Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Boards Fantasy Football 2014

Options
1…2122232527

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users Posts: 10,829 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    fisgon wrote: »
    If you don't care, then why are you posting here? For someone who is so indifferent, as you claim to be, why are you even commenting?

    And the point is, we are actually discussing how to organize the leagues. People are simply giving their opinions about this, as I was. When someone makes a point that you don't like, you make some stupid implication and then get personal, rather than actually making a useful point.

    Aaron-Rodgers-Relax.jpg


  • Options
    #723
    fisgon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭fisgon


    People can have different views on how the leagues are structured, but at the very minimum I think we need to ensure that if we have a divisional structure, you actually have to play the other teams in your division at least once. This is not happening at the moment. A number of teams in Div 2 this year did not play all of their division opponents.

    You have to be consistent, there are people here saying they want to keep the way the leagues are set up at the moment, and also that they want to keep it close to the NFL. In what division in the NFL can you win your division despite not actually playing the other teams in your division?


  • Options
    #724
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users Posts: 10,829 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    fisgon wrote: »
    People can have different views on how the leagues are structured, but at the very minimum I think we need to ensure that if we have a divisional structure, you actually have to play the other teams in your division at least once. This is not happening at the moment. A number of teams in Div 2 this year did not play all of their division opponents.

    You have to be consistent, there are people here saying they want to keep the way the leagues are set up at the moment, and also that they want to keep it close to the NFL. In what division in the NFL can you win your division despite not actually playing the other teams in your division?

    I think most people probably agree with this, that it would make the divisions more competitive and more fun and far less arbitrary if you had to play your division rivals by default. I guess the only question is whether you want to go down the rest of JaMarcus's route where your schedule would be dependent on previous years' rankings, which I would see as problematic, especially since promoted teams would get an easier schedule.

    But I think this discussion would be much more productive if everyone responded to one another's posts with astonished, offended incredulity and condescending dismissals over this vitally important issue.


  • Options
    #725
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Johnny_Fontane wrote: »
    Thats an astonishing post. You must be quite the player. Quite the surprise to see that you've actually never won anything though.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057275543

    Interestingly, since the league went to say 5 leagues in 2011, only 1 player has one division more than once.


    its not really an astonishing post at all. I never claimed to be a guru I said ive have a winning record every year, ive also said many others regularly make the playoffs. The inference being a decent knowledge and being active and also attending your draft outweighs the small amount luck involved.

    of course to win a championship your likely to need some luck in the playoffs much more so than you do to make the playoffs, and the discussion around divisional structure related to how one would make the playoffs.

    perhaps you would read my posts next time before replying. It might mean your response is actually relevant.


  • Options
    #726
    fisgon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭fisgon


    Dodge wrote: »
    Whatever happens, luck will play a part. We have monster teams steam roll through the regular season and lose the final. You can't take luck out of it.

    The key thing for me is to keep it simple and let as many people as possible have an interest for as long as possible. I think the current format does that

    This is true about luck, this will always play a part in FF. All I am suggesting is that we try to minimize the role luck plays in deciding who gets to the playoffs, and I think changing the structure would help. We definitely need to change the way the schedule is organized.

    Whatever structure we have, there will still be promotion and relegation, 6 playoff places to fight for, 4 relegation places to avoid, so people will have something to play for in any setup. There were a number of inactives in Div 2 this year, and that is with the current structure.

    I would argue that two eight team divisions would maximize the best teams being rewarded, while also keeping interest for everyone and introducing a more workable solution than Jamarcus', which is good in theory but very complex to put into operation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    Johnny_Fontane
    Registered Users Posts: 3,093 ✭✭✭Johnny_Fontane


    D3PO wrote: »
    its not really an astonishing post at all. I never claimed to be a guru I said ive have a winning record every year, ive also said many others regularly make the playoffs. The inference being a decent knowledge and being active and also attending your draft outweighs the small amount luck involved.

    of course to win a championship your likely to need some luck in the playoffs much more so than you do to make the playoffs, and the discussion around divisional structure related to how one would make the playoffs.

    perhaps you would read my posts next time before replying. It might mean your response is actually relevant.

    I've been reading your posts for years. It always being preached from the same pulpit, which I believe you think is way up on high, above the madding crowds.


  • Options
    #728
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,172 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    fisgon wrote: »
    This is true about luck, this will always play a part in FF. All I am suggesting is that we try to minimize the role luck plays in deciding who gets to the playoffs, and I think changing the structure would help. We definitely need to change the way the schedule is organized.
    I disagree.

    I haven't seen a single post yet that has convinced me that any chance is needed.

    As for fairness, I think the play each division "rival" twice could have the opposite effect. What if the top 3 teams are all in the same division? They're beating each other which means one of them misses out as a team in another division has 3 poor rivals nd 6 easy wins (call it the Colts effect).

    Whatever format people use will have flaws. I think the current system has the least, and is the easiest to manage and therefore I think change is completely unneccesary


  • Options
    #729
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Johnny_Fontane wrote: »
    I've been reading your posts for years. It always being preached from the same pulpit, which I believe you think is way up on high, above the madding crowds.

    surprised your still reading them so if that's your opinion. You know theres an ignore option don't you ?

    I make no apologies for having an opinion. One that I back up with reasoned thought. I don't expect anybody has to agree with them, but I do expect if they are going to have their own opinion it not be one liners with no thought. That's entirely my prerogative, if you consider that preaching from a high well so be it. I really have no interest or need to convince you otherwise.


  • Options
    #730
    Raoul
    Registered Users Posts: 7,694 ✭✭✭Raoul


    I think it is very enjoyable and changing a couple of things won't make it worse or make people want to leave. People with the best skill will still win but I think that changing the waiver wire is definitely worth looking at and so is having the fixtures so you play everyone in your division (I didn't even notice that this didn't happen though).

    I got promoted 3 out of the last 4 years, I think. I never even noticed the way waiver wire ran until this year where I did pretty crap and I actually needed to use the FA more than ever. I didn't draft a very good team and for that I suffered the rest of the season and was never really in a position on the waiver wire to improve my team. I think they guy who has a 4 and 0 record after 4 games has a massive advantage over someone who is 0-4 and had to spend waiver picks on say Allen Hurns, in a desperate attempt to improve his team and now is 16th in the waiver list and when will he get a chance to pick the best player again? It will take ages and he can't really not pick anyone up and has to take gambles. While the 4 and 0 guy can just bide his time and pick up the one that is not just a gamble.

    Rambling on...I know people will say that the 4&0 guy deserves that because he had a great draft but the 0&4 guy may have picked AP and just got unlucky, now because he has a crappy waiver wire spot he has to suffer for the whole season.

    In conclusion, the waiver wire should be last place in the standings gets the first waiver spot.


  • Options
    #731
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Raoul wrote: »
    I think it is very enjoyable and changing a couple of things won't make it worse or make people want to leave. People with the best skill will still win but I think that changing the waiver wire is definitely worth looking at and so is having the fixtures so you play everyone in your division (I didn't even notice that this didn't happen though).

    I got promoted 3 out of the last 4 years, I think. I never even noticed the way waiver wire ran until this year where I did pretty crap and I actually needed to use the FA more than ever. I didn't draft a very good team and for that I suffered the rest of the season and was never really in a position on the waiver wire to improve my team. I think they guy who has a 4 and 0 record after 4 games has a massive advantage over someone who is 0-4 and had to spend waiver picks on say Allen Hurns, in a desperate attempt to improve his team and now is 16th in the waiver list and when will he get a chance to pick the best player again? It will take ages and he can't really not pick anyone up and has to take gambles. While the 4 and 0 guy can just bide his time and pick up the one that is not just a gamble.

    Rambling on...I know people will say that the 4&0 guy deserves that because he had a great draft but the 0&4 guy may have picked AP and just got unlucky, now because he has a crappy waiver wire spot he has to suffer for the whole season.

    In conclusion, the waiver wire should be last place in the standings gets the first waiver spot.

    3 promotions in 4 years you clearly got a lot of luck :rolleyes: couldn't be anything else like ..

    re the waiver wire the argument against what you said is that there is even in a 16 team league with the structure in place the ability to improve your team with FAs aswell as the waiver.

    I know in the prem league for example

    CJ Anderson & Brandon Lafell amongst others were FA's are different points of the season im sure if you did a review of your division you would find there were guys good enough to start in your team and good enough for a playoff team that were FAs at different points too.

    my argument against the worst to best is that there is no incentive not to put I a waiver claim or multiple ones in every week. that is more likely to prevent somebody rebuilding and finding gold on FA or waivers than the other way around.

    if Im 4-0 and have nothing to lose by putting in a claim and one spot im not chuffed with I can keep going week after week trying to get what I feel happy with. however if I know having a go is going to lose me the chance of maybe getting a say Carlos Hyde if Frank Gore had an IR ending injury Id think twice about putting in a claim.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    JaMarcusHustle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭JaMarcusHustle


    Thought I'd give our Wall of Champions a fresh coat of paint, and get rid of the now defunct leagues.

    ehXmPk3.jpg?1


  • Options
    #733
    fisgon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭fisgon


    Dodge wrote: »
    As for fairness, I think the play each division "rival" twice could have the opposite effect. What if the top 3 teams are all in the same division? They're beating each other which means one of them misses out as a team in another division has 3 poor rivals nd 6 easy wins (call it the Colts effect).

    I think you are missing the point. What is happening now is that some teams aren't even playing their division rivals once. I'm not suggesting playing twice. At least two division winners in my league (div 2) only played two of their division rivals in the regular season.

    I don't think it is very controversial to say that if someone is going to win a division, they should have to play all of the other teams in that division during the season.


  • Options
    #734
    TO.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭TO.


    In all my years play fantasy in the NFL setup with more than a couple of divisions I have always played each of the opponents in the same division as me and then randomly picked opponents from the other.

    My only problem with the new suggested change who determines who are "Division Rivals" are? Who also decides who goes in what division? Maybe these have already been answered and I just missed them.

    Either way if the majority vote on the new system I have no problem going down that road but I do agree with Dodge's sentiments on the change though.


  • Options
    #735
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,172 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    fisgon wrote: »

    I don't think it is very controversial to say that if someone is going to win a division, they should have to play all of the other teams in that division during the season.

    It doesn't matter at all. Not one bit.


  • Options
    #736
    Raoul
    Registered Users Posts: 7,694 ✭✭✭Raoul


    Can anyone confirm if you can set it up on the site that you play your divisional rivals once and just let NFL.com decide the rest? If so I think that would be very hand and nobody could really have any complaints?


  • Options
    #737
    Guffy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,039 ✭✭✭Guffy


    I wonder would there be any scope for changing the promoted teams to top 3 plus the playoff winners?


  • Options
    #738
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    gufc21 wrote: »
    I wonder would there be any scope for changing the promoted teams to top 3 plus the playoff winners?

    what exactly do you mean by top 3 ?

    the last 4 teams left go up which means #1 #2 seeds for sure and then the 2 wildcard winners.

    are you suggesting #3 seed goes up aswell even if they lose the wildcard round ? meaning #4 #5 or #6 seed have to win it all to go up ? Seems a bit unfair to me


  • Options
    #739
    Guffy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,039 ✭✭✭Guffy


    D3PO wrote: »
    what exactly do you mean by top 3 ?

    the last 4 teams left go up which means #1 #2 seeds for sure and then the 2 wildcard winners.

    are you suggesting #3 seed goes up aswell even if they lose the wildcard round ? meaning #4 #5 or #6 seed have to win it all to go up ? Seems a bit unfair to me

    My bad.. I thought it was top overall in the league that went up. Its perfect the way it is so ;)


  • Options
    #740
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,616 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I think the simplest solution is to reduce the divisions to 14 teams which imo makes a lot more sense anyways. I think 16 is just too much, if you get unlucky in a 16 team league you could be relegated quite easily.

    A 14 team league means that everybody plays everybody, you can even add an extra bench spot if you wish but I wouldn't.

    I don't think it would be fair to reduce them for next season. I think that we should aim to do it for the following season. Send four down from and two up to the Premier league and do the same all the way down through the divisions.


  • Options
    #741
    TO.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭TO.


    So far things to be voted on:

    - Waiver wire - going from pick and reset to worst record gets top seed

    - Divisions - Changing division structures manually to make them like the NFL

    - 14 team leagues - Changing numbers down.

    - Positions:
    - Keeping as is
    - QB RB RB WR WR TE FLEX K DEF
    - QB RB RB WR WR TE WR/TE K DEF

    - Bench size
    - Smaller Bench
    - Larger Bench

    Im sure I am missing something though. Of course all of this changes would have to be voted on as per our rules for the leagues. So working out the majority vote will be key.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    Spongey1975
    Registered Users Posts: 1,849 ✭✭✭Spongey1975


    TO. wrote: »
    So far things to be voted on:

    - Waiver wire - going from pick and reset to worst record gets top seed

    - Divisions - Changing division structures manually to make them like the NFL

    - 14 team leagues - Changing numbers down.

    - Positions:
    - Keeping as is
    - QB RB RB WR WR TE FLEX K DEF
    - QB RB RB WR WR TE WR/TE K DEF

    - Bench size
    - Smaller Bench
    - Larger Bench

    Im sure I am missing something though. Of course all of this changes would have to be voted on as per our rules for the leagues. So working out the majority vote will be key.

    A lot to discuss. Im not sure the best way to do these, maybe a new thread for each rule change with a poll attached.

    I would suggest doing the 14 team league vote before the division/schedule vote as if we do go down to 14 teams it kinda solves the division structure/scheduling issues.


  • Options
    #743
    Guffy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,039 ✭✭✭Guffy


    What's the voting criteria. A majority across all divisions? How many votes needed for it to be a valid vote?


    What's the divisions in a 14 team league?


  • Options
    #744
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,616 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Spongey1975 wrote: »
    A lot to discuss. Im not sure the best way to do these, maybe a new thread for each rule change with a poll attached.

    I would suggest doing the 14 team league vote before the division/schedule vote as if we do go down to 14 teams it kinda solves the division structure/scheduling issues.
    A multi option poll would do. You can have for and against each option and people select the options they would like.

    I think its important that the poll be public so that we can be certain that those who vote are actually playing in the league.


  • Options
    #745
    TO.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭TO.


    eagle eye wrote: »
    A multi option poll would do. You can have for and against each option and people select the options they would like.

    I think its important that the poll be public so that we can be certain that those who vote are actually playing in the league.

    I agree that way we can weed out the names that are not actually playing.


  • Options
    #746
    TO.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭TO.


    Spongey1975 wrote: »
    A lot to discuss. Im not sure the best way to do these, maybe a new thread for each rule change with a poll attached.

    I think EE way might be doable.
    I would suggest doing the 14 team league vote before the division/schedule vote as if we do go down to 14 teams it kinda solves the division structure/scheduling issues.

    Agreed as this is a key rule change and means more people will be relegated.


  • Options
    #747
    TO.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭TO.


    gufc21 wrote: »
    What's the voting criteria. A majority across all divisions? How many votes needed for it to be a valid vote?

    Add up all the numbers of those playing the Boards leagues and find the majority.

    What's the divisions in a 14 team league?

    Most likely have to be 2 large divisions. Let me add that to the thread above.


  • Options
    #748
    TO.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭TO.


    So far things to be voted on:

    - Waiver wire - going from pick and reset to worst record gets top seed

    - Divisions - Changing division structures manually to make them like the NFL

    - 14 team leagues - Changing numbers down.
    - Also added to this how many divisions can be set with 14 teams

    - Positions:
    - Keeping as is
    - QB RB RB WR WR TE FLEX K DEF
    - QB RB RB WR WR TE WR/TE K DEF

    - Bench size
    - Smaller Bench
    - Larger Bench

    Im sure I am missing something though. Of course all of this changes would have to be voted on as per our rules for the leagues. So working out the majority vote will be key.


  • Options
    #749
    Spongey1975
    Registered Users Posts: 1,849 ✭✭✭Spongey1975


    TO. wrote: »
    Add up all the numbers of those playing the Boards leagues and find the majority.

    I would just say majority wins. Whilst i would like all of the players to participate in the poll i cant see that happening. Having the poll public we can discard the non players and after that majority wins


  • Options
    #750
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    big list TO however I have a comment on voting on the waiver wire.

    This was voted on 2 seasons ago are we just going to keep going back voting on the same things over and over ? Fair enough vote on it again this off season but Id like to see a change made to the charter that says if something is voted on it cannot be revisited for X number of seasons.

    what X should be I dunno but my suggestion would be 4 seasons.

    Otherwise were going to end up with somebody proposing something to be voted on, it getting defeated that person or somebody else not accepting it and requesting it be voted on again the following off season.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    GoldFour4
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 4,961 Mod ✭✭✭✭GoldFour4


    D3PO wrote: »
    big list TO however I have a comment on voting on the waiver wire.

    This was voted on 2 seasons ago are we just going to keep going back voting on the same things over and over ? Fair enough vote on it again this off season but Id like to see a change made to the charter that says if something is voted on it cannot be revisited for X number of seasons.

    what X should be I dunno but my suggestion would be 4 seasons.

    Otherwise were going to end up with somebody proposing something to be voted on, it getting defeated that person or somebody else not accepting it and requesting it be voted on again the following off season.

    Some things can become more topical though with changes in the actual league. Two years ago we were't really aware of how much pressure the weekly Thursday night games put on teams to wait out on waiver wires to see if they got who they wanted. That's just one example, I'm sure there are others.

    Obviously we shouldn't be voting on things like positions every couple of years. That makes plenty of sense.


Advertisement