Please Vote on Rule Changes for 2018

adrian522

https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/W3GHQ2B

I am limited to 10 questions so please answer these questions. You don't need to answer each question.

Please add your boards username when voting and only votes from players who have played fantasy football for at least 1 full season will count.

The following questions were not included, So I will create a separate survey if people feel it is justified:

Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

hots

adrian522 wrote: »

https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/W3GHQ2B

I am limited to 10 questions so please answer these questions. You don't need to answer each question.

Please add your boards username when voting and only votes from players who have played fantasy football for at least 1 full season will count.

The following questions were not included, So I will create a separate survey if people feel it is justified:

Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

Done, and 1)not sure, 2)definitely for defenses (there was some col custom scoring suggested on reddit I think) 3)no

boccy23

adrian522 wrote: »

https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/W3GHQ2B

I am limited to 10 questions so please answer these questions. You don't need to answer each question.

Please add your boards username when voting and only votes from players who have played fantasy football for at least 1 full season will count.

The following questions were not included, So I will create a separate survey if people feel it is justified:

Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

Done and 1) Yes, 2) No, 3) Happy as it is

TOss Sweep

Done but I would say lets not go crazy changing rules and leave out those 3 others you have.

adrian522

TOss Sweep wrote: »

Done but I would say lets not go crazy changing rules and leave out those 3 others you have.

Agreed. I'll leave those out for the moment.

kev_s88

all done with survey

1) no negative points for kickers.

2) maybe levelling up the pts awarded for kicks from different distances. sometimes I find getting 3 pts for a 20yd FG and for a 49yd FG a bit annoying. Potentially have 3pts for 0-19yd, 3 pts for 20-29yd, 3 pts for 30-39yd, 4 pts 40-49yd, 5 pts 50+ yd

3) no need to change what ain't broke. plus theres not much else out there thats better

genericgoon

adrian522 wrote: »

https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/W3GHQ2B
Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

No
No
No

thomond2006

Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?

No

Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?

No

Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

I'm not familar with other platforms but I really like the NFL.com one, particularly the app.

TOss Sweep

adrian522 wrote: »

https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/W3GHQ2B

I am limited to 10 questions so please answer these questions. You don't need to answer each question.

Please add your boards username when voting and only votes from players who have played fantasy football for at least 1 full season will count.

The following questions were not included, So I will create a separate survey if people feel it is justified:

Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

How long are you going to leave the Poll open for?

aferru

Done the poll.
For the three extra questions:
1) No
2) No
3) No

adrian522

Early days yet but so far:

64% voted to set the draft order prior to the draft
64% voted to leave it at 16 teams per league
56% disagree that rules should only be voted on once every 3 years
56% voted to stay on standard scoring
48% vote to have a flex (WR/RB/TE), 28% to leave it with 3WR.
56% want to leave the Free Agent set up as itr currently stands
52% believe points should be awarded for fumbles recovered for a TD
60% want the time reduced to 60 seconds to make a draft pick.
48% want to leave Head to Head as the tie breaking scenario.

Guffy

1) yes
2) no
3) once its not espn i dont mind

jester1980

adrian522 wrote: »

Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

NO
NO
NO

Mr_Man2121

Sorry stupid question. What league is this

adrian522

This is for the 16 team leagues, Premier Division, Div 1-9 etc.

Mr_Man2121

adrian522 wrote: »

This is for the 16 team leagues, Premier Division, Div 1-9 etc.

Okay thanks, I was div 8 last year, will apply when registration rolls around

TOss Sweep

adrian522 wrote: »

56% disagree that rules should only be voted on once every 3 years

This one right here for me is a slippery slope as the league continues to grow. Nothing worse than Fantasy league that change rule after rule after rule every year.

adrian522 wrote: »

64% voted to leave it at 16 teams per league

I do believe that this is one rule that should never be voted on also. The only reason in my eyes people don't like 16 team leagues is because they find them too hard to play in. For me that is the challenge of these leagues.

But if the rule ever changes it will cause a mess and you are asking guys to give up their earned spots in the higher league which I don't think is fair.

mikemac2

1. No
2. No
3. No

Survey completed too

davetherave

Survey done,

1. No
2. Yes, for kickers only
3. No


Also echo with what TO says, the leagues are too established now to be changing the number of participants. It just means you have to do your homework with the waiver wire.

Itssoeasy

Survey done during the week.

1. No
2. No
3. No

Also what needs to be gotten in terms of votes for a rule to change ?

TOss Sweep

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Also what needs to be gotten in terms of votes for a rule to change ?

All of the polls done in the past I think were all based on majority.

Itssoeasy

TOss Sweep wrote: »

All of the polls done in the past I think were all based on majority.

So 50% plus 1 ? Surely it should be a 2/3rds for certain rule changes ?

TOss Sweep

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So 50% plus 1 ? Surely it should be a 2/3rds for certain rule changes ?

I agree. But the ones in the past were just majority.

Foxtrol

Some of those questions are very dependent on the results of each other. For example, reducing the size of the leagues would make having a flex make sense, but moving to a flex that includes RBs while staying at 16 will leave RBs incredibly tight.

Other answers 1) yes, 2) yes, 3) don’t mind

LuckyLloyd

Survey response in.

I'm against all of the additional three changes so would vote no to a further poll on that basis.

Adamcp898

TOss Sweep wrote: »

I agree. But the ones in the past were just majority.

Previous ones iirc though were basically "Option A or Option B" type questions and so a majority rule sufficed. Multiple option questions like the flex scenario here muddy the waters with what should be required to change the rule as it raises the possibility that two options may be cannibalising each other in terms of their total votes, but the voters for both options may be vehemently against the only other option which then wins almost by default.

I swear I'm not trying to make work for your though Adrian :pac: it's impossible to keep everyone happy and wouldn't expect anyone to go to such lengths to organise the leagues voluntarily.


As it is, I'm against all the major changes basically. Keep it at 16 teams, it's what makes the Boards leagues a bit more challenging. I imagine it's the lack of player depth and having to look at obscure players you've never heard of which is what's making some people want to go to the more generic 12 team league?

If it is, then just get to grips with how the waiver wire works and then try to project a couple of obscure RB and WR 3/4's that might be useful 2-3 weeks down the line or during bye weeks and you'll be fine. Even it's simply to start following a fantasy football podcast and/or journalist on twitter to take their predictions and you'll find you'll be just as right/wrong as much as everyone else trying to make the same stock predictions.

Ditto for the flex option. But on the flex option, it'd be interesting to know how many people want both a flex AND a smaller league. If the reasoning for wanting either is due to lack of waiver depth then would a change to a smaller league mean the same person may then not want a flex position added or vice versa.

TOss Sweep

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Previous ones iirc though were basically "Option A or Option B" type questions and so a majority rule sufficed. Multiple option questions like the flex scenario here muddy the waters with what should be required to change the rule as it raises the possibility that two options may be cannibalising each other in terms of their total votes, but the voters for both options may be vehemently against the only other option which then wins almost by default.

We did have some polls that were majority and I set them up but as you said other were A or B.

Personally I feel we really shouldn't change anything from what made the league what they are. If people don't like the rules there are other options out there. I think we are being too flexible with this and the whole structure will become muddy as fook and people will never be happy.

To itssoeasys point also the % has to be higher as if its 51 49 split then you know next season we will have someone wanting it to be voted on again. Right now it looks like the 3 year no re vote is winning so the flood gates have been opened.

Just my opinion.

Tristram

What was the last change that was introduced? I swear we vote on stuff every year but nothing ever changes lol or I just forget straight away No harm in voting!

FastFullBack

Survey done and No, No & No to the 3 questions

Johnny_Fontane

survey done and no, no, no

eagle eye

Survey done and no, no, no.

billr67

Survey done and No, No, No (Is it just me or has it all gone a bit Destinys Child in here?).

Would love to move to half point PPR, FAB and a Flex but hey majority rules.

boccy23

billr67 wrote: »

Survey done and No, No, No (Is it just me or has it all gone a bit Destinys Child in here?).

Would love to move to half point PPR, FAB and a Flex but hey majority rules.

If a majority split between half point PPR and full PPR, will the majority rule and we look again at this option?

billr67

boccy23 wrote: »

If a majority split between half point PPR and full PPR, will the majority rule and we look again at this option?

You mean if there's a tie? or if one option fails to get more than 50% of the vote and we have a run off between the two highest options?

Any idea how the votes are going so far?

boccy23

billr67 wrote: »

You mean if there's a tie? or if one option fails to get more than 50% of the vote and we have a run off between the two highest options?

Any idea how the votes are going so far?

Well is PPR had say 25% and ½ PPR had 35% and no PPR had 40%, would it not be reasonable then to look at which of full PPR or ½ PPR would suit as a majority had selected such a format.

Maybe complicating things, but with three options, such an outcome is feasible.

billr67

boccy23 wrote: »

Well is PPR had say 25% and ½ PPR had 35% and no PPR had 40%, would it not be reasonable then to look at which of full PPR or ½ PPR would suit as a majority had selected such a format.

Maybe complicating things, but with three options, such an outcome is feasible.

Yep makes sense to me.

eagle eye

If you have three options then the one with the highest % wins.

Two ppr options doesn't mean that we should have a runoff between them because neither of them has the most votes. If you wanted to have a runoff then it should be no ppr versus the highest voted other option.
Imo there should be no runoff though.

TOss Sweep

eagle eye wrote: »

If you have three options then the one with the highest % wins.

Two ppr options doesn't mean that we should have a runoff between them because neither of them has the most votes. If you wanted to have a runoff then it should be no ppr versus the highest voted other option.
Imo there should be no runoff though.

I agree the majority should get it. Weren't be only allowed pick 1 option? So in saying that you either wanted

Option 1
or
Option 2
or
Option 3

Saying 1 should roll into the other is unfair to those who voted against it.

Guffy

billr67 wrote: »

Survey done and No, No, No (Is it just me or has it all gone a bit Destinys Child in here?).

Would love to move to half point PPR, FAB and a Flex but hey majority rules.

But there is already a ppr league. You could put your hat in to join that too?

TOss Sweep

Guffy wrote: »

But there is already a ppr league. You could put your hat in to join that too?

This is my biggest gripe with this whole vote when it comes to PPR there are other options out there. Nothing stopping the PPR league expanding into multiple leagues.

Benimar

boccy23 wrote: »

Well is PPR had say 25% and ½ PPR had 35% and no PPR had 40%, would it not be reasonable then to look at which of full PPR or ½ PPR would suit as a majority had selected such a format.

Maybe complicating things, but with three options, such an outcome is feasible.

Have to agree with this. The question is unfortunately flawed. People who want PPR are being asked to choose between two options when voting, while those who don’t want it have one option.

It probably would have worked better if it was a 2 part question. Part a being do you want PPR, with part b being something like ‘if you do, would you prefer 1pt or 0.5pt’

Similarly for the flex option, there probably should have been a straight yes/no question first, then look at the various flex options.

TOss Sweep

Or those who want PPR could just join and fill out the PPR league that has already been on Boards for a long time etc etc

The Boards PPR League fill caters to both Flex and obviously PPR and was setup for those who wanted PPR and Flex and an alternative to standard

Guffy

The more i think about it the more I don't understand why there is a vote to move to ppr. As TS pointed out, the forum already has a PPR league so why would we ne changing to have 2 PPR leagues? There is nothing stopping those who want PPR from joining the PPR league surely.

Benimar

TOss Sweep wrote: »

Or those who want PPR could just join and fill out the PPR league that has already been on Boards for a long time etc etc

The Boards PPR League fill caters to both Flex and obviously PPR and was setup for those who wanted PPR and Flex and an alternative to standard

Yes they could, but my point is that if there is going to be a vote on introducing PPR here, it should be a simple yes/no first.

If no wins, fine. That’s democracy, and I have no issue whatsoever with it. But if more than 50% of people want it changed, then it should be.

Your post smacks of go elsewhere if you want to change the rules, which sort of defeats the purpose of having a vote on said rules!

Guffy

Benimar wrote: »

Your post smacks of go elsewhere if you want to change the rules, which sort of defeats the purpose of having a vote on said rules!

I didn't read it like that tbf. I read it like that facility is already provided here so why change the rules of a standard league to accommodate it.

TOss Sweep

Benimar wrote: »

TOss Sweep wrote: »

Or those who want PPR could just join and fill out the PPR league that has already been on Boards for a long time etc etc

The Boards PPR League fill caters to both Flex and obviously PPR and was setup for those who wanted PPR and Flex and an alternative to standard

Your post smacks of go elsewhere if you want to change the rules, which sort of defeats the purpose of having a vote on said rules!

You are entitled to your opinion as am I. If you feel my posts come off that way that is your opinon.

On the vote thing I would rather there was no vote on the PPR and Flex option. I have made that known over the last few years in favt we have already voted on both 2 yrs ago anf both lost and I suggested re vite shouldnt happen for a few years.

For what it is worth I was one of the original people who suggested voting and created some if the first polls so take from my posts what you will.

My opinion though is the original boards league was standard points and positions and at the time some set up the Boards PPR league to cater for those who wanted PPR my point being why have a PPR league if this main one becomes one. There is options.

Way I also see it is every league these days is flex and ppr and this Boards league is old school and one of the most competitive aeound because its hard.

What I say really doesnt matter if flex and ppr wins out out butnim entitled to put my counter argument to it whether you agree or not.

Benimar

Everyone is entitled to express a view, I’m certainly not afraid of a view that’s opposite to mine.

My point is that the vote on PPR should be a straight yes/no, not two options for yes and one for no.

If it’s a straight yes/no and no get 50.1%, then we don’t change, simple as. However, I don’t think no getting, say, 40%, yes for 1 PPR getting 35% and yes for 0.5 PPR getting 25%, is enough to say that people don’t want PPR just because the highest single % of votes was for no.

MileHighGuy

Questions should be a straight yes or no where possible, but I have to agree, I don't understand why we are voting on rule changes every year when it seems clear there is nothing *glaringly* wrong with the format as it stands.

If PPR and flex are what the market dictates, then we should see the PPR/Flex offshoots become more popular on the forum. It shouldn't require the legacy league format to change.

eagle eye

As TO says, there is already a boards ppr league so this vote should never have happened as the option to play ppr is already available.

This league was set up as standard many years ago and opened up to everybody on boards when the sport and fantasy nfl became more popular. It's got a lot of history behind it at this stage so I don't see why we should change it to some type of ppr league now.

The boards ppr league doesn't have that many members, if people want to join up then they can fill the currently league and we'll start up divisions if needed.

L.S.F

adrian522 wrote: »

https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/W3GHQ2B



Should we have negative points for a missed PAT?
Should we increase the value of kickers and defenses by increasing points for FG's, Sacks, Fumbles etc?
Should we move to another platform from NFL.com?

Done.
Yes
Yes on FG depending on distance.
No

billr67

eagle eye wrote: »

As TO says, there is already a boards ppr league so this vote should never have happened as the option to play ppr is already available.

This league was set up as standard many years ago and opened up to everybody on boards when the sport and fantasy nfl became more popular. It's got a lot of history behind it at this stage so I don't see why we should change it to some type of ppr league now.

The boards ppr league doesn't have that many members, if people want to join up then they can fill the currently league and we'll start up divisions if needed.

I honestly didn't know that a PPR league existed maybe that's my fault for not looking but when you loook around Yahoo are 0.5 PPR as default, ESPN has gone to full point PPR only NFL.Com remain at standard scoring for default and apparently they are close to changing too, it's just the way the game has evolved.

Personally I don't like full PPR as I think it's too much of a hindrence to old fashioned RB's but half point is a decent compromise. As for flex I don't understand any argument against a flex as it allows people to build the roster they want and it totally overvalues the WR position.