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.
Edge Designation Implementation (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Gally
- Start date
MAC_32
Footballguy
Hankmoody
Footballguy
It's not MFL it's Fantasy Sharks, MFL just inputs from them. There was talk that Fantasy Sharks would just put all their "EDGE" guys at DE on their page to solve this, and that might still happen, I'm guessing this is just the first automated dump from initial team depth charts.
Hankmoody
Footballguy
Anyone want to hit the author up and see if they will add a field allowing us some kind of API input instead of using some random guy's list? If I could copy/paste my own or link to my own league's google doc this would interest me a lot more but I have no interest in explaining to my league "instead of trusting the FS donkey's list we're trusting a different random guy we don't know to create a list". It's an awesome concept and tool but needs a little customization.
Young 8
Footballguy
FAQ
Where do the positions come from?
Currently this list is built from Pro Football Focus positions.
Hankmoody
Footballguy
Irrelevant and illustrates my point - they aren't "our" designations. Why are we trusting one set of guys over a different set of guys on the internet? We're just going to have the same discussion with our rage vented toward PFF instead of MFL. Give me the ability to input my own changes and we can solve something and this tool becomes super helpful so I don't have to do it manually.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tick
Footballguy
Tick
Footballguy
Now I'm trying to figure out just how much this boosts DE value... I think it's a lot more significant after a day to think about it.
FBG's dynasty DE rankings:
Myles Garrett DE1
Chase Young DE2
Aaron Donald DE3
Danielle Hunter DE4
Joey Bosa DE5
Nick Bosa DE6
Haason Reddick DE7
Josh Allen DE8
Maxx Crosby DE9
Leonard Williams DE10
It gets grim pretty quickly... Young's not proven yet, so we're down to 3 reliable players at the position. How much are those guys worth now?
FBG's dynasty DE rankings:
Myles Garrett DE1
Chase Young DE2
Aaron Donald DE3
Nick Bosa DE6
Maxx Crosby DE9
Leonard Williams DE10
It gets grim pretty quickly... Young's not proven yet, so we're down to 3 reliable players at the position. How much are those guys worth now?
MAC_32
Footballguy
The pff system also doesn't whiplash year-to-year and scheme-to-scheme. Most NFL defense now are multiple, so the 3-4 classifications is a square peg round hole thing. Y'all do what you want to do, but our experience with this was a vast improvement.
tripp
Footballguy
Retweet if you agree. If not, no worries.
Thx,
Tripp
https://twitter.com/DynastyTripp/status/1525655156284604418?t=WsCRWplYjR7URqVoTDZPQQ&s=19
Thx,
Tripp
https://twitter.com/DynastyTripp/status/1525655156284604418?t=WsCRWplYjR7URqVoTDZPQQ&s=19
niagararapids
Footballguy
Just a few thoughts which I think I agree with @Hankmoodythe most on this subject.
Hope you understand where I am coming from @trippand why I think your letter might not be the best approach.
So for years MFL has relied on such companies as Rotoworld, Fantasy Sharks, Gary Davenport, and this new customization tool relies on PFF.
I personally think all of these systems are bad for MFL and they should not be relying on what someone who runs a fantasy site thinks a players position is or what their feelings are on a players true position.
All of these methods involve someone giving an opinion of where a player is designated and a lot of times these are made to balance out what we as dynasty IDP owners think will give equal points to different players to make sure everyone has a value and can be drafted in rookie drafts.
My personal feeling and what I think would be best in the long run would not to ask MFL to use any arbitrary system or any true position system.
What we should be asking for is that MFL uses the actual team depth charts and positional designations that are on each of their official websites in the roster section! This would be clear and actually designate a player where their team is putting them.
I checked a few teams and yes Bosa is listed as OLB at the Chargers official site. While on the other hand Hunter is still listed as DE on the Vikings official site. On the other hand Mafe is listed as OLB on the Seahawks site but was not changed in MFL at all from DE.
There is no rhyme or reason to Fantasy Sharks or Davenport and what they designate.
If MFL used the official websites instead of whichever random fantasy site then there would be no issues about fairness or balance or anything else and we would all be working with the same lists!
Yes some of these players listed as LB instead of DE would be less valuable but part of the drafting process is trying to make sure to draft 4-3 ends to ensure you get good value from your DL players.
I have seen it with Robert Quinn where he went from DE for the Rams to LB for the Rams when Wade Phillips took over (Mr. 3-4) and then to LB for the Bears and now back to DE for the Bears. It is part of the game and we all need to adjust to the defensive schemes.
This is why I try to draft players form Dallas or San Francisco or Cleveland or other such teams that will keep running a 4-3 defense and make players like Garrett, Lawrence and Nick Bosa more valuable as a true DE.
Hope that all makes sense and why MFL should go to official team designations!
Hope you understand where I am coming from @trippand why I think your letter might not be the best approach.
So for years MFL has relied on such companies as Rotoworld, Fantasy Sharks, Gary Davenport, and this new customization tool relies on PFF.
I personally think all of these systems are bad for MFL and they should not be relying on what someone who runs a fantasy site thinks a players position is or what their feelings are on a players true position.
All of these methods involve someone giving an opinion of where a player is designated and a lot of times these are made to balance out what we as dynasty IDP owners think will give equal points to different players to make sure everyone has a value and can be drafted in rookie drafts.
My personal feeling and what I think would be best in the long run would not to ask MFL to use any arbitrary system or any true position system.
What we should be asking for is that MFL uses the actual team depth charts and positional designations that are on each of their official websites in the roster section! This would be clear and actually designate a player where their team is putting them.
I checked a few teams and yes Bosa is listed as OLB at the Chargers official site. While on the other hand Hunter is still listed as DE on the Vikings official site. On the other hand Mafe is listed as OLB on the Seahawks site but was not changed in MFL at all from DE.
There is no rhyme or reason to Fantasy Sharks or Davenport and what they designate.
If MFL used the official websites instead of whichever random fantasy site then there would be no issues about fairness or balance or anything else and we would all be working with the same lists!
Yes some of these players listed as LB instead of DE would be less valuable but part of the drafting process is trying to make sure to draft 4-3 ends to ensure you get good value from your DL players.
I have seen it with Robert Quinn where he went from DE for the Rams to LB for the Rams when Wade Phillips took over (Mr. 3-4) and then to LB for the Bears and now back to DE for the Bears. It is part of the game and we all need to adjust to the defensive schemes.
This is why I try to draft players form Dallas or San Francisco or Cleveland or other such teams that will keep running a 4-3 defense and make players like Garrett, Lawrence and Nick Bosa more valuable as a true DE.
Hope that all makes sense and why MFL should go to official team designations!
Young 8
Footballguy
"It is part of the game and we all need to adjust to the defensive schemes"
What the hell are you talking about ? Do you realize most people here play Dynasty ?
3-4 OLB & 4-3 DE are EDGE players, all the other defensive linemen....are not.
PFF had this for years and now ROTOWORLD has it too while official Depth Charts are still stuck in the past.
MFL doesn't wanna do anything about ? Fine, just ask your commissioner to use Sticky True Position Tool or tell him to change players designation manually.
We just made the switch and couldn't be more happier that we don't have to deal with this non-sense anymore.
Last edited by a moderator:
niagararapids
Footballguy
Yes I play dynasty with IDP and have done so for 20+ years.
Part of dynasty is adjusting to whatever position a team assigns their player. This used to happen less and positions were more static until free agency became more predominant as it has over the past 5-10 years.
There is no such position as EDGE and it is just a made up fantasy thing by some websites to try to put equal value to a 4-3 DE and a 3-4 OLB.
Were Lawrence Taylor and Reggie White the same? Nope one was a LB and one was a DE. Of course White was always better in fantasy to have due to rareness of the DE position.
This was also the reason why workhorse RB got drafted early and QB super late because of rareness. The same goes for WR too as most people would rather draft a volume WR over a touchdown specialist nowadays as PPR has become the standard.
But yes I do understand the argument for why you would want Khalil Mack and Myles Garrett to be treated the same in fantasy as they are both sack specialists. Unfortunately they do play different positions even if they both line up against the OT in their schemes.
Part of dynasty is adjusting to whatever position a team assigns their player. This used to happen less and positions were more static until free agency became more predominant as it has over the past 5-10 years.
There is no such position as EDGE and it is just a made up fantasy thing by some websites to try to put equal value to a 4-3 DE and a 3-4 OLB.
Were Lawrence Taylor and Reggie White the same? Nope one was a LB and one was a DE. Of course White was always better in fantasy to have due to rareness of the DE position.
This was also the reason why workhorse RB got drafted early and QB super late because of rareness. The same goes for WR too as most people would rather draft a volume WR over a touchdown specialist nowadays as PPR has become the standard.
But yes I do understand the argument for why you would want Khalil Mack and Myles Garrett to be treated the same in fantasy as they are both sack specialists. Unfortunately they do play different positions even if they both line up against the OT in their schemes.
Tick
Footballguy
I strongly disagree. PFF should be the source - they're not a FF site, they're an NFL analysis site based on film study. Their position designations are based on a player's position on the field, verifiable by video and photos. The bolded above is not true - they designate a player where they want them to be for franchise tag reasons.
niagararapids
Footballguy
I don’t believe teams assign players based on where they want to franchise tag them. The NFLPA would have a field day suing teams if that were the case.
But let’s use a different example and exchange the word EDGE for the word SLOT.
We know there is a shortage of high scoring TE in fantasy so getting a Kelce or a Kittle is very valuable and gives a team an advantage.
If you study film and positional breakdown and everything that PFF does then you would realize that both Kelce and Hunter Renfrow line up in the SLOT for a majority of their plays. Adding more to that I would also classify Cooper Kupp and Tyreek Hill as SLOT also.
This would add a ton of players to the TE pool by reclassifying those WR as TE based on their true position on film.
Would anyone here who is an advocate for EDGE designations also be an advocate for SLOT designations to ensure we are classifying those offensive players with their true positions on the field?
I am guessing no and I also don’t see teams classifying someone like Renfrow as a TE just for franchise tag purposes either.
I do understand that I just gave an extreme example on offense but it is essentially the same argument people here are making for defense.
But let’s use a different example and exchange the word EDGE for the word SLOT.
We know there is a shortage of high scoring TE in fantasy so getting a Kelce or a Kittle is very valuable and gives a team an advantage.
If you study film and positional breakdown and everything that PFF does then you would realize that both Kelce and Hunter Renfrow line up in the SLOT for a majority of their plays. Adding more to that I would also classify Cooper Kupp and Tyreek Hill as SLOT also.
This would add a ton of players to the TE pool by reclassifying those WR as TE based on their true position on film.
Would anyone here who is an advocate for EDGE designations also be an advocate for SLOT designations to ensure we are classifying those offensive players with their true positions on the field?
I am guessing no and I also don’t see teams classifying someone like Renfrow as a TE just for franchise tag purposes either.
I do understand that I just gave an extreme example on offense but it is essentially the same argument people here are making for defense.
tripp
Footballguy
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, @niagararapids. I think using the information that the teams put out about their position designations is fine. Reality Sports Online is tweeting out today that that's how they do it. The example you gave - Boye Mafe at OLB - helps to illustrate what I'm after. I expected Mafe would begin at SAM in the Seahawks' system, so I'm not surprised that's how he's classified on their site. But on MFL? How could we know? Haason Reddick has been changed from DE to LB. Does MFL (or Fantasy Sharks) think he's a SAM in a 4-3 under? Or an OLB in a 3-4? I dislike the black-box approach.
I appreciate that relying on the idea of EDGE requires a mental leap. I see how it could be a barrier to entry for someone new to IDP. I feel sure, tho, that fantasy nerds didn't come up with it!
PFF, ESPN, and NFL,com have been using it for quite some time to compare and contrast prospects and veterans' performances, especially in light of the various college defensive schemes and unknown landing spots ahead of the draft.
I appreciate that relying on the idea of EDGE requires a mental leap. I see how it could be a barrier to entry for someone new to IDP. I feel sure, tho, that fantasy nerds didn't come up with it!
PFF, ESPN, and NFL,com have been using it for quite some time to compare and contrast prospects and veterans' performances, especially in light of the various college defensive schemes and unknown landing spots ahead of the draft.
Hankmoody
Footballguy
Or you could just make a balanced scoring system such that it doesn't matter if a guy is a LB or DE or DT he can still score the same. There are plenty of them out there. Only reason anyone even cares about this is because of the poorly weighted scoring systems which I personally love. They are one of the few true remaining advantages I get, because I pay attention to this stuff way more than my opponents and I act much quicker than they do to changes. Hell 1/2 my opponents don't even realize that Khalil Mack is a terrible guy to roster, they just keep trotting his 7.7 PPG out while I'm getting 15 x3 from off-ball LB starters.
Tick
Footballguy
MAC_32
Footballguy
Even with true position and big play scoring the lines don't cross until 50 players or so deep. The difference lies at the top of each position. I think the top tiers of edge are more valuable. Just be sure to secure your lb's before their scoring slides too much.
It's not so much the scoring as it is scarcity of players worth playing at a certain position. By taking Bosa, Hunter, Crosby, Reddick, Allen out of DE and making them LB you just made a very scarce position even scarcer. Our system has the same scoring and it is big play based. OLB's score a ton (TJ Watt as a LB was the top scoring player by far last year) so it is not about scoring more as an assigned DL vs LB. They would score the exact same regardless of where they are designated. But now there are a lot fewer DL players that score well with these changes.
My solution is to just give dual eligibility. That way the team owner can use them as a DL or LB depending on need. This only works if there is not difference in scoring across positions though (which is how my league is run).
As far as using the team website for designation - I read a couple years ago that those are many times put out by marketing type people and they don't typically get updated often so wherever a player is originally designated it usually statys that way regardless of the actual scheme they use. It's not a true "football" person making the designation. Also, if you think teams don't fudge those for franchise tag reasons to save money then you are a bit naïve.
Tick
Footballguy
I'm frustrated with their response to me... they said they use Fantasy Sharks depth charts... but from what Gary Davenport says, they tell him he can't switch the edges to DE... it seems they're telling him what to use for depth charts, then blaming his depth charts for anything people complain about.
MAC_32
Footballguy
Correct, which is why this is a MFL problem. They are not adapting to the reality of the NFL in which every defense is multiple.
rockaction
Footballguy
I've been saying this to Gally. They don't score enough in Zealots to chase them. Let them go and stream them and hope. That's what I'm going to do.Enderdog said:
Really. Here is the biggest factor in decision is no longer about 3-4 or 4-3. Those are only used on 23% of downs. And even how much is true with how they have weapons now. Nickel and dime are used 74% of the time and that is 4-2-5 or 4-1-6.
Thus really not a debate anymore. I changed for my home league as guys like Hunter, and Bosa will drop back how many times a game. Their job is pass rusher period. Too add they have been DE for years and are paid like DE and not LB.
mFL allows you to think for yourselves.. just do it. Couple clicks of buttons and done.
Thus really not a debate anymore. I changed for my home league as guys like Hunter, and Bosa will drop back how many times a game. Their job is pass rusher period. Too add they have been DE for years and are paid like DE and not LB.
mFL allows you to think for yourselves.. just do it. Couple clicks of buttons and done.
I just did a quick little tally to see how this shakes out and here is what I found:
In the top 100 scorers for that league there were a total of 26 IDP players (26%). Of those 26 there were 16 LB's (first was the #36 scorer), 4 DL's (first was #66), and 6 DB's (first was #83). When looking at a "starting lineup" number of players here is what I found:
The league starts 216 players (18 players x 12 teams). The requirements are 1 QB (12 starters), 1-5 RB (I counted it as 2.5 per team for 30 starters), 1-5 WR (I counted 4 per team for 48 starters), 1-5 TE's (I counted it as 1 for 12 starters) and the defense is 3 per position for 36 DL, 36LB, and 36DB's. Here is the actual distribution from 2021:
Total of the top 216 scorers (starter quality as 216 players start each week):
- QB - 31 in the top 216
- RB - 28 (under by 2 based on my average above)
- WR - 45 (-3)
- TE - 13 (+1)
- DL - 19 (-17) (this includes Reddick/Allen/Bosa/Crosby who are now LB's so it would be at 15 making it even worse now).
- LB - 38 (+2)
- DB - 43 (+7)
As you can see the distribution is way off for a balanced league. QB's are way to powerful although with only playing 1 per team it doesn't really matter. The real problem is that IDP is way under represented especially when you consider that highest scoring IDP was #36 overall and then two in the 40's, 3 in the 50's, 4 in the 60's, etc. So even though they are overall represented in the top 216 (starters) they are mostly on the back end so they don't influence the game as much as the top end offensive players. This is a problem with many IDP leagues and relegates the IDP side to afterthoughts most of the time.
So @rockaction's theory seems to make sense. DL is way underrepresented (as is the entire IDP side) in Zealots. My only response to that is when drafting in a rookie draft in the 3rd & 4th rounds it still makes sense to go after the "can't miss" DL or LB because they are likely to be long term starters where the equivalent offensive players in that area of the draft are a lot less likely to be a long term starter. So there is value in that.
The way my non-Zealots league handled this disparity was going to be big play scoring and breaking those big plays into smaller categories. By this I mean you get a lot of pts for a sack but a sack itself is only 3 pts. But a sack also gets you a QBH (worth 3), a TFL (worth 2), and a tackle (worth 1) so the whole play gets you 9 pts vs 1 pt for a normal tackle. So good edge players may not get the sack every time but they can get 3 or 4 QBH's in a game and that gives them 9 to 12 pts. They are also more likely to get TFL's on all their tackles making them actually worth three pts. It really helped with the boom/bust nature of IDP scoring. They still topped out well with end of season numbers but they were much more consistent week to week which is a benefit to everyone.
For comparison to the Zealots numbers above we had 2 IDP in the top 10 (a LB - TJ Watt & a DL - Donald) and 41% of IDP's in the top 100. The position distribution as shown above for Zealots was the following in this big play scoring league (this is a SF league so starters were based on 1.25 QB/2.25RB/2.25WR/1.25TE and for IDP it is 2 per position plus 1 flex so - 2.3DL/2.3LB/2.3DB):
- QB - 22 in the top 216 (should be 15)
- RB - 22 (should be 27)
- WR - 25 (should be 27)
- TE - 13 (should be 15)
- DL - 26 (should be 27-ish)
- LB - 33 (should be 27-ish)
- DB - 29 (should be 27-ish)
So although it's not perfect (and looking at a single year can be off because it might have had outlier performances to jump a position to be more or less represented) it does a fairly good job of making IDP's matter and making every position important to some degree. In this league everyone is usually close in offensive points (all the info on offense is easy to find is similar across the board) but the IDP side is what wins you championships as there is a large gap in teams defensive production. Is also helps that our scoring is so different than the typical "cheatsheet" basis so those are relatively useless and you have to do your own work to be successful (kind of like when FF started).
Take this info however you want and if you have any questions or concerns let me know. I highly recommend going to a big play scoring system to bring the IDP side equal to the offensive side. It makes for a much more interesting league.
ETA: The edge situation isn't as big of a deal in this type scoring because if you are a LB or DE the scoring is the same so you are relevant regardless. The only negative this does is if you built around a couple DE's that are now LB's (or vice versa) you now have to replace those. We have somewhat prevented that of being a huge issue by keeping the position constant (no matter what MFL does) for the duration of the contract for that player. So if you have Bosa under contract at DE he stays a DE until that contract expires. Once that happens he becomes the default position and when you acquire him you know you are acquiring him at that new position. We also can petition a league vote if you disagree with the change and a league vote can overturn the default position if it is a majority vote. We try to allow for max flexibility.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dacomish
Footballguy
I have set up a vote in my league to give the team managers the option to either keep the MFL designation as a default or can be changed to match what's on the NFL Team's Website Roster (I.E. D.Hunter is a LB on MFL and the VIkings list him as a DE) if the manager wants it changed. Its pretty unanimous so far to allow it.
We use DT/DE as DL, OLB/ILB as LB and CB/SS/FS as DB so it makes sense to offer the option to the managers.
We are a 16 team league and start 7 Def players (2 of each and 1 Flex) so there are a lot of IDP players rostered and looking at those rosters I would imagine I'm only going to have to change 10-15 players max. Mostly those DE's that nerfed to LB that are listed as DE's on their NFL team's site.
We use DT/DE as DL, OLB/ILB as LB and CB/SS/FS as DB so it makes sense to offer the option to the managers.
We are a 16 team league and start 7 Def players (2 of each and 1 Flex) so there are a lot of IDP players rostered and looking at those rosters I would imagine I'm only going to have to change 10-15 players max. Mostly those DE's that nerfed to LB that are listed as DE's on their NFL team's site.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is the correct answer. Give max flexibility to the owners and allow them to not get screwed out of having key guys at positions they planned for.
Dacomish
Footballguy
Yea I finally came off my antiquated "One must use MFL designations always" stance from when we drew up the rules 5 years ago....I guess I was just slower than others...lol.
And yea listening to all you in here helped me come to grips with my grumpy old man ways....You guys rock!
Tick
Footballguy
Some Zealots PPR league stuff I did last season:
I calculated VORP for all the positions using https://www.dynastynerds.com/how-to-calculate-idp-value-in-fantasy-football/ methods. It's basically an average of how much each starter in a position scores over the last starter in the position. I then normalized it - since RBs had the highest value, I divided all the numbers by the RB number. I got this for a normalized VORP by position:
Pos VORP Normalized
QB 0.06 0.42
RB 0.15 1.00
WR 0.13 0.85
TE 0.09 0.59
DE 0.08 0.50
LB 0.05 0.30
S 0.04 0.25
So, DEs weren't so bad - better than LBs and S because the 36th DE blows, and more valuable than QBs over baseline.
I'm still trying to figure out how to combine hit rates with those numbers to automate tiers, and I'm close, but I'm having a hard time figuring out to look at hit rates for top-12 (which are more predictive than top-24 or -36) vs. baselines of top-36... still a work in progress.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tick
Footballguy
Balls, I feared that might happen. I copied and pasted it very poorly into an Excel sheet about a month ago... I'll see if I can figure out a way to share it in a readable format.
ETA: Oof, PM me if you want me to send it to you... it looks okay in Excel but I can't easily clean it up.
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction
Footballguy
this sounds like a mistake. It should be the best player minus an average replacement player, really. I thought that’s how VORP was done. Not the worst player starting, but a replacement-level player, making VORP the value over an average replacement.
rockaction
Footballguy
Maybe I’m wrong in that. But it doesn’t seem to me you replace the worst starter, but rather, what the average replacement would bring to bear.
rockaction
Footballguy
“Many equations and methods exist for finding the replacement level, but most will set the level somewhere around 80% of the league average, in terms of runs per out“
from Wiki for offensive VORP
from Wiki for offensive VORP
Wow that was weird. You quoted me but the quote wasn't from me. hahahaha. I was like, I don't remember ever writing that.....hahaha
rockaction
Footballguy
Huh. That happens sometimes from my phone. I've been quoted before by others, too, and I haven't said anything remotely like what was quoted.
Sorry, man.
I'm just wondering if the VORP isn't more accurate if you take a certain percentage of all of the starters, average them, and then subtract a little from that, like in baseball.
Dacomish
Footballguy
League unanimously approved the measure. So far only changed 3 players (D. Hunter, C.Jones, J.Allen all from LB back to DE) but I gave them a deadline of the Sunday prior to the start of the regular season to request changes. I'm expecting only a few more more from this point, most likely LB back to DE like Bosa and Crosby.
As I think about suggesting something similar to my league, the first objection might be that it creates a supervision problem. As in, how do we know that the NFL Team's Website Roster doesn't get changed? Who is going to monitor that? Does that change 1. during the offseason, in which case you'd have to wait until near opening day to be sure, and 2. during the season itself? Curious how that might be handled.
Dacomish
Footballguy
honestly don't know how often NFL roster positions change, until now never really scoured and tracked it. I guess I'll just deal with it on a case by case basis, in the end its about trying to be as "true position" as possible and all the guys in my league are pretty laid back and I don't see an issue if it comes up. Doing it with either MFL as default or the team roster then at least it gives the team owner the choice to be flexible.
Given how few I expect to have to change (24 hours in and only 4 overall) I may do a cursory check near the deadline I set of the weekend before the season to see if anything changes and go from there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Be nice if MFL would either allow to set up a custom "Edge" position for leagues to make use of (suppose there are ways to work around this like using Punter for Edge or something like that) or allow for dual position eligibility, such as players being eligible for either DL or LB assuming the league doesn't have different scoring rules for the different positions.
rockaction
Footballguy
Huge assumption. I know Zealots has different scoring for different positions. I'm sure many leagues also do. I think that's a big problem with implementing EDGE designation.
MFL does allow you to change the position from the default. They don't really need to add "edge" as a position as you can decide as a league how you want to handle it and then manually switch positions as necessary. I am not absolving MFL from responsibility of doing this. I am only stating that you can use the manual change work around to change things as you see fit as a league.
Why do you see this as a supervision problem? The idea is to give flexibility to the owners so their team isn't screwed by random position changes that don't make sense. All of the discussion regarding edge designations is in the realm of reasonable. What are you trying to necessarily prevent? If the NFL changes the position mid season back to LB/DE for some reason it doesn't really change the fact that you as a league decided it was ok to change a guy to either or at the beginning of the season. What "advantage" do you see to this making the supervision part a problem?
The way we handle these types of things is to make things valid for the season. So it doesn't matter if the NFL team site or MFL changes mid season. What you draft a guy at is what his position is for the year. No reason to change mid season and since it is clear up front there is no reason for anybody to worry about it.
Now if someone changed from DE to QB and was now playing QB every week then there would be a special situation that we would address at the time it happens and make sure we make an equitable change. There is always the ability to adjust on the fly if something off the wall happens. Bottom line is realizing the intent of this situation which is to make sure people are blindsided by something mid stream. No real advantage to be gained if you decide before the season the position designation and everyone knows it lasts the year and what it is.
Dacomish
Footballguy
Yes that is my vision, they have until the Sunday prior to the season to decide, and once we get into the season I'm not doing updates unless a player changes NFL teams and the system causing a position change somehow then I would look at that. Those types of case by case basis are pretty few and far between once we get in-season so that's not a big issue with me. Like I said in my OP on the subject I really don't expect much more than 10-15 total changes in the league.
