Rule changes for 2020?

LuckyLloyd

Maybe a good time to discuss potential rule changes for 2020? Three I’d like to see:

1) Points For as tiebreaker - current system doesn’t make sense, you can’t play Defense against your opponents and the NFL
Software gives no visibility on how the breakdown works. So you can’t be sure who owns the tiebreaker. Next week this system will see less deserving teams through to the playoffs in multiple boards leagues. Time to move on.

2) Do away with the trade waiting period, allow commissioner to reverse trades manually it there is a suspicion of collusion - we should be looking to encourage trading and only vetoing where collision is a concern. As is, trades not agreed by Thursday evening won’t process in time for a game weekend. And earlier for days like today, where players play on a Thursday. Process them through and people can post on thread or in their league feed to object if they feel something is awry

3) Move from standard to ppr - ppr is increasingly the default setting in the fantasy world. Most leagues play it, most analysis centres around it. In 16 team leagues it specifically makes sense to widen the pool of scoring. Another one where it’s time to move on.

We should discuss these and any other changes at the very least.

In Exile

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Maybe a good time to discuss potential rule changes for 2020? Three I’d like to see:

1) Points For as tiebreaker - current system doesn’t make sense, you can’t play Defense against your opponents and the NFL
Software gives no visibility on how the breakdown works. So you can’t be sure who owns the tiebreaker. Next week this system will see less deserving teams through to the playoffs in multiple boards leagues. Time to move on.

2) Do away with the trade waiting period, allow commissioner to reverse trades manually it there is a suspicion of collusion - we should be looking to encourage trading and only vetoing where collision is a concern. As is, trades not agreed by Thursday evening won’t process in time for a game weekend. And earlier for days like today, where players play on a Thursday. Process them through and people can post on thread or in their league feed to object if they feel something is awry

3) Move from standard to ppr - ppr is increasingly the default setting in the fantasy world. Most leagues play it, most analysis centres around it. In 16 team leagues it specifically makes sense to widen the pool of scoring. Another one where it’s time to move on.

We should discuss these and any other changes at the very least.

Agree on 1 & 2. I'm torn on the third. I know it's the way things are moving and we've a great Boards PPR league going with a all group. What I love most about standard scoring in 16 teams is having to dumpster dive to find that differential on any given week.

I'd actually like to see the bench reduced to 4 ( not saying it should be a proposed rule change!) To make waivers and trades more interesting

eagle eye

I'm against speeding up trades. People have a right to veto and you can't expect them to be logging in every day of the week. It's easy to monitor as it is and should stay that way I think.
I'm against moving to PPR to. I play in, and love, a PPR league but standard scoring is a whole different ball game and it's good fun the way it is.

eagle eye

I'd like to propose removing the flex position and having 1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1DST and 1 kicker.
It's a 16 team league, I think we have too many positions to fill.

LuckyLloyd

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm against speeding up trades. People have a right to veto and you can't expect them to be logging in every day of the week. It's easy to monitor as it is and should stay that way I think.

People get an app notification and email when a trade is processed in their league. This doesn’t remove power to object to a trade - they can use the thread here or the feed for their league to do so. But it pushes an emphasis on people having to articulate why - the only acceptable reason to reverse trades is collusion.

eagle eye

LuckyLloyd wrote:

People get an app notification and email when a trade is processed in their league. This doesn’t remove power to object to a trade - they can use the thread here or the feed for their league to do so. But it pushes an emphasis on people having to articulate why - the only acceptable reason to reverse trades is collusion.

As it is you can object without anybody knowing you object which is a good thing imo.
If you think a trade is too one-sided you can object, doesn't have to be collusion.
As for the feed on the thread, I can't speak for other people but I never look at it. I do use boards obviously but not many come on here too often during the season I think.

LuckyLloyd

eagle eye wrote: »

As it is you can object without anybody knowing you object which is a good thing imo.
If you think a trade is too one-sided you can object, doesn't have to be collusion.
As for the feed on the thread, I can't speak for other people but I never look at it. I do use boards obviously but not many come on here too often during the season I think.

So you never look at the feed to see who people have dropped on waiver day? Or to scan for drops during the week or players you may want to add? Really?!

mikemac2

Can we set divisions that waivers process on Thursday morning and then free agency opens. You have to tactically decide whether to use your waiver or not. Will you take a chance if your target will still be there or not? Good fun. It was how it was always done

Boards Division 7 turned this off and free agency became a free for all scramble on Tuesday but at some random time when players were unlocked. I never figured out when free agency started. It was neither equal or fair

LuckyLloyd

mikemac2 wrote: »

Can we set divisions that waivers process on Thursday morning and then free agency opens. You have to tactically decide whether to use your waiver or not. Will you take a chance if your target will still be there or not? Good fun. It was how it was always done

Boards Division 7 turned this off and free agency became a free for all scramble on Tuesday but at some random time when players were unlocked. I never figured out when free agency started. It was neither equal or fair

That’s an error by the commish in how div 7 was configured

eagle eye

LuckyLloyd wrote:

So you never look at the feed to see who people have dropped on waiver day? Or to scan for drops during the week or players you may want to add? Really?!

No, I look at the players available. I spend a lot of time on that.

Dodge

Yes to 1. I might be relegated with the same record and more points than someone who isn’t...

No to 2. There’s nothing wrong with a waiting period (but I’m ambivalent about this tbh)

No to 3. Definitely no. PPR might be standard elsewhere but I like having one league where it isn’t used.

I’m OK with the line up settings (I pressed for the flex to be included previously and think it works well). Wouldn’t mind 4 man benches though. It might lead to more trades

Hoki

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Maybe a good time to discuss potential rule changes for 2020? Three I’d like to see:

1) Points For as tiebreaker - current system doesn’t make sense, you can’t play Defense against your opponents and the NFL
Software gives no visibility on how the breakdown works. So you can’t be sure who owns the tiebreaker. Next week this system will see less deserving teams through to the playoffs in multiple boards leagues. Time to move on.

2) Do away with the trade waiting period, allow commissioner to reverse trades manually it there is a suspicion of collusion - we should be looking to encourage trading and only vetoing where collision is a concern. As is, trades not agreed by Thursday evening won’t process in time for a game weekend. And earlier for days like today, where players play on a Thursday. Process them through and people can post on thread or in their league feed to object if they feel something is awry

3) Move from standard to ppr - ppr is increasingly the default setting in the fantasy world. Most leagues play it, most analysis centres around it. In 16 team leagues it specifically makes sense to widen the pool of scoring. Another one where it’s time to move on.

We should discuss these and any other changes at the very least.

Agree with all of this, PPR is now the standard on NFL site as mentioned, maybe we could even start off with 0.5 PPR for a season and see how it goes.
This might be an unpopular suggestion but I'd also recommend changing platforms to Yahoo. As I mostly use the mobile app for all my interactions, the NFL app is dogshi*t in comparison - painfully slow and clunky. This was my first year using Yahoo fantasy having been purely NFL for the last few years & Yahoo is hands down the superior platform.

eagle eye

So for you guys who want to change to PPR, why not set up a PPR league or join the boards one?

LuckyLloyd

Hoki wrote: »

This might be an unpopular suggestion but I'd also recommend changing platforms to Yahoo. As I mostly use the mobile app for all my interactions, the NFL app is dogshi*t in comparison - painfully slow and clunky. This was my first year using Yahoo fantasy having been purely NFL for the last few years & Yahoo is hands down the superior platform.

Would have been with you on this a year ago but I think the NFL app has made giant strides this year and clearly has an active development team working on it.

massdebater

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That’s an error by the commish in how div 7 was configured

That league's a disaster, I think the commissioner just kind of gave up a few weeks ago!

Agree to the OP's changes though, trades should be immediate with just commissioner veto if collusion is suspected. I prefer PPR too but 0.5 could be a good compromise?

conor222

I don't really get the rationale for the never reset waiver priority, surely if the target is to keep teams engaged and help them to improve it should reset weekly in reversed standings (bottom team that week gets first waiver priory that week).
Yes it makes it tougher for the top teams to get the flashy new commodity on the WW that week, but makes it easier for lower teams to churn their roster and stay competitive.
I'd like to see a change in the waiver system

LuckyLloyd

conor222 wrote: »

I don't really get the rationale for the never reset waiver priority, surely if the target is to keep teams engaged and help them to improve it should reset weekly in reversed standings (bottom team that week gets first waiver priory that week).
Yes it makes it tougher for the top teams to get the flashy new commodity on the WW that week, but makes it easier for lower teams to churn their roster and stay competitive.
I'd like to see a change in the waiver system

It already should be set that way, no?

Dodge

conor222 wrote: »

I don't really get the rationale for the never reset waiver priority, surely if the target is to keep teams engaged and help them to improve it should reset weekly in reversed standings (bottom team that week gets first waiver priory that week).
Yes it makes it tougher for the top teams to get the flashy new commodity on the WW that week, but makes it easier for lower teams to churn their roster and stay competitive.
I'd like to see a change in the waiver system

The rationale is that you need to be selective about using your priority waiver. So it adds a layer of strategy

These leagues are tough. Really tough. That’s not a bad thing IMO

eagle eye

No, once you pick up a player through waivers you go to the bottom. A guy that never uses it will be no. 1 as long as he doesn't use it.
Personally I like it resetting every week with the player with the worst record having first pick.
Like it's not abnormal to be unlucky at the start of the season and lose your two best players to IR. With the waiver priority like it is you might never get a decent replacement. Meanwhile the guy going well in the league with no injuries can sit and wait for a great option to emerge and make his squad even stronger.

LuckyLloyd

See the arguments for both, but ideally FAAB would be utilised. Tends to be the fairest system ime and adds a deeper element of strategy.

L.S.F

I'd definitely be in favour of faster trade processes. Not pushed on PPR

Guffy

1. Fab bidding, failing that a resetting waiver wire.

2. Standard scoring. If you want to play ppr set up a ppr league or join the existing one. This league, imo is the standard version of the two and should remain so. I don't understand why this comes up every year seen as there is already an option there.

3. No one should be vetoing trades barring obvious collusion. Managers should be allowed to manage teams how they like.

4. I like the division schedule and the current head to head tiebreaker. I'd have points for as a 3rd tie break. Points for favours boom or bust players too much imo.

Dodge

I didn’t realise it was head to head to decide placings. Happy enough with that so

LuckyLloyd

Dodge wrote: »

I didn’t realise it was head to head to decide placings. Happy enough with that so

Well you shouldn’t be happy with that. It’s a vastly inferior tiebreaker in fantasy.

Dodge

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well you shouldn’t be happy with that. It’s a vastly inferior tiebreaker in fantasy.

Ha ha.

1 Head to head
2 points scored

Can’t see how anything is better than that.

genericgoon

Change: Waivers to FAAB (tactical while still giving injury affected/worse teams a chance to turnover quick)

Trade Waiting to Instant (or at least a much shorter period)

Keep: Standard Scoring (need for PPR ladder next year or would split teams too much?)

Head to Head (increases stakes of current in-division setup of 3 games at start/end. If possible (don't think so) wouldn't mind points for being used for wildcard/consolations purposes but for in-division standings (i.e. top 4 seeds) head to head is better imo.

AirDemon

I like the rule changes that were suggested.

Changing to PPR now makes sense to me as it has become the standard on most platforms.

Move to FAAB would be great.


Vetoes

One thing I really dislike however is this.... Veto if a trade is too one sided. This is straight up rubbish. If I have made a decision to trade a player say for another then there is no reason for anyone to veto it unless it's collusion.

I can have my reasons for making the trade and if I am doing it to benefit my team then there isn't any grounds for it to be stopped.

massdebater

For the people saying head-to-head is better, it's better in real life NFL games but far inferior in fantasy. It's unfair to have an advantage over another team just because you played against them when their good players are on a bye, had bad matchups etc. Points for is an accurate way to establish who had been the best team throughout the year as it doesn't penalise a team for having a bad week.

eagle eye

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Well you shouldn’t be happy with that. It’s a vastly inferior tiebreaker in fantasy.

Head to head is by far the best and fairest tiebreaker.

eagle eye

massdebater wrote:

For the people saying head-to-head is better, it's better in real life NFL games but far inferior in fantasy. It's unfair to have an advantage over another team just because you played against them when their good players are on a bye, had bad matchups etc. Points for is an accurate way to establish who had been the best team throughout the year as it doesn't penalise a team for having a bad week.

So random guy has 200 points one week and has ten or more less than you every other week and he beats you because his team had one freak week.
How is that better than head to head?

eagle eye

AirDemon wrote:

One thing I really dislike however is this.... Veto if a trade is too one sided. This is straight up rubbish. If I have made a decision to trade a player say for another then there is no reason for anyone to veto it unless it's collusion.

If it's too one sided it could be collusion. The veto allows you to make sure there is no collusion.

Guffy

eagle eye wrote: »

If it's too one sided it could be collusion. The veto allows you to make sure there is no collusion.

That's not collusion though is it? A one sided trade no matter how one sided i mean. It may be a bad trade but that's different to collusion

BarryC21

1. Would love to see waivers reset to reverse standing order every week.

2. I’d be in favour of PPR (or at least 0.5PPR) if it’ll broaden the player base. If that means sticking with standard and reducing number of bench players I’d be grand with that.

3. Don’t really mind about the head to head or points scored but if I had to pick I’d go points scored.

4. I’d keep the trades the way they are.

eagle eye

Guffy wrote:

That's not collusion though is it? A one sided trade no matter how one sided i mean. It may be a bad trade but that's different to collusion

And every player in the league has the right to look at it and veto it if it looks like it might be collusion.

AirDemon

eagle eye wrote: »

And every player in the league has the right to look at it and veto it if it looks like it might be collusion.

That's not what you are saying though, you've said you veto if it's too one sided. But that's totally down to the person viewing the trade.


It just means that you have decided that this must be collusion because you know better than the people making the trade. And fair enough, you may know better than the people making the trade but just because I make a stupid trade doesn't mean you should have the ability to veto it.


Vetoes are for collusion, so cheating, but a one sided trade isn't cheating.

eagle eye

AirDemon wrote:

Vetoes are for collusion, so cheating, but a one sided trade isn't cheating.

How am I supposed to know which it is?

LuckyLloyd

eagle eye wrote: »

How am I supposed to know which it is?

You don’t. Post your concern, let the commish investigate, and they can reverse if necessary. You shouldn’t have the right to veto anonymously just because you don’t like a trade. That just ain’t cricket.

LuckyLloyd

Some great suggestions here. Plenty to collate into a survey ahead of next season.

eagle eye

LuckyLloyd wrote:

You don’t. Post your concern, let the commish investigate, and they can reverse if necessary. You shouldn’t have the right to veto anonymously just because you don’t like a trade. That just ain’t cricket.

It's not cricket it's American fantasy football.
As a player you should have the right to veto. It prevents collusion.

Blured

eagle eye wrote: »

It's not cricket it's American fantasy football.
As a player you should have the right to veto. It prevents collusion.

It also allows people to veto a trade they don't like, i.e. if they think it helps a rival

Dodge

How many trades have been vetoed? In all my years on here (11/12?) I don’t ever remember a trade being vetoed

LuckyLloyd

Dodge wrote: »

How many trades have been vetoed? In all my years on here (11/12?) I don’t ever remember a trade being vetoed

Even more reason to process them straight through so.

eagle eye

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Even more reason to process them straight through so.

No, leave well enough alone is the smart approach.

Podge_irl

All for trades going straight through with the commish able to retroactively veto it. I think even obvious collusion trades could sneak through with the current system from players not paying a lot of attention during the week. Don't see the downside of a retroactive change based on suspicion and a lot of upside for players looking to trade.

Happy to move to some element of ppr also.

Dodge

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Even more reason to process them straight through so.

Not really. The argument was being made that trades were being stopped by people who ‘didn’t like them’. That isn’t the case

I don’t really feel too strongly on this either way to be honest. The current system isn’t a problem for me

Beefy78

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You don’t. Post your concern, let the commish investigate, and they can reverse if necessary. You shouldn’t have the right to veto anonymously just because you don’t like a trade. That just ain’t cricket.

He can't veto the trade. He can cast a vote if he has concerns. If so many people feel the same way that there's enough votes to veto then that suggests that the trade was pretty egregious. It happens almost never and I completely get the viewpoint that some people have that a trade should never be vetoed but a trade window is there to keep people honest.

Fwiw I've never seen trades vetoed on Boards but some people are naturally way less invested in their team than others are and don't care so much about throwing away their players to get a backup running back at their favourite team or to help their friend who is doing much better than they are. Having a mechanism to detract from that is a good thing IMO.

The veto window should be 24 hours though. I'd like to see waiver claims processed on Wednesdays instead of Thursdays like basically every other fantasy league in the world.

I'm naturally in favour of PPR or half point PPR in fantasy. I just think it's a much more fun game. That said I kinda like that this league uses standard scoring - combined with 16 team leagues it makes it a really tough environment.

I don't feel too strongly about FAAB bidding vs waivers. Both have their advantages. If we use waivers I like that we don't reset them. I think it adds some strategy to waiver claims.

On waivers my main issue, and I don't think this is even something that can be fixed, is around the post season. For the playoffs only teams still in the main competition should be able to make claims IMO or they should at least be given top priority. I'm in the Championship Game in Div 5 this weekend (humble brag) but I'm 11th in waiver priority. I've no issue at all with people in consolation brackets playing properly but the main bracket should get priority.

Overall this is a great set-up here but I don't think we should be afraid to tweak things if they can make it better.

adrian522

OK, So what do we want to vote on?

1. Remove Veto period for a trade
2. Change to PPR Scoring
3. Change Tie Breaking Scenario to Points for
4. Change Waiver order to reset every week

Anything else?

People have mentioned changing from NFL.com or removing the flex but I didn't see much support or discussion on those suggestions so I'm not inclined to include them.

Each option needs to have only 2 possible outcomes, 3 or more leads to too many arguments about the results.

eagle eye

How about getting rid of the flex position and leaving it at 2 WR and 2 RB? There are sixteen players in each league. There are weeks when between injuries and bye weeks it's hard to put out a full team.

BarryC21

Yeah I'd like a vote on this as well as the other 4.

genericgoon

Personally, would prefer to simply reduce waiting time for trades but see that's probably too minor a proposition. Also no item for waivers (moving to FAAB, reset every week or status quo?)

BaronVon

1. Move to FAAB for waivers. Did this in my home league, and it's the single greatest thing we have done. Adds an extra dimension to strategy , and help reduces lads sticking in waiver claims for the sake of it.

2. Not too bothered, but the Points For tie breaker is probably fairer. The aim is to score points. When you have a 3 or 4 way tie, you need NASA to explain who wins that tie breaker, and why!

3. Not a great fan of PPR, tried it in 1 league this year, but we're gonna change back. You get some ridicously high scores......

Other than that, I'd be happy enough