What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2023 Footballguys Championship Survey - Please Help (1 Viewer)

Thank y'all. Much appreciated.

There's also a chance at the end of the survey to join the Footballguys Contest Advisory Team. It's free and probably sounds more fancy than it really is. But I'd like to have a group of folks who are interested in helping with this kind of stuff in the future. Thanks.
 
Done

One thing not touched is I prefer KDS for drawing of draft pick. The NFFC uses it as well as 3RR. Obviously with 3RR you need KDS otherwise what is the point.
I would also prefer KDS for FFPC and RTS type contests even though they are snake drafts last year I hated getting pick 1. Sometimes you want to be at the back end sometimes the middle. If you draw the 1 or 2 pick why not get allowed 1st or 2nd choice this allows more people to get what they want. I seen sometimes in the NFFC where 10 different people will get their 1st or 2nd choice sure makes for a happier draft.
 
Dez said:
Done

One thing not touched is I prefer KDS for drawing of draft pick. The NFFC uses it as well as 3RR. Obviously with 3RR you need KDS otherwise what is the point.
I would also prefer KDS for FFPC and RTS type contests even though they are snake drafts last year I hated getting pick 1. Sometimes you want to be at the back end sometimes the middle. If you draw the 1 or 2 pick why not get allowed 1st or 2nd choice this allows more people to get what they want. I seen sometimes in the NFFC where 10 different people will get their 1st or 2nd choice sure makes for a happier draft.
Click to expand...

Thanks. One huge negative to the Kentucky Derby Style for draft picks is the added time it tacks on to every draft. We'll consider all this but it's another barrier to get over for drafts.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks. One huge negative to the Kentucky Derby Style for draft picks is the added time it tacks on to every draft. We'll consider all this but it's another barrier to get over for drafts.
Click to expand...
The way NFC does it makes it pretty seamless in that every team lists their order of preference.

So when you learn your draft position it doesn’t add any time.

Personally I loathed the 3RR, but loved the KDS.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Dez said:
Done

One thing not touched is I prefer KDS for drawing of draft pick. The NFFC uses it as well as 3RR. Obviously with 3RR you need KDS otherwise what is the point.
I would also prefer KDS for FFPC and RTS type contests even though they are snake drafts last year I hated getting pick 1. Sometimes you want to be at the back end sometimes the middle. If you draw the 1 or 2 pick why not get allowed 1st or 2nd choice this allows more people to get what they want. I seen sometimes in the NFFC where 10 different people will get their 1st or 2nd choice sure makes for a happier draft.
Click to expand...

Thanks. One huge negative to the Kentucky Derby Style for draft picks is the added time it tacks on to every draft. We'll consider all this but it's another barrier to get over for drafts.
Click to expand...
What added time ? The way it is set up for NFFC is you order your preference of pick in order. They give you a bar that shows each of the 12 picks 1-12 in order.
Then you just put them in the order you want.
Maybe your order is
12-11-3-2-1-10-9-8-7-6-5-4

So all 12 teams do this before the league is filled and the draft slot is picked.
So when you sign up you fill in your KDS right after that way if the league fills 12 hours or 3 days later your all set. If you are the 12th person to sign up you have 15 mins to set your KDS then the picks are drawn (if you sign up for a league 3 months in advance the KDS is usually draft 5 days before the draft)

So there is maybe added creating of the feature but no adding in time delay.

So if you drew the "1st pick" you would actually be pick 12. If you drew 2nd as long as team who got 1st didn't have 12 as his 1st choice you still get 12 if he did you get 11. And so on.
 
Dez said:
Joe Bryant said:
Dez said:
Done

One thing not touched is I prefer KDS for drawing of draft pick. The NFFC uses it as well as 3RR. Obviously with 3RR you need KDS otherwise what is the point.
I would also prefer KDS for FFPC and RTS type contests even though they are snake drafts last year I hated getting pick 1. Sometimes you want to be at the back end sometimes the middle. If you draw the 1 or 2 pick why not get allowed 1st or 2nd choice this allows more people to get what they want. I seen sometimes in the NFFC where 10 different people will get their 1st or 2nd choice sure makes for a happier draft.
Click to expand...

Thanks. One huge negative to the Kentucky Derby Style for draft picks is the added time it tacks on to every draft. We'll consider all this but it's another barrier to get over for drafts.
Click to expand...
What added time ? The way it is set up for NFFC is you order your preference of pick in order. They give you a bar that shows each of the 12 picks 1-12 in order.
Then you just put them in the order you want.
Maybe your order is
12-11-3-2-1-10-9-8-7-6-5-4

So all 12 teams do this before the league is filled and the draft slot is picked.
So when you sign up you fill in your KDS right after that way if the league fills 12 hours or 3 days later your all set. If you are the 12th person to sign up you have 15 mins to set your KDS then the picks are drawn (if you sign up for a league 3 months in advance the KDS is usually draft 5 days before the draft)

So there is maybe added creating of the feature but no adding in time delay.

So if you drew the "1st pick" you would actually be pick 12. If you drew 2nd as long as team who got 1st didn't have 12 as his 1st choice you still get 12 if he did you get 11. And so on.
Click to expand...

Added time of creating and explaining and then organizing. Especially at the very end where there's a huge rush to get last second drafts in. It's something we're looking at though.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Thank y'all. Much appreciated.

There's also a chance at the end of the survey to join the Footballguys Contest Advisory Team. It's free and probably sounds more fancy than it really is. But I'd like to have a group of folks who are interested in helping with this kind of stuff in the future. Thanks.
Click to expand...
I would be happy to. I gave my email in the survey
 
When the NFL went to a 17-game schedule in 2021, the FFPC/FPC added an all-play week to their regular-season schedule.

I'd like someone to explain to me why the all-play week is scheduled on an NFL Bye Week.

Prior to the change, the contest ran an 11-week regular season schedule. When that became a 12 Week schedule, including the all-play week, the all-play week was scheduled for Week 6 both in 2021 and 2022.

I'm speculating, but at face-value it appears to me that this may have been a somewhat arbitrary decision as in: "Let's just drop it right in the middle, nice and simple" 5 or 6 weeks on one side, 5 or 6 weeks on the other."

The FFPC/FPC, like most National Contests, prioritizes being as fair as possible to all entrants.

It's bad enough that there's no rhyme or reason to how the NFL schedules it's bye weeks, and we all have to deal with that, both during the draft, and in-season management of our Teams.

In the interest of fairness to all, wouldn't it be better to schedule the all-play week for a week when every NFL Team is playing, so that every Manager has access to the entire 32-Team pool of NFL Players?

I Commission a High-Stakes Dynasty League that's been operating for 20+ years, and when it came time to make the same adjustment to our regular-Season schedule, after a lengthy discussion/debate, we decided to hold our all-play week in Week 1, partly because, in theory, every Team is on the most equal footing relative to each other, for the entire season. RFA/UFA is over, the Rookie/FA Draft is over, Roster Cuts/Contracts have been submitted, and there is no game-result data generated yet to influence lineup decisions for rostered players, nor Free Agent add/drops.

The FFPC/FPC doesn't have to schedule the all-play week for Week 1 like we did, but I think it would be the most fair decision for all Teams to schedule it on a week where all 32 NFL Teams are playing.
 
Done. I'm a best ball draft and go type. I realize that's not for everyone, but maybe a smaller contest to test the waters? Also wouldn't mind seeing you duplicate the FBG subscriber contest into buy-in league. You've got a killer format waiting to be monetized.
 
Joe Bryant said:
nittanylion said:
@Joe Bryant

Hi Joe, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about the All-Play Week issue. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you elaborate on exactly what you mean with all play in one week? Thanks.
Click to expand...
With the FFPC contests, the all-play week fell during week 6, when NFL teams were on bye, so the argument being that it is a competitive disadvantage for those owners who have players on bye, whereas in some other national contests with very similar formats, they decided to do the all-play week during week 1, for that very reason.
 
Thanks y'all. I agree with you in I like the all play game with no byes. Makes sense.

One huge thing from the survey is that a ton of folks want something more than just head to head. And I get that too.

I'm interested in something simple like getting a win or loss from head to head but also using something where you can get a win if your score is in the top half of scores that week. Have you folks done any leagues like that?
 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks y'all. I agree with you in I like the all play game with no byes. Makes sense.

One huge thing from the survey is that a ton of folks want something more than just head to head. And I get that too.

I'm interested in something simple like getting a win or loss from head to head but also using something where you can get a win if your score is in the top half of scores that week. Have you folks done any leagues like that?
Click to expand...
I mean this sounds exactly like victory points scoring, no?

And victory points is by far my favourite format and becoming incredibly common these days.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks y'all. I agree with you in I like the all play game with no byes. Makes sense.

One huge thing from the survey is that a ton of folks want something more than just head to head. And I get that too.

I'm interested in something simple like getting a win or loss from head to head but also using something where you can get a win if your score is in the top half of scores that week. Have you folks done any leagues like that?
Click to expand...

Thanks, Joe. Sorry if my initial post about this, upthread, was unclear.

Regarding the bolded: Somwhere in the 1st decade of the 2000's, there was a National Contest with several different price points for entries that perhaps some of the other guys here who have been playing since the WCOFF days might remember: I think it was called The Fanasy Jungle. The contest went under and disbanded sometime around 2010. I think there were integrity issues, but don't clearly recall. I do recall that it was one of the most unique and interesting formats I'd played in up to that point, and I was sad to see it's demise.

I'm searching through my archives to find something, but not having any luck. They definitely had a format something like what you're talking about, or involving Victory Points (which is an option on MFL; not sure about any other sites).

2022 Scott Fish Bowl definitely did something like this, as well.
 
Deamon said:
I mean this sounds exactly like victory points scoring, no?

And victory points is by far my favourite format and becoming incredibly common these days.
Click to expand...

Yes. I'm a big fan of that style.

Especially in a bigger contest. Head to head for the local league is fun as you have smack talk and bragging rights and such. But for a contest, you probably don't know the team you're facing and head to head isn't as big a deal. And it sucks to have the 2nd highest points that week and have the bad random luck of the draw and face the highest scoring team that week. With this, you'd get a W or L for the head to head, and a W for being in the top half of scores that week and a L if you're in teh bottom half.

So in the above example, you'd be 1-1 for the week instead of 0-1.
 
One sore spot with regards to contests, if residents of select states are not eligible to participate, please make it known up front. I forget which one it was (not FBG), but I stepped through an entire signup process, only to get face-palmed at the end saying that I could not play with all the other reindeer.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Deamon said:
I mean this sounds exactly like victory points scoring, no?

And victory points is by far my favourite format and becoming incredibly common these days.
Click to expand...

Yes. I'm a big fan of that style.

Especially in a bigger contest. Head to head for the local league is fun as you have smack talk and bragging rights and such. But for a contest, you probably don't know the team you're facing and head to head isn't as big a deal. And it sucks to have the 2nd highest points that week and have the bad random luck of the draw and face the highest scoring team that week. With this, you'd get a W or L for the head to head, and a W for being in the top half of scores that week and a L if you're in teh bottom half.

So in the above example, you'd be 1-1 for the week instead of 0-1.
Click to expand...
Ah ok. That's a different style of VP than I'm used to. Do you have any issues with simple normal vps? (2 for win, 1 for tie, 0 for loss, PLUS 2 for top 4 scoring team of the week, 1 for middle 4, 0 for bottom 4)

System is flawless and still takes head to head as the biggest factor but just eliminates a small amount of bad matchup luck. 7 of my 8 leagues use this exact scoring.
 
Deamon said:
Ah ok. That's a different style of VP than I'm used to. Do you have any issues with simple normal vps? (2 for win, 1 for tie, 0 for loss, PLUS 2 for top 4 scoring team of the week, 1 for middle 4, 0 for bottom 4)

System is flawless and still takes head to head as the biggest factor but just eliminates a small amount of bad matchup luck. 7 of my 8 leagues use this exact scoring.
Click to expand...

The only issue is the 3 options (top, middle, bottom) just adds another layer of complexity that makes it one more thing the reader has to understand. You have to remember, youre in the top 1% likely for understanding. The vast majority of people who'll play aren't as serious. So the simpler you can make something the better.

I'll keep looking at it.

Sleeper now is starting to do this in their scoring and it's super popular. https://support.sleeper.com/en/articles/3971690-extra-game-each-week-against-league-median
 
One thing I do like is keeping it simple with a W-L record.

With something like I'm thinking, you still view the record as W-L, there are just two ways to win or lose each week.

You can win or lose the head to head. And you can win by finishing in the top half of scores or lose by finishing in the bottom half of scores.

So each week you have two outcomes.

A team that scored the second highest points but had the bad luck of facing the highest scoring team that week would go 1-1. Instead of going 0-1 in a normal head to head only format.
 
I think the current format handles this with how playoff spots are awarded. 2 are for record and 2 are for points.

The format matching the FFPC is a big plus for me. I mostly play as warmup drafts for the Main Event.
 
What's y'all's opinion on doing a contest that had no head to head and only did total points?

Like Underdog does their best ball contests?

I personally like some element of head to head. But not completely head to head. But wondering what ya'll thought about total points only.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks y'all. I agree with you in I like the all play game with no byes. Makes sense.

One huge thing from the survey is that a ton of folks want something more than just head to head. And I get that too.

I'm interested in something simple like getting a win or loss from head to head but also using something where you can get a win if your score is in the top half of scores that week. Have you folks done any leagues like that?
Click to expand...
My home league is like this. Any given week a team gets a W/L for head to head and a W/L for top 6 or bottom 6 in points for that week. So we now end up with a 30 W/L season for a 15 week schedule.

I must say that when I first introduced this rule about 6 years ago, there was some push back and one guy actually quit over it. However, it’s been a great success and now loved by all. It really puts a dent into the randomness of head to head matchups. Example, this past season, after 6 weeks, I was 2-4 in HTH, but 6-0 in weekly scoring. So my record was 8-4 overall and 2nd in total points. I love this format.
 
Joe Bryant said:
msudaisy26 said:
If you go that route, imo you should just go to all play every week.
Click to expand...

Thanks. You'd rather have all play every week over just total points? Can you elaborate?
Click to expand...

Yes I would rather have all play every week over total points.

In my personal experience with all play and total points leagues, it usually doesn't change much with either system you use.

However we have had some people in our leagues that like to run stats and look at hypotheticals. On a few occasions we have had teams in a total points leagues when a team had three of four spike weeks put them in the playoffs, but if it was all play they wouldn't have made it. On the opposite end we have never seen an all play team make the playoffs that wasn't top 6 in the league in points.

It is a small sample size, but I think total points is kind of like head to head with a little less variance/luck, but all play is even less variance and luck than that. So head to head last, then total points, then all play way ahead of those two formats.
 
Joe Bryant said:
What's y'all's opinion on doing a contest that had no head to head and only did total points?

Like Underdog does their best ball contests?

I personally like some element of head to head. But not completely head to head. But wondering what ya'll thought about total points only.
Click to expand...
The head to head format requires teams to be consistent. There us some luck in matchups, but I do think the current playoff format mitigates this.

1 terrible week is also devastating in total points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
Footballguys Classic Apps Ready For 2023
Replies
30
Views
1K
Hurl Bruce
Hurl Bruce
Simon Shepherd
Footballguys Testing Team: recruiting!
Replies
7
Views
512
JAK Straw
J
Joe Bryant
  • Locked
Big News - The 2023 Footballguys Championship Is Live And Partnering With The NFFC
2
Replies
65
Views
3K
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top