a big grand prize. However, I also know that several of my friends were quite shocked when I told them I won my league's championship and $5200. That sounded great until they asked how much my entry fee was. For $1400 in they were expecting a league prize of at least $8K because our local leagues give 50% of the pot to first place. When I explained there was a chance at $100K on top of the $5200 they understood better. However, i feel they still seemed to think I did not win enough. If that's what the average person thinks, then maybe a smaller grand prize makes some sense.
That said, Glenn's point about joining a satellite is all too true, or an ultimate. I get that too.
Pete The answer lies somewhere in between Glenn's response and $100,000k. Something like a 75k overall with added league prizes.
Joe