Exactly.Yeah I’ve only ever heard redraft talk. Basic ESPN leagues usually.
Exactly.Yeah I’ve only ever heard redraft talk. Basic ESPN leagues usually.
Lot going on in here, great thread topic BnB.BassNBrew said:I initially wanted to start a thread on DFS, but will leave it more broad to include more people. I wanted to get the opinions of the regulars on the shark pool about daily fantasy football, but feel free to weigh in on season long. Would like to know what you season long contest players are seeing in the industry.
Three (maybe four) years ago DFS came long like gangbusters. I'm just not seeing the interest in it like I had in years past and noticed this sometime last year well prior to the pandemic. The DFS forum is practically a ghost town.The week 1 thread has 12 posts. Last year and the year before it was two pages long and five pages the year prior to that. Personally I won money until last year when I lost a small amount. Fan dual has pushed the rake to 19% which is insanity IMO. In years past I would have had $200 to $500 in play most weeks. This year it looks like I'll have 50 cents in play. I dropped my FBG subscription down a tier because the quite honestly the tools weren't making a significant difference and the season long content was just as helpful. Another tell tale sign to back off my playing was David Dodds leaving Fandual to play at a lower rake site. Maybe I should follow along, but I wonder if the whales have moved to these sites. Honestly been too lazy to follow along.
I suspect DFS will be a slowly sinking ship with only the people chasing the lottery pots remaining. It's probably done irreversible damage to the season long formats and they'll won't experience a big bounce back. Given our shorter attention spans, I suspect that most of these players leaving dfs will migrate to straight up game and prop betting as it becomes more legal. The grinders will also have more success as the rakes are significantly less.
"Why manage a season long team when you can have instant gratification putting together a weekly team?" will become
"Why put together a dozen weekly teams and wait a day for gratification when you can bet the over on Preston Williams receiving yards an win in the first half?"
Awesome news for you on the number upgrading. Appreciate the insight as I'm an old guy posting on a message board and certainly don't have the pulse of the current dfs crowd like you do. My read is based on the Shark Pool still thriving and the dfs forum fading and friends I know certainly backing off the level of dfs play.Forums are an odd thing. Momentum is a huge factor. The "nothing draws a crowd like a crowd" type thing. So I don't read too much at all into our DFS forums being quiet. We have a ton of subscribers that move up to the All Pro subscription to get the DFS content. We've never been down with the cheesy "lock of the week" type stuff for DFS so I don't see any reason we'd do a 180 and start promoting like that for sportsbook.
Hat's off to you for recognizing this. I fight the same thing in my industry. The difference in age between my customer base and myself is accelerating. It's a delicate balance between embracing change and doing the things that have made you successful for years. It's hard to take the risks to change when your business is still doing very well and generating revenue. I know some of the attempts I've made to chase change have failed, especially in the areas of internet marketing. Some of the changes my competitors have made to cater to the younger generation have done a disservice to their customers and we have been googling those customers up.Not enough. But that's changing. It'll be more a thing of "going where they are". The beauty is that's easy to do without changing what we're currently doing. I get encouraged as I've done a terrible job in the past of marketing to a younger audience. But the upside is we're kind of like the team that's thrown 3 interceptions in the first half and still leading by a field goal. Tons of room for improvement.
I think that's old people in general for all kinds of topics.Diehards that I’ve run across in my years of playing are losing interest. Could be a covid thing but the guys I thought would never quit have disengaged a lot from where they used to be.
Could be but they’re not all old. I’m just seeing less diehards, atleast in the dynasty leagues I’m in. Felt bigger a few years back, could be over saturation as well.I think that's old people in general for all kinds of topics.
This.could be over saturation as well.
I see both sides of this perspective. On one hand, I clearly think the older generation which is starting to naturally phase out is being replaced but not in quality.Joe Bryant said:Thanks. I don't see that as a factor at all. Young people might have a shorter attention span, but they're not stopping group activities. I've been super encouraged at how many young people are in the space. Fantasy Football used to be a dorky old guy thing. Now every college kid you see is in two leagues.
Understood. That's a super hardcore way to play. Those types of leagues are definitely fading in popularity. What I'm saying is those leagues fading doesn't mean fantasy football is fading.The leagues I’m in are dead compared to what they were even 2-3 years ago. And these are $250 entry, 32 teams, so the pot is there.
This is what I notice most (and maybe what makes me have an exagerrated view of things if I do). In what used one very active leagues, it now looks like very casual interest. You'd think bots are just submitting lineups these days. Having the experience of how it used to be,. She that's what makes me think it's worse than it actually is. Either that or it IS the way it's trending. Joe Bryant made an analogy like the high end camera industry is down but it doesn't mean interest in photography is. That's a good analogy but it's hard to say what that means. Maybe it is a sign things are healthier than what is diehards want to set the standard as. But it may also mean exactly what he said in that the high quality stuff is out the door and only the casual, passing interest is there.The leagues I’m in are dead compared to what they were even 2-3 years ago. And these are $250 entry, 32 teams, so the pot is there.
DFS is still illegal in my state so I completely tuned it out. But even with workarounds or if it was made legal tomorrow, I lost some trust in the major sites when the stories of in-house staff with access to all the data lineups were winning the pools. I am sure some has changed since, maybe not. Either way have never been interested.I got tired of the countless stories of monte carlo simulations, AI and statistical models being used by the "professionals" to win. I'd rather play lotto.
Welcome to 2020Didn't watch much of the afternoon games. I'll be honest. Not that into FB this year like in previous years.
Oh I’m sure it exists. But my guess is it’s not going to be made public by the folks who have gathered that data. That would seem to be very valuable info to have.I would be very curious to see detailed stats on FF / DFS / "regular gambling" participation among football viewers, broken down by age, demographics, gender, and so on. People playing for money, not playing for money, do people who consume more NFL content play more of these games, etc. Though I'm not sure that data exists.
The data exists but as Grove pointed out no one's going to just give it away. Eilers & Krejcik will probably sell it to you for a few grand. On the other hand, how specific do you want to get? Because the rough answers to most of your questions are pretty obvious/accessible. ~50 million people play fantasy football. ~10 million have ever played DFS, and a fraction of that are still currently active. (Legal) sports betting is smaller still but that's because it's only in a few states. It will quickly overtake DFS as it spreads nationwide. It's largely a white male hobby, DFS skews younger, etc. People who play for money consume a lot more content, and more inclined to pay for RedZone, etc.I would be very curious to see detailed stats on FF / DFS / "regular gambling" participation among football viewers, broken down by age, demographics, gender, and so on. People playing for money, not playing for money, do people who consume more NFL content play more of these games, etc. Though I'm not sure that data exists.
Obviously I meant "not freely available" when I said "doesn't exist". I'm sure the big $$ in fantasy sports, casinos, etc., all have this info. I just meant for my own perusal.The data exists but as Grove pointed out no one's going to just give it away. Eilers & Krejcik will probably sell it to you for a few grand. On the other hand, how specific do you want to get? Because the rough answers to most of your questions are pretty obvious/accessible. ~50 million people play fantasy football. ~10 million have ever played DFS, and a fraction of that are still currently active. (Legal) sports betting is smaller still but that's because it's only in a few states. It will quickly overtake DFS as it spreads nationwide. It's largely a white male hobby, DFS skews younger, etc. People who play for money consume a lot more content, and more inclined to pay for RedZone, etc.