Fantasy Home Field Advantage (1 Viewer)

[Mr.Underhill]

yeah, i tried to take the civil approach... what was I thinking? my last parting thought on this topic/thread is you chose to participate in this thread (not start it), be as you wish to be seem

Nice try. Critical comments about my use of analogy, which has nothing to do with the topic of debate, but you were being civil?Don't worry. I can take it. But apparently you can't. So when I turn the tables and criticize your use of a strawman argument, then all of a sudden I am being uncivil.Much like with the luck argument and the windmill assertion, there is a tremendous amount of hypocrisy in this this thread. You do it and it's OK. I do it and it's wrong.

 

[[icon]]

they're already factored into the real NFL scores

And that where you are wrong.

jesus...

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I'm going to assume this is important since there are so many posts.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Your initial claim about what fantasy football "is" is nonsensical. It is what people make it be with their rules. Your inference actually is that it must be this narrow thing which you think it should be. So now you're the fantasy football police trying to keep the fantasy gene pool free from undesirable mutation. So then what defines undesirable? Well, you do. We know that now.

Honestly, this is what the entire thread boils down to and it should just end. There's two sides. 1. You like whatever rule it is being discussed, and you would play in a league that uses said rule.

2. You think whatever rule is an abomination to the fantasy gods and would avoid a league that uses said rule.

(And I guess there's a third where you don't really give a crap.)

Neither group has to affect the other. Neither way is better or the right way. Both can live and play fantasy in peace and harmony. This is turning into a holy war, and quite frankly, it's ridiculous.

The very voice of wisdom. That is exactly what is going on here.Now, I am combative. I make no apologies for that. But I never swing first. So I ask anyone to review the thread and consider which side started the bashing.

I don't recall reading any pro-HFA posters doing anything other than confirming that they use it with maybe a polite explanation of why. So then where are the posters who are insulting someone else's position on the use or non-use of a HFA rule?

you like his explanation....?....looks a lot like mine just worded slightly different..."Mr U....you keep asking people to try and explain/justify something to you that doesn't really need explaining or justifying....it's pretty simple

1. you think it's ok to give a team points in fantasy football for doing absolutely NOTHING....

2. most people think thats ####ing stupid...."

I have also said from the get go that people can choose whatever rules they want in whatever leagues they want to be in .....all the while not insulting anybody....calling the rule stupid, not the person....nobody has said you can't do something different in this hobby.....people have just said that the HFA rule and getting free points for no reason in and of itself is kinda stupid dumb not really the greatest rule that most like to have in their leagues.....

 

[[icon]]

I'm going to assume this is important since there are so many posts.

I really really really hope this Mr Underhill guy never finds the FFA. I'm pretty sure we've got another timschochet/Christo on our hands.

 

[SWC]

i think the problem is that you want to keep defending it by saying it replicates something that is in the real nfl game but is not already reflected in the fantasy game and most of us disagree with you because our players who commprise our team are sometimes home and sometimes away so they get the advantage or disadvantage relfected in there scores so it is there and what i think you do when you add arbitrary advantages is influence the fantasy game based on factors that 1 can not be quantified and 2 are already reflected in player scores if indeed they do exist and 3 you basically eliminate a lot of strategy in stashing hurt players and picking up budding guys and make winning in the regular season the most important thing in the world so i do not buy it and so basically even though you keep saying that your whole argument is you just like it and some do not you keep on trying to then provide some backup that validates it if you like it fine just leave it at that but we get to say if we think the stats basis you are throwing out there is junk and we have so in the end lets all go get hammered and forget about it and then take it to the bank tomorrow when everyone has drank it off brohans

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Yet, that's exactly what goes on in home field advantage formats. We entertain more luck in order to make our fantasy league look a little more like the NFL.

So... because there is some luck in the exclusive roster (which, again, doesn't actually GIVE points away arbitrarily), you're using that to justify handing out points based on a coin flip? (you really should look into auction leagues, btw). Why stop there? Let's add random INJURIES! I mean, they're already factored into the real NFL scores, but that didn't stop you guys with HFA. Maybe you guys could get a 20 sided die and each week you have an injury party. Everyone can wear jerseys and shoulder pads and drink Gatorade. You each randomly pick a player on your opponent's roster, then roll a 20 sided die. The outcome determines the injury:

1-14: No effect

15: Ankle sprain -3 points that week

16: Turf Toe : 10% penalty for next 4 weeks

17: Concussion: Player lost for this and next week

18: ACL Tear: Player lost for next 16 weeks (in dynasty)

19: DWI: Player lost for 4 weeks (Reduced to 2 weels if you can roll an even number on a subsequent roll)

20: BIG CONTRACT! : Player scoring reduced by 30% for the next 16 weeks.

I LOVE MAGIC FOOTBALL!

And that where you are wrong. Both NFL teams can't enjoy HFA at the same time, can they?So if two fantasy owners in a H2H league have rosters composed of a mixture of home and away players, they both enjoyed the fruits and the curses of HFA within their roster, correct? So both teams enjoyed the bonuses of HFA and both teams suffered the consequences of it. Is that in dispute?

Now, compare that to an NFL H2H match-up where only one team enjoys HFA. Both teams don't equally share that risk in that H2H match-up.

So now let's take your injury example. Do both NFL teams suffer injury risk in a game? Yes. Do both fantasy teams suffer injury risk in a game? Yes. So then there is no need to create an injury risk mechanism because it works wonderfully well already.

What is so hard to get about this?

I get that you don't like it. You've said that over and over. But what's so hard to understand about it?

Now, if you understand it, but don't like it, then why are you posting here? I've never argued that you should like it or need to have it. I've merely defended the use by those who like to.

All you have to do is say you don't like it and walk away. Why do you insist on telling someone who does like it that it's silly or stupid? It's nothing more than a matter of preference. <----- Which is what I've been saying all along.

maybe because this is what the original poster was asking for......

 

[packseasontix]

I guess people keep saying its a coin flip, for HFA in the playoffs this is not a coin flip. If a league bases schedules off the previous years performances that is not a coin flip for instance.

Quite a few people have also stated they only use this for the playoffs as well. Some people are completely against that which is fine.

In the end I don't understand the need to act like HFA is like dungeons and dragons. This is one little piece certain leagues like to add to spice things up, they are not creating elaborate rules and scoring systems to mirror real-life. You can state over and over that you only want to reward on the field stats which is fine, but then I say I only want to reward on the field PRODUCTION.

I could simply derail this conversation into a stats line vs true production if its needed to show that every rule/scoring is "silly" when you really think about it. I think what got underhill so frustrated with a few of the reponses is the underhanded tone 2 or 3 posters responded with seemingly trying to look down at those who dare add anything other than a simple stat line into FFB.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I guess people keep saying its a coin flip, for HFA in the playoffs this is not a coin flip. If a league bases schedules off the previous years performances that is not a coin flip for instance.

Quite a few people have also stated they only use this for the playoffs as well. Some people are completely against that which is fine.

In the end I don't understand the need to act like HFA is like dungeons and dragons. This is one little piece certain leagues like to add to spice things up, they are not creating elaborate rules and scoring systems to mirror real-life. You can state over and over that you only want to reward on the field stats which is fine, but then I say I only want to reward on the field PRODUCTION.

I could simply derail this conversation into a stats line vs true production if its needed to show that every rule/scoring is "silly" when you really think about it. I think what got underhill so frustrated with a few of the reponses is the underhanded tone 2 or 3 posters responded with seemingly trying to look down at those who dare add anything other than a simple stat line into FFB.

as one of those 2 or 3 posters is was never about looking down, insulting, or demeaning anyone....it was about:1. the rule, not the people using the rule....

2. responding/giving feedback/opinions to what the original poster was asking...

 

[Mr.Underhill]

Mr U....you keep asking people to try and explain/justify something to you that doesn't really need explaining or justifying....it's pretty simple

1. you think it's ok to give a team points in fantasy football for doing absolutely NOTHING....

2. most people think thats ####ing stupid....

not trying to sound like a doosh or whatever, but if you really don't get the concept that most people aren't real cool with just giving out free points in their fantasy football matchups, then there is not much else to say...

it's got nothing to do with luck vs skill or Vegas or some "phenomenon" or bad ### pancake and bacon sandwich eating grandma brohans....

you tried to make fun of me when I said I just want to line my team up against the other guys team and see whose team is best that week......well that's really what it's all about isn't it?....if I was to actually lose a head to head game by 2 points but then actually end up winning cause I got 3 points for being the "home" team, I would want to puke....

You realize that this doesn't jive with this, right?But I'm sorry if you felt I was trying to make fun of you. It couldn't be that you were insulting or demeaning to anyone who held a contrary opinion would it? But when you get called out, well, then someone's trying to make fun of you?

It's like this. HFA, like any other fantasy stat. Is a matter of preference. It's all made-up, arbitrary BS. All of it.

So someone likes to have HFA in their league. So what? But it isn't enough for you to say it's not for you. You've got to take a hard-line position and not only say it isn't your thing, but say why it isn't your thing. That's not a big deal, either. Except that when you take a hard-line position, insult people who feel otherwise, and then toss out some BS reason for why your way is better, you're going to get called out on it. Which is what happened.

So you can keep on posting and I'll keep on dismantling your arguments till I get bored. Like when you resort back to your H2H argument and claim that losing your H2H match-up that week due to HFA is somehow anathema because you want to see who's lineup is best that week. All you're doing is arbitrarily choosing what you think qualifies as "best". But I've already broken down how your belief that you won that H2H match-up because of skill isn't true because of your draft and exclusive roster rules that defined how you composed your roster. So you didn't prove who's lineup was "best" by skill. There was so much luck involved in putting those particular players on your roster in the first place, how could you possibly freakin' enjoy that?

Mr. U...1. not once in any of my posts did I insult or demean anyone.....I called the rule stupid...not the people that use it

You're not stupid, your beliefs are. Don't be insulted.

2. you acted like and keep acting like just wanting to see who team is better that week is a bad thing...cause it's all luck anyway right...so why do we even play...?

No, I don't think it's a bad thing. I DARE you to quote me where I said that. I play exclusively in H2H leagues now. But I understand that the uncertainty is part of the fun. And overcoming odds against you, even if you need luck to do so, is exciting.

What I won't do is revel in that uncertainty and then dismiss some rule change idea simply because it involves uncertainty. Because that would be intellectually inconsistent of me. If it's too much uncertainty for me, I just say so. I don't pretend that the status quo is somehow all about skill when it obviously isn't.

3. you initially confused me with somebody else when talking about skill vs. luck.....and then did it again after I corrected you...up until that point I never even used the words skill and luck in any of my posts....and even stated later that both are part of fantasy football...

I may have confused you with someone else. If I did, then I apologize, seriously. It's not intentional, but when you're fending off two or three opponents at the same time and trying to get home to the family, it can happen.

But you kept on saying you wanted to see who was best. Well, best according to what measure? Scoring, right? So then if the rules allow HFA, then you still know who was best each week, right? Because the rules define what wins and loses. Now, if it's some psychological need for validation, simply look at your score vs. the other guy's and see if his HFA cost you the win. If it did, then know you played better and pat yourself on the back but bad luck bit you. Now, if bad luck biting you just kills you, again, we go back to the point of why are you in a H2H league. The same thing happens in the NFL. Sometimes the best team doesn't win. But the team with the most points always does.

You don't have to like that. You don't have to use it in your league. But who in the hell do you think you are to tell someone else that they are silly for wanting to add that element into their league?

4. your qoute..."It's like this. HFA, like any other fantasy stat. Is a matter of preference. It's all made-up, arbitrary BS. All of it"..........the bolded part is the problem...IT IS NOT A FANTASY "STAT"

Yes. It is. If you put it in scoring, by definition it's a fantasy stat. Fantasy stat as opposed to an NFL box score stat. Your league rules define what stats you use. What an extra kicker scores is the stat we use for HFA. It's that simple.

You're implied assertion seems to mimic icon's in that it's only proper to use individual stats from a box score in fantasy football scoring. It's OK that you prefer that to be the case. But that doesn't make that preference right or wrong. But that extra kicker's stats are in the box score, so we are using real stats.

Now, if your next argument is that we abuse the stat in some way by calling it HFA, I ask you if we are really abusing it anymore than you do by pretending that a QB that throws for more yards than another was the "best" QB of the two that day. Well, you can only say that if you define "best" as "throwing for more yards". That's fine. The NFL determines winners and losers by a scoreboard, not box scores. So your decision to reward yards with points is no more legitimate than is deciding to let a home team start an extra kicker.

5. I said people can have whatever rules they want in their leagues, even stupid ones, it doesn't matter to me. It is a matter of preference, some chose stupid rules, some don't. With HFA there is no "position" to defend, it's simply about free points vs. no free points.

How gracious of you. And non-insulting too. See my response to your point No. 1.

So what's wrong with free points again? Particularly if you get them one week and give them another.

6. And I hate to burst your bubble but I never really felt like you "called me out"....we were having a written discussion...if what you were doing is "calling" me out, you might need to reevaluate....or I may need to get more sensitive....one of the two...

Well, you got pretty defensive... But if you didn't feel called out, good for you. I believe you. You weren't called out. All better now?

7. The last part of your post above really indicates that you don't think there is any skill in this hobby....you couldn't be more wrong....

No, there is skill. But many of our formats and rules limit how much influence that skill can bring to bear. The funny thing is that in leagues where owners are similarly skilled but that use H2H, drafts, etc. in their rules, the role of luck in determining outcomes is actually magnified. The more similar teams are in a H2H league in terms of skill, then luck becomes the primary difference maker.

Example, play with noobs, you have a greater chance of winning the league than the noobs. Play with experts, your chances plummet. Not because they are better than you, but their equal skill throws it right back into a game of luck.

8. I realize some of what I just posted might be considered an arguement....so I guess ths is where the dismantling starts....

It has.

to everybody else....mostly those that use HFA...if you took it like Mr. U did that I was insulting you or demeaning you...I'm sorry you took it that way.....it's not about you...it's about the free point fairy....

Just can't resist that insult, can you? Free points fairy. Hmm. I guess that's a compliment intended to promote debate and discussion.

My comments in red.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

So I was correct in that it is randomly assigned and not based in any way on actual NFL stats/scoring. Good.

Now.. another Question for the HFA'ers...

TRUE OR FALSE: The real NFL Home Field Advantage is already reflected in the statistical outcome of the NFL Games.

Bump

patiently waiting for Mr U's response to this.....

bump.whole lotta words about nothin being typed. whole lotta questions not being answered.

brohan

You back? It's been a while since you posted. Oh, you had things to do? Me too. Thought I might head home and spend some time with the family before lacing up the gloves again.Why you so mad, butcher boy? Is it that someone doesn't look at HFA like you do? Why so angry that someone has a different opinion? Or is it that someone had the nerve to speak up in favor of it after you dogged it? Was it the defiance, then? Or was it that someone asked you why you thought a certain way about something and you couldn't really defend it?

Comeon, Brohan. Be honest. Something made you come back in here and cheer the others on. What was it?

I had to come back to try and get the point that you completely missed when it sailed right over your head and landed on the opposite corner of the message boards.

Stick around. Maybe someone will finally give me the comeuppance you are so fervently wishing for.Might want to offer some compensation though since you're having them carry your water.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

Mr. Underhill may have just defended his position better than any poster I've ever seen on these boards, and I actually started reading these since the spring of 2001. All he really said is he likes the free point fairy.

You mean like when you keep saying you don't like it? Your skills at debate scintillate!

Icon, SWC, and stinkinref really don't seem to grasp the context that they are straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel. No idea what this means. Why does that not surprise me?

In other words...they play a H2H schedule which can give a team who is the second lowest scoring team in a week a victory because the luck of the draw pitted that team against the team who scored the least amount of points that week. Anyone with any time in FFhas seen this occur. Happens all the time, what's the point?

Letme ask you, stinkinref, do you complain when you win a h2h matchup but finish in the bottom half of your league in scoring? Don't know, never complain when I win and have never finished in the bottom half of scoring. You've never had a week where you were in the bottom half of your league in scoring for that week?

Isn't that luck that can be avoided by simply getting rid of the h2h schedule and go with a top half/bottom half system that determines victories and losses? No...this will not emilinate luck from fantasy football. There's a difference in elimination versus lessening. There you go with the strawman again. He never said it eliminates luck. But that format does increase the impact skill differences have in the outcome. Which is why you're refuting an argument he didn't make.

That is what MR.Underhill has smoked you 3 guys on and you all don't see it. Can't see thru all the smoke, Lem.

You don't like HFA idea? Fine! No problem. Correct!

But please see the hypocrisy of the reasons why you do not like it. I do not see any hypocrisy in just simply not liking the free point fairy. Some people like her and good for them. Most hypocrites don't see their hypocrisy.

Just my opinion from an entertained outsider. Thanks for sharing. Thanks for sharing your sarcasm. You never insult anyone, do you?

Brilliant posts Mr.Underhill... But I agree that you should just step away now...Correct quit while you think you are ahead.

My comments in red.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

(just fyi...not all of your response was in red for those just looking at the red parts...)

Mr U...when speaking of the free point fairy....that was not calling you that...it was an expression for whatever the process is of magically awarding the free points.....obviously that was taken out of context early in the discussion so I can now see why you thought some of what I said was insulting...not the case

never said anybody was stupid....if they think because they use the rule that that means I think they are stupid....they are wrong...but I can't fix that

your quote: "You don't have to like that. You don't have to use it in your league. But who in the hell do you think you are to tell someone else that they are silly for wanting to add that element into their league?"

my answer to your quote/question: is that I was responding to what the original poster of this thread was asking.....you may have totally lost sight of the orginal post in your passion to have us agree with you....

in leagues that award these points before the matchup even starts...it is not a stat...it's an award...

in "fantasy" football a QB that throws for more yards is the better QB that day....(obviously depending on what other stats are accumulated)....

to everybody, most importantly the OP, use it or don't use it....you should have enough info in here to make your decision....

 

[DexterDew]

yeah, i tried to take the civil approach... what was I thinking? my last parting thought on this topic/thread is you chose to participate in this thread (not start it), be as you wish to be seem

Nice try. Critical comments about my use of analogy, which has nothing to do with the topic of debate, but you were being civil?Don't worry. I can take it. But apparently you can't. So when I turn the tables and criticize your use of a strawman argument, then all of a sudden I am being uncivil.Much like with the luck argument and the windmill assertion, there is a tremendous amount of hypocrisy in this this thread. You do it and it's OK. I do it and it's wrong.

Oh I could have dissected your spurious argument with red pen (or font) to dust, but chose not to for a number of reasons, the most obvious being that your lack of civility is not really worth it. Trust me when I say that if I wanted to be critcal, you gave me enough material to write a dissertation on "The Modern Belief Disconfirmation Paradigm: Why the Abuse of Anonymity on the Internet Portends to an Uncivil Society".When I said your "use of similies is substandard" I was being polite, you should feel fortunate. I could have easlity pointed out that analogies and similies are different, but i wouldn't want to make you look the fool, you don't really need any help.... bathtub.

 

[[icon]]

To clarify I have been stating the point repeatedly because I've been countering the absurd assertions that this random point assessment for HFA is no different than adding PPR.... or yardage bonuses.... or the "luck factor" associated with draft placements. I take issue that it's a logical move toward "realism" given it's presence in the real NFL (for reasons already stated). People are certainly more than able to inject increased levels of luck into the game and decrease the odds of rewarding the person who is "better" at the pure form of the game (as in more successful at assessing the EOY value of the player pool and it's value in the given scoring system). I take no issue with that if you guys wish to play in a league like that. Just don't try to make any of the analogies that giving points based on a random draw is the same thing as any points indicative of box score results.... and don't try to imply that it's a justifiable move because of HFA in real NFL games. Both of those assertions are baseless at best and foolish at worst. If you simply want to reduce this to a "We simply prefer directly gifting 3 points based on random assignment of "home" team status" I'll accept that as a viable stance. I think it foolishly dilutes the remaining skill factor of the game further, but hey... it's a free country.

Bump

 

[packseasontix]

People are certainly more than able to inject increased levels of luck into the game and decrease the odds of rewarding the person who is "better" at the pure form of the game (as in more successful at assessing the EOY value of the player pool and it's value in the given scoring system). I take no issue with that if you guys wish to play in a league like that. Just don't try to make any of the analogies that giving points based on a random draw is the same thing as any points indicative of box score results.... and don't try to imply that it's a justifiable move because of HFA in real NFL games. Both of those assertions are baseless at best and foolish at worst. .

Bump

First HFA once again does not have to be randomly assigned and can be given based on previous year or current year performance.Second you talk about end of year value of a player based on a scoring system. I know this was brought up but what about H2H scoring then? I could in theory pick the best QB, RB, WRs, TE, K, Def but still lose either all my games or in the playoffs right away. If your stance is truly about skill shouldn't we get ride of the H2H at least then?

I know H2H is added for the fun factor of 1 opponent but there is not much of a difference in HFA. You can reasonably stretch the conversation to say I have Rodgers on bye and you have Brady against the Browns. Now if we were in an all play league no big deal it mostly balances out, in a h2h league it is very unfair though.

I know you will say well it doesn't actually give points to you though it's a bye week, well the point is if your truly after who can asses the better EOY value than you already are not in the correct format. I know your also thinking that this only adds another layer of "luck" but you keep forgetting the home field advantage can be determined by average points for average difference for instance thus reducing the luck and actually reinforcing the teams that produce high scores week after week.

 

[packseasontix]

Letme ask you, stinkinref, do you complain when you win a h2h matchup but finish in the bottom half of your league in scoring? Don't know, never complain when I win and have never finished in the bottom half of scoring.

If you have played in enough leagues you would have finished in the bottom half at least 1 or 2 times. You should go pro and be writing all the columns on who to pick and trade for.

when he said finished in the bottom half of scoring...I thought he meant for the season, not just one particular week.....cause I fo sho have been the lowest scoring team on a given week a few dozen times probably....icon really keeps saying it over and over and I don't think there is really any way to make it more clear....

I am talking about a whole season, how many dynasty and redraft leguesafe are you in? I can believe someone would have never finished in the bottom half ever, even knowing everything just injuries alone could derail your whole team in a season.

 

[packseasontix]

I guess people keep saying its a coin flip, for HFA in the playoffs this is not a coin flip. If a league bases schedules off the previous years performances that is not a coin flip for instance.

Quite a few people have also stated they only use this for the playoffs as well. Some people are completely against that which is fine.

In the end I don't understand the need to act like HFA is like dungeons and dragons. This is one little piece certain leagues like to add to spice things up, they are not creating elaborate rules and scoring systems to mirror real-life. You can state over and over that you only want to reward on the field stats which is fine, but then I say I only want to reward on the field PRODUCTION.

I could simply derail this conversation into a stats line vs true production if its needed to show that every rule/scoring is "silly" when you really think about it. I think what got underhill so frustrated with a few of the reponses is the underhanded tone 2 or 3 posters responded with seemingly trying to look down at those who dare add anything other than a simple stat line into FFB.

as one of those 2 or 3 posters is was never about looking down, insulting, or demeaning anyone....it was about:1. the rule, not the people using the rule....

2. responding/giving feedback/opinions to what the original poster was asking...

You called the idea ;$:&/ing stupid, sorry but that is very demeaning towards the person bring up the idea. Afterall he is 1 not your friend most likely to say that to and 2 he is not talking about robbing a bank or jumping off the empire state building. You might think its not a good idea but you took it to the next level with a hostile tone.Not saying I haven't ever been demeaning towards people as well ever but at least be able to own up to it being somewhat of a d of a move by saying it

 

[Mr.Underhill]

Letme ask you, stinkinref, do you complain when you win a h2h matchup but finish in the bottom half of your league in scoring? Don't know, never complain when I win and have never finished in the bottom half of scoring.

If you have played in enough leagues you would have finished in the bottom half at least 1 or 2 times. You should go pro and be writing all the columns on who to pick and trade for.

when he said finished in the bottom half of scoring...I thought he meant for the season, not just one particular week.....cause I fo sho have been the lowest scoring team on a given week a few dozen times probably....icon really keeps saying it over and over and I don't think there is really any way to make it more clear....

He's made it very clear. He prefers that teams can only receive points derived from individual stats that are found in the box score.The problem is that this merely states a preference and in no way advances the argument against HFA.

His argument is essentially that HFA sucks because he doesn't like it.

Now, he sometimes throws in an unproven assertion (which is merely a self-serving "purist" argument) that for some reason his preference in scoring "is the way it's supposed to be". Of course, this is bunk. It's merely an assertion of some imagined authority. It's was the same argument advanced when someone offered to introduce a bonus for a 100 yard rushing game in someone's TD only league 20 years ago.

So, he keeps repeating over and over again his preference while claiming that people aren't understanding him. But we do. What he believes but won't actually say is that if you think differently than he, you are in error. He knows you are in error. And how does he know this? Because you think differently than he. You don't like what he likes, therefore you are wrong.

That's why he keeps rehashing the box score point, which is simply restating the difference, over and over. He thinks that difference is the proof when it's nothing more than a preference.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

the original poster asked what people thought of the rule....he was looking for opinions....

I gave mine....

has nothing to do with the people who use it or don't use the rule.....wasn't directed at anybody....not the OP, not Mr. U...not you...wasn't meant to be hostile to anyone just a description of how dumb I think it is...

would it made a difference if i said ####ing stupid with a cherry on top.....would that help

 

[Mr.Underhill]

yeah, i tried to take the civil approach... what was I thinking?

my last parting thought on this topic/thread is you chose to participate in this thread (not start it), be as you wish to be seem

Nice try. Critical comments about my use of analogy, which has nothing to do with the topic of debate, but you were being civil?Don't worry. I can take it. But apparently you can't. So when I turn the tables and criticize your use of a strawman argument, then all of a sudden I am being uncivil.

Much like with the luck argument and the windmill assertion, there is a tremendous amount of hypocrisy in this this thread. You do it and it's OK. I do it and it's wrong.

Oh I could have dissected your spurious argument with red pen (or font) to dust, but chose not to for a number of reasons, the most obvious being that your lack of civility is not really worth it. Trust me when I say that if I wanted to be critcal, you gave me enough material to write a dissertation on "The Modern Belief Disconfirmation Paradigm: Why the Abuse of Anonymity on the Internet Portends to an Uncivil Society".When I said your "use of similies is substandard" I was being polite, you should feel fortunate. I could have easlity pointed out that analogies and similies are different, but i wouldn't want to make you look the fool, you don't really need any help.... bathtub.

No, you were being snide. This most recent post merely shows you to be a liar and a hypocrite on that point. Better that you were open about it than to pretend it is otherwise.But I'm being polite when I say that because, if I follow your example, "polite" apparently means that I could have said worse about you.

Suffice it to say you were as insulted by my response as I was by your first post, which is proven by your psychological need to respond. And I assume you are as unimpressed with my arguments as I am with your inability to form the plural of simile despite your threats to crush me intellectually. So then neither of us are overly impressed with each other.

So, the move is yours. We can go back and forth trying to one up each other in the insult department till one of us gets bored and fails to respond. Or we can simply go our separate ways. Will you be the bigger man and walk away? Or will you stoop to my level? Will you simply do? Or will you need to tell me you are giving me the silent treatment?

 

[Mr.Underhill]

the original poster asked what people thought of the rule....he was looking for opinions....

I gave mine....

has nothing to do with the people who use it or don't use the rule.....wasn't directed at anybody....not the OP, not Mr. U...not you...wasn't meant to be hostile to anyone just a description of how dumb I think it is...

would it made a difference if i said ####ing stupid with a cherry on top.....would that help

So you insult with gross disregard rather than intent?You aren't a man, you're a cartoon.

I bet you pat yourself on the back at how you "tell people how it is".

 

[Mr.Underhill]

(just fyi...not all of your response was in red for those just looking at the red parts...)

Mr U...when speaking of the free point fairy....that was not calling you that...it was an expression for whatever the process is of magically awarding the free points.....obviously that was taken out of context early in the discussion so I can now see why you thought some of what I said was insulting...not the case

never said anybody was stupid....if they think because they use the rule that that means I think they are stupid....they are wrong...but I can't fix that

your quote: "You don't have to like that. You don't have to use it in your league. But who in the hell do you think you are to tell someone else that they are silly for wanting to add that element into their league?"

my answer to your quote/question: is that I was responding to what the original poster of this thread was asking.....you may have totally lost sight of the orginal post in your passion to have us agree with you....

in leagues that award these points before the matchup even starts...it is not a stat...it's an award...

in "fantasy" football a QB that throws for more yards is the better QB that day....(obviously depending on what other stats are accumulated)....

to everybody, most importantly the OP, use it or don't use it....you should have enough info in here to make your decision....

First, what did I write that was not in red? Seriously. I'll go and correct it. Oops. I found it. It's corrected.Second. You saying that someone's idea is stupid isn't that different than saying the person is stupid. Stupid is as stupid does, as the saying goes. So then, someone who has stupid ideas... But you know this. This is just your way of being a #### and then pretending your weren't being a ####.

Third, I never thought you were calling me a fairy. Your use of the phrase though was clearly intended to demean and belittle the practice. Again, feel free to do so. But I'm going to return the favor. So expect to get as good as you give.

Fourth, you don't have to agree with me. But I think you know that. Or you should. I've said it repeatedly. What you do is say that someone's idea is silly, and then when they take you to task you accuse them of trying to convert everyone. Defending the practice is not the same as advocating that everyone do it. I suspect that you know this. It's just convenient for you to make a counter accusation rather than simply defend your own actions.

Fifth, define "stat". Is that a reasonable definition or are you defining it in that manner so as to defend your preference as something other than a preference? We allow the home team to start an extra kicker. You get to count his stats. How is that not a stat?

Sixth, in fantasy football a QB who throws for more yardage is "better" than another simply because you choose to score it so. Again, this turns on nothing more than a preference. You like awarding points based on yardage. You can't separate "better" from the method by which you define it. Isn't it a bit silly to arbitrarily choose to reward a QB who throws for more yards because he threw for more yards? Why not use QB rating? See how that works?

Is it lost on you that throughout this thread I have never once claimed it is silly to not use some form of HFA? Does that not carry any significance to you?

 

[Mr.Underhill]

Yet, that's exactly what goes on in home field advantage formats. We entertain more luck in order to make our fantasy league look a little more like the NFL.

So... because there is some luck in the exclusive roster (which, again, doesn't actually GIVE points away arbitrarily), you're using that to justify handing out points based on a coin flip? (you really should look into auction leagues, btw). Why stop there? Let's add random INJURIES! I mean, they're already factored into the real NFL scores, but that didn't stop you guys with HFA. Maybe you guys could get a 20 sided die and each week you have an injury party. Everyone can wear jerseys and shoulder pads and drink Gatorade. You each randomly pick a player on your opponent's roster, then roll a 20 sided die. The outcome determines the injury:

1-14: No effect

15: Ankle sprain -3 points that week

16: Turf Toe : 10% penalty for next 4 weeks

17: Concussion: Player lost for this and next week

18: ACL Tear: Player lost for next 16 weeks (in dynasty)

19: DWI: Player lost for 4 weeks (Reduced to 2 weels if you can roll an even number on a subsequent roll)

20: BIG CONTRACT! : Player scoring reduced by 30% for the next 16 weeks.

I LOVE MAGIC FOOTBALL!

And that where you are wrong. Both NFL teams can't enjoy HFA at the same time, can they?So if two fantasy owners in a H2H league have rosters composed of a mixture of home and away players, they both enjoyed the fruits and the curses of HFA within their roster, correct? So both teams enjoyed the bonuses of HFA and both teams suffered the consequences of it. Is that in dispute?

Now, compare that to an NFL H2H match-up where only one team enjoys HFA. Both teams don't equally share that risk in that H2H match-up.

So now let's take your injury example. Do both NFL teams suffer injury risk in a game? Yes. Do both fantasy teams suffer injury risk in a game? Yes. So then there is no need to create an injury risk mechanism because it works wonderfully well already.

What is so hard to get about this?

I get that you don't like it. You've said that over and over. But what's so hard to understand about it?

Now, if you understand it, but don't like it, then why are you posting here? I've never argued that you should like it or need to have it. I've merely defended the use by those who like to.

All you have to do is say you don't like it and walk away. Why do you insist on telling someone who does like it that it's silly or stupid? It's nothing more than a matter of preference. <----- Which is what I've been saying all along.

maybe because this is what the original poster was asking for......

That's just being coy. He asked for opinions, not insults. You can give one without resorting to the other. You chose not too. Just own it.

 

[DexterDew]

calling me a liar and hypocrite is not the appropriate response for someone being "snide" (your word). You obviously use loaded language to get a reaction, and reaction so that you can fulfill your compulsive need to keep responding (nay escalating) as a need to validate your opinion/existence. Obvious this is personal for you, and I am truly sorry for that. Many people in this thread have giving you a chance to bow out and let it go. Let it go.

 

[Jersey35]

Underhill seems like the only adult in this playground.

"I didn't call you stupid, just your idea. I'm not a bad guy" Do you really say garbage like that in real life, or did you stop after getting your asterisk kicked a few times? Being demeaning or condescending IS being insulting. Underhill is correct in calling you out and is spot on.

FWIW: We don't use HFA in my leagues - though we've considered it numerous times. We run 2-week series in the playoffs, which seems to serve just as well for giving the higher seed an advantage. Though we DO award ties to the higher seed, ties never happen.

I would have no problem playing in a league that uses it. If done right, It evens out during the regular season, and it is obviously earned on the field in the playoffs.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

3 point HFA in playoffs (but not in Super Bowl), 16 team league, I like it

 

[Mr.Underhill]

To clarify I have been stating the point repeatedly because I've been countering the absurd assertions that this random point assessment for HFA is no different than adding PPR.... or yardage bonuses.... or the "luck factor" associated with draft placements. I take issue that it's a logical move toward "realism" given it's presence in the real NFL (for reasons already stated).

You haven't been countering the assertion. You've been determined to gain a confession that awarding 3 points to home team isn't the same thing as awarding a QB 10 points for a 200 yard game. Well, it is and it isn't. Did the team score those points due to player performance on the field? No. So what? Why is that a distinction that matters?

And you haven't refuted the realism argument, as my previous post shows. In a H2H match-up in the NFL, a home team had an advantage. Vegas quantifies this advantage in terms of the point spread. While individual players on a fantasy roster may have better stats by virtue of being at home, both fantasy teams have this advantage, so it isn't then the same thing.

People are certainly more than able to inject increased levels of luck into the game and decrease the odds of rewarding the person who is "better" at the pure form of the game (as in more successful at assessing the EOY value of the player pool and it's value in the given scoring system). I take no issue with that if you guys wish to play in a league like that. Just don't try to make any of the analogies that giving points based on a random draw is the same thing as any points indicative of box score results.... and don't try to imply that it's a justifiable move because of HFA in real NFL games. Both of those assertions are baseless at best and foolish at worst.

Again, it isn't the same and it is the same. Both are scoring rules whereby a team scores points for certain conditions. But, no, assigning points isn't a player scoring points for a stat kept in the box score. But, again, is this a distinction that matters in any way?

You've failed to counter my argument that HFA in the NFL is largely neutralized in impact in an exclusive roster, H2H format by virtue of roster diversity. So then the question becomes what the value may be in trying to mimic this real phenomenon in a fantasy context. And this is where you simply state a conclusion again with no actual argument. You just say it's baseless and foolish.

If you simply want to reduce this to a "We simply prefer directly gifting 3 points based on random assignment of "home" team status" I'll accept that as a viable stance. I think it foolishly dilutes the remaining skill factor of the game further, but hey... it's a free country.

That's all it ever was and will be. Sorry if you are just now coming to that conclusion. But thanks for the parting insult all the same. Rather than just disagree, you must always stick a little bit more in there, don't you? Rather than just diluting the game further to a degree you don't enjoy, it "foolishly" does so. Reasonable minds differ, but when one position is foolish, that position then isn't valid. So you chose to call the practice foolish, trying to claim the other position to be invalid, and thereby bolster your own position, without actually proving it to be superior. You resorted to name-calling once again. Your assertion that it "foolishly" does so is nothing but baseless assertion.

Of course, this is where the bath water analogy comes into play. If the format you've chosen is already diluting the skill, whether the format be exclusive rosters, serpentine draft, or H2H schedule, then what is the harm in one slight bit more? It is a fiction that teams in these formats start a H2H game from any equal footing even if you have no HFA provision. They've been handicapped to differing degrees the minute the first team name was drawn from a hat. Which is more foolish? To acknowledge the luck and unequal footing involved and enjoy it for what it is or to pretend it isn't there and falsely claim that skill is in control?

The advantage/disadvantage adds to the excitement of a particular week's game but will net close to "0" over the course of a season (assuming an even number of games). It essentially becomes a weekly thrill ride that pays for itself over the course of the season.

My comments in red.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

calling me a liar and hypocrite is not the appropriate response for someone being "snide" (your word). You obviously use loaded language to get a reaction, and reaction so that you can fulfill your compulsive need to keep responding (nay escalating) as a need to validate your opinion/existence. Obvious this is personal for you, and I am truly sorry for that. Many people in this thread have giving you a chance to bow out and let it go. Let it go.

If what you say is true, the solution would be to stop responding. So then you should follow your own advice. But you can't. This most recent post is proof of your own compulsive need to respond. Which also proves how this is personal for you. Hence even more hypocrisy.Let it go. Just bow out. Else I will have to feel sorry for you! BTW, calling someone snide, or being snide in return, is an appropriate response to one who is snide, excepting of course the being snide in return if one adheres to the golden rule. And that is what I did in my first response to you. You claiming that I was in the wrong for being uncivil to you, when you were first uncivil to me, makes you a hypocrite. When you showed yourself as one, I noted it.Claiming you were being polite when insulting my use of analogy makes you a liar. You intentionally spoke falsely. Trying unsuccessfully to be clever does not make it any less a lie. When you showed yourself as one, I noted it.Oops. I did it again. Obviously I'm trying to draw you back in. Let it go. Just bow out. I'll even concede that you are the bigger man if you can do so. Please, help me help myself by not responding!

 

[TheLem]

Underhill seems like the only adult in this playground."I didn't call you stupid, just your idea. I'm not a bad guy" Do you really say garbage like that in real life, or did you stop after getting your asterisk kicked a few times? Being demeaning or condescending IS being insulting. Underhill is correct in calling you out and is spot on.FWIW: We don't use HFA in my leagues - though we've considered it numerous times. We run 2-week series in the playoffs, which seems to serve just as well for giving the higher seed an advantage. Though we DO award ties to the higher seed, ties never happen.I would have no problem playing in a league that uses it. If done right, It evens out during the regular season, and it is obviously earned on the field in the playoffs.

Jersey35,You are witnessing a complete dismantling of some posters on here the likes of which I've never seen.I appreciate that you appreciate it.Mr.underhill is destroying 3 guys who have taken hypocrisy And made It an art form. He's not letting them get away with it and I respect the hell out of that as a man and a right-winger.

 

[[icon]]

Alright this will likely be (one of) my final posts on this matter since I just had a rather large project just come across my desk. But I will through out some parting thoughts:

You haven't been countering the assertion. You've been determined to gain a confession that awarding 3 points to home team isn't the same thing as awarding a QB 10 points for a 200 yard game. Well, it is and it isn't. Did the team score those points due to player performance on the field? No. So what? Why is that a distinction that matters?

You say it is and it isn't. But it IS. Yes, the fantasy team did indeed score the 10 points because of player performance on the field. He threw for 200 yards..which earned the fantasy team 10 points. It's pretty simple really. I'll add that Fantasy Sports are defined as:

A fantasy sport (also known as rotisserie, roto, or owner simulation) is a game where participants act as owners to build a team that competes against other fantasy owners based on the statistics generated by the real individual players or teams of a professional sport.

Now, are there any hard and fast rules that state there can be no other criterial for the actual awarding of points? Of course not. You can customize your league any way you would like. However my preference, which is echoed by the vast majority of the FF community including all major high stakes leagues such as WCOFF and AFFL, is that points should be awarded based purely on elements from the box score.

Again, it isn't the same and it is the same. Both are scoring rules whereby a team scores points for certain conditions. But, no, assigning points isn't a player scoring points for a stat kept in the box score. But, again, is this a distinction that matters in any way?

Yes because it's how the hobby has been defined... and it's how it is played at the top levels. If you wanted to create a baseball game that awarded a run to the team voted "Coolest looking jerseys" (or any other non-performance based metric) nobody would stop you. However it deviates from the real game, it deviates from how MLB plays the game, it deviates from how the VAST majority of the non-pro leagues play, and it would be mocked by most fans of the game. Does that mean you CAN'T do it? Of course not.

They've been handicapped to differing degrees the minute the first team name was drawn from a hat. Which is more foolish? To acknowledge the luck and unequal footing involved and enjoy it for what it is or to pretend it isn't there and falsely claim that skill is in control?

I've never once claimed that there aren't certain elements of luck in the game... but it is the losing FF player who claims that skill isn't involved. The supreme court has ruled that it is indeed a skill-based hobby in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. What's interesting is that pesky bolded part showed up again:The bill specifically exempts fantasy sports games, educational games, or any online contest that "has an outcome that reflects the relative knowledge of the participants, or their skill at physical reaction or physical manipulation (but not chance), and, in the case of a fantasy or simulation sports game, has an outcome that is determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of sporting events, including any non-participant's individual performances in such sporting events..."

Dare I say that adding additional random (non statistical) elements like H2H further dilutes the skill elements and actually could be putting the hobby in a grey area with regards to legality under the UIGEA.

Of course exclusive rosters and H2H competitions add a degree of luck. HOwever do you know what they don't do? Directly Add points to the bottom line based on a coinflip (what i've been saying all along is my issue with H2H during the regular season).

Again, it is merely a difference in opinion... you have no problem directly adding points based on a relatively arbitrary reason... I prefer to stick to the "pure" form of the game as it's definied in Merriam Webster... as it's played at the highest levels....as under the guidelines prescribed in supreme court rulings.

We will have to agree to disagree. I hope you have a great season.

 

[jaymoon007]

From 2003 to 2010 all but 3 teams won more games at home then on the road. So while it may not be found in the box score there is obviously an advantage to playing at home. So why would it be "silly" or "stupid" to add this into your fantasy league. Some may think its silly to even have a serpentine draft, nfl players usually go to the highest bidder. So should any league not an auction be wrong. Why not have team qb's ever see an nfl team not replace their qb if he gets hurt. Most leagues don't do this. Is it not luck if your oppentents qb gets hurt and can't finish the game.

As for the big money leagues, I doubt very many leagues with friends have the rules of these leagues. They are designed to be easily managed and reduce the risk of cheating. They often restrict trading among other things. So it's easy to have a league more fun then these.

 

[[icon]]

From 2003 to 2010 all but 3 teams won more games at home then on the road. So while it may not be found in the box score there is obviously an advantage to playing at home. So why would it be "silly" or "stupid" to add this into your fantasy league. Some may think its silly to even have a serpentine draft, nfl players usually go to the highest bidder.

This has been addressed numerous times here but to summarize:• HFA in the NFL is already factored into the statistical performance and is reflected in those players points those weeks.

• HFA in Fantasty Football (unlike other issues mentioned) is talking about directly adding points to the bottom line that weren't earned through stats scoring.

• Fantasy Football is actually DEFINED as being "based on the statistics generated by the real individual players".

• The SCOTUS only allowed FF a pass under UIGEA because winners/losers are determined by "accumulated statistical results of sporting events".

My use of the world "Silly" seems to be a sticking point and purely reflects my (and I'm sure many others') viewpoint, but in reality my entire crusade in here has been against anything that flies in the face of the very definition of the sport, dilutes the skill factor by DIRECTLY adding unEARNED points to the bottom line of a week's scoring, and potentially moves the game outside the allowed parameters outlined by the Supreme Court.

Hope that helps

 

[Stinkin Ref]

last post on this topic...icon you said it very well again...

I apologize if my comments came across as insulting and demeaning, while not the intent I can understand how some may have taken it that way....I never had and still don't have a problem with anybody that posted in this thread...this issue was just one that I felt strongly about so I communicated in that way.....whats crazy is I could really care less what other people do in their leagues....but the issue of a team starting out (-3) before the matchup even starts just seems insane to me....my view on that will not change so I am just wasting my time continuing to respond because all it is doing is adding fuel to those that think I was being a jerk or not defending my opinion....if you really think it is cool to start a matchup (-3) in this hobby....so be it...

after thinking about this (hopefully for the last time) I do think I realized why I feel so passionatley about this rule...and this is said with the background of a normal regular season matchup where before the game starts a team is losing by (-3) or -X amount of given points......not an extra kicker....or in a playoff matchup....

I think it is because these are points that I can't control or feel that I could have an impact on in some way....so much of this game is luck and it is so easy for the casual FF player to get the same basic information as the guy who is a real die hard player...but....I can control who I draft, who I start, who I drop, who I pick up, I can even kind of prevent other guys from getting guys I know they want, I can strategize my lineup so that I have one of his QB's WR's in my lineup to possibly minimize some damage if I choose....I can control some of those things with my "skill"....I can try to gain an advantage here or there, week in and week out to try and put in a better lineup than the guy I am playing that week....

becuase we are all starting on the same playing field....

when you start (-3) it is not the same playing field....and I really don't buy into the "it evens out over the course of the season" stuff.....tell that to the guy who loses 2 regular season games because of the 3 points given to the guy he was playing.....and now he misses out on the playoffs by a game or two....

many/most leagues have gone to decimal scoring and I would be willing to bet that most leagues also have some sort of tiebreaker rule.....why do we have those....because many times these matchups are close....it can come down to that last second FG in the Monday Night game....the reason we stay up till midnight watching a JAX vs STL matchup or something....(no offense to fans of those teams)...HFA would impact those games...

again...I apologize if I offended anyone....but when it comes down to the heart and soul of it....I put a ton of time in this hobby, trying to gain every advantage I can every week in every matchup I have...I can control some things and some things are pure luck....and we never really know what our players will do each week....so maybe it's old school, but I do just want to put in my lineup and see if I can beat the other guy....and I don't want him to have any extra few points and I don't want them either...good luck to you all you in your leagues...

 

[Instinctive]

Underhill seems like the only adult in this playground."I didn't call you stupid, just your idea. I'm not a bad guy" Do you really say garbage like that in real life, or did you stop after getting your asterisk kicked a few times? Being demeaning or condescending IS being insulting. Underhill is correct in calling you out and is spot on.FWIW: We don't use HFA in my leagues - though we've considered it numerous times. We run 2-week series in the playoffs, which seems to serve just as well for giving the higher seed an advantage. Though we DO award ties to the higher seed, ties never happen.I would have no problem playing in a league that uses it. If done right, It evens out during the regular season, and it is obviously earned on the field in the playoffs.

Jersey35,You are witnessing a complete dismantling of some posters on here the likes of which I've never seen.I appreciate that you appreciate it.Mr.underhill is destroying 3 guys who have taken hypocrisy And made It an art form. He's not letting them get away with it and I respect the hell out of that as a man and a right-winger.

It's really been quite enjoyable to watch/read.Kind of like when the Lakers were beating the Cavs by like 40+ two seasons ago. It was humiliating for the Cavs, and not exactly a good game of basketball...but you still couldn't look away.

 

[jaymoon007]

While home field advantage may be reflected in individual players it's not necessarily reflected for a fantasy team because both teams have guys playing at home and away.

So long as I'm using an extra player ie lowest scoring position in my league, for home field advantage then my league would fit in under the definition of fantasy sport

 

[[icon]]

So long as I'm using an extra player ie lowest scoring position in my league, for home field advantage then my league would fit in under the definition of fantasy sport

It seems a bit odd to offer a 3pt bonus for lowest scoring player but if you want to play that way and call it "HFA" I see no reason not to since it's at least tied into on-field performance.

 

[packseasontix]

SO:

Personally at this point your against it or you are open to it.

After reading through this and responding I think there are a few ways to utlizie HFA if you want.

1. Only use HFA for the Playoffs (also known as higher seed advantage)

2. Schedule is set by previous years record with best team getting most home games (thus a bonus for being the best the year before)

3. Random schedule (this does make Home or Away a luck factor)

HFA Scoring

1. Set amount of points (+3 for instance)

2. Add an extra kicker or player (ramps up the HFA alot more)

3. Compare the average score each week and give the difference to the higher seed (for playoff use)

4. Have a home field advantage multiplier (2% or 5% of total score for instance - this percentage could be based on current or previous year records)

I think there is ways to introduce HFA into the equation to actually lower the luck factor from week2week instead of increasing it like most people seem it has to automatically do.

Other rules that fall outside of the norm (probably alot more)

1. Upon injuries of players they recieve the average weekly score instead of that weeks scoring (Vick goes down in the 1st Q he get his normal PPG)

2. Bye weeks (players sitting out due to bye weeks can be started for their PPG Average)

3. Win the toliet bowl get an extra pick the following year

 

[packseasontix]

• Fantasy Football is actually DEFINED as being "based on the statistics generated by the real individual players".

potentially moves the game outside the allowed parameters outlined by the Supreme Court.

Just needed to make one point here that by basing anything be it HFA or drafting based on what has happened previously do not increase luck or random outputs.HFA or Drafts based on results from the past actually stablize the result towards the player with skill winning.

Think about it this way:

Team A - 200 Points Per Week Average

Team B - 100 Points Per Week Average

Both teams end up in the championship but Team A gets a 100 point bonus due to the Points Per Week Average

This actually then stabilizes the game towards skill and moves it away from luck by a long shot.

 

[[icon]]

• Fantasy Football is actually DEFINED as being "based on the statistics generated by the real individual players".

potentially moves the game outside the allowed parameters outlined by the Supreme Court.

Just needed to make one point here that by basing anything be it HFA or drafting based on what has happened previously do not increase luck or random outputs.HFA or Drafts based on results from the past actually stablize the result towards the player with skill winning.

Think about it this way:

Team A - 200 Points Per Week Average

Team B - 100 Points Per Week Average

Both teams end up in the championship but Team A gets a 100 point bonus due to the Points Per Week Average

This actually then stabilizes the game towards skill and moves it away from luck by a long shot.

Sorry but your post isn't very clear. What you're proposing is taking the Points Per Week (PPW) average for teams that are facing off in the playoffs, find the gap between the two, and credit that to the higher scoring team?

That seems a bit extreme of a bonus to carry into the playoffs to me and I wouldn't personally play in a league like that... however it's at least based on real world statistics so it's better than random assignment of 3 points.

Then again, this sorta feels like you're taking a "high scoring bonus" and trying to call it "Home Field Advantage".

 

[Mr.Underhill]

I'm going to assume this is important since there are so many posts.

Nah. Just a pissing contest is all. A few grown men who should know better finding a way to compete for no other reason than to compete at something.

 

[[icon]]

SO:

Personally at this point your against it or you are open to it.

Wat?

After reading through this and responding I think there are a few ways to utlizie HFA if you want.

1. Only use HFA for the Playoffs (also known as higher seed advantage).

Wouldn't play by this but it's acceptable IMO.

2. Schedule is set by previous years record with best team getting most home games (thus a bonus for being the best the year before)

IMO any bonuses offered based on PREVIOUS year records should be confined to preseason (Ie draft slotting).

3. Random schedule (this does make Home or Away a luck factor)

This is the part I said was silly because you're just giving 3 points to a team based on pure luck of the draw.

I think there is ways to introduce HFA into the equation to actually lower the luck factor from week2week instead of increasing it like most people seem it has to automatically do.

Other rules that fall outside of the norm (probably alot more)

1. Upon injuries of players they recieve the average weekly score instead of that weeks scoring (Vick goes down in the 1st Q he get his normal PPG)

I would never play in a league where you got points for an injured player... that's part of the game.

2. Bye weeks (players sitting out due to bye weeks can be started for their PPG Average)

Same as above.... Bye weeks are part of the game.

3. Win the toliet bowl get an extra pick the following year

Nothing wrong with this at all as long as it's nothing too dramatic as to upset the balance of power.

Frankly I have no desire to get into a hundred "what if" bonuses that will be rebadged as "Home Field Advantage". The issue I took umbrage with with is outlined here and clarified here.

 

[packseasontix]

Previous post was just saying you are either against HFA or you are for it at this point and doubtful you are going to change your mind except if you possibly ended up utliizing it in a fun with friends league and then possibly opened up to it.

As far as bonuses repackaged as HFA that is the beauty you can really do anything you want with HFA as you are simply adding the bonus to the home/higher seed team. Some might be extreme but if your trying to eliminate randomness that would do it.

One question I have is what would you expect the real difference in HFA to be for teams? Think of this like a rating system in Madden for all 32 teams?

Top HFA (7-10 points a week sometimes I would bet)- GB, NE, NO, SEA

Worst HFA (0-3 points a week most of the time) - CLE, JAX, MIA

 

[Mr.Underhill]

Alright this will likely be (one of) my final posts on this matter since I just had a rather large project just come across my desk. But I will through out some parting thoughts:

You haven't been countering the assertion. You've been determined to gain a confession that awarding 3 points to home team isn't the same thing as awarding a QB 10 points for a 200 yard game. Well, it is and it isn't. Did the team score those points due to player performance on the field? No. So what? Why is that a distinction that matters?

You say it is and it isn't. But it IS. Yes, the fantasy team did indeed score the 10 points because of player performance on the field. He threw for 200 yards..which earned the fantasy team 10 points. It's pretty simple really. I'll add that Fantasy Sports are defined as:

A fantasy sport (also known as rotisserie, roto, or owner simulation) is a game where participants act as owners to build a team that competes against other fantasy owners based on the statistics generated by the real individual players or teams of a professional sport.

Now, are there any hard and fast rules that state there can be no other criterial for the actual awarding of points? Of course not. You can customize your league any way ou would like. However my preference, which is echoed by the vast majority of the FF community including all major high stakes leagues such as WCOFF and AFFL, is that points should be awarded based purely on elements from the box score.

Again, it isn't the same and it is the same. Both are scoring rules whereby a team scores points for certain conditions. But, no, assigning points isn't a player scoring points for a stat kept in the box score. But, again, is this a distinction that matters in any way?

Yes because it's how the hobby has been defined... and it's how it is played at the top levels. If you wanted to create a baseball game that awarded a run to the team voted "Coolest looking jerseys" (or any other non-performance based metric) nobody would stop you. However it deviates from the real game, it deviates from how MLB plays the game, it deviates from how the VAST majority of the non-pro leagues play, and it would be mocked by most fans of the game. Does that mean you CAN'T do it? Of course not.

They've been handicapped to differing degrees the minute the first team name was drawn from a hat. Which is more foolish? To acknowledge the luck and unequal footing involved and enjoy it for what it is or to pretend it isn't there and falsely claim that skill is in control?

I've never once claimed that there aren't certain elements of luck in the game... but it is the losing FF player who claims that skill isn't involved. The supreme court has ruled that it is indeed a skill-based hobby in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. What's interesting is that pesky bolded part showed up again:The bill specifically exempts fantasy sports games, educational games, or any online contest that "has an outcome that reflects the relative knowledge of the participants, or their skill at physical reaction or physical manipulation (but not chance), and, in the case of a fantasy or simulation sports game, has an outcome that is determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of sporting events, including any non-participant's individual performances in such sporting events..."

Dare I say that adding additional random (non statistical) elements like H2H further dilutes the skill elements and actually could be putting the hobby in a grey area with regards to legality under the UIGEA.

Of course exclusive rosters and H2H competitions add a degree of luck. HOwever do you know what they don't do? Directly Add points to the bottom line based on a coinflip (what i've been saying all along is my issue with H2H during the regular season).

Again, it is merely a difference in opinion... you have no problem directly adding points based on a relatively arbitrary reason... I prefer to stick to the "pure" form of the game as it's definied in Merriam Webster... as it's played at the highest levels....as under the guidelines prescribed in supreme court rulings.

We will have to agree to disagree. I hope you have a great season.

I agree that fantasy sports use statistics as a basis for scoring. The leagues that use HFA use player statistics. What you are doing, however, is trying to read exclusivity into the definition when it is not there. I need point no further than to that portion of the SCOTUS decision you yourself quoted that I've highlighted in red. Does it not say "predominantly"? Are you going to claim, with a straight face, that "predominantly" means "exclusively"? Should I quote Webster's on the difference in meaning in the two?So then, a fantasy league which uses individual stats, which for example may add up to an average of 200 points per game, but then also adds in a HFA of 3 points (which is a 1.5% increase) would still meet the SCOTUS's definition of a fantasy sport. And in the case of our main league, which simply adds an additional kicker to make HFA, we ARE using player generated stats exclusively which would comply completely with your requirement and go further than what the SCOTUS defines. So you've been refuted by the very authority you offer!

And to answer your question, no, inclusion of HFA would not put fantasy sports into a gray area legally because, obviously, the SCOTUS has defined fantasy sports as those which "predominantly" use stats to score.

Good gracious, man. Did you even read what you quoted?

Now, what do we have left of your argument? Oh yes, the argumentum ad populum. When all else fails, assert that the popular opinion is the correct one. So why is HFA foolish? Well, because more people don't like it than like it. Rather than argue on the merits, you resort to a vote. And we all know that the majority never err.

As for the formats that WCOFF and AFFL utilize... Here we have the favorite appeal to authority. This is the right way to do it because _________ says so. This must be the right way to do it, because that's how WCOFF and AFFL do it. But rather than simply identify the fallacy for what it is and leave it at that, let me parse this one out a bit more.

Are there high stakes or professional leagues which do not utilize a H2H format? If so, what is their reasoning? Could it be that elimination of H2H schedules emphasizes the skill involved and lessens the "luck" factor? If so, then why do WCOFF and AFFL use a H2H format?

Could it be because that format is the most popular and they therefore get more entries if they offer a H2H format? If so, then we have simply come back around to the argumentum ad populum. How WCOFF does it is "the right way" to do it because they are an authority. But WCOFF is doing it that way so they can generate the most interest. So then the authority is simply determining "the right way" because that's what more people like to do. Argumentum ad populum.

And so here we sit, just as I predicted. You think another way of doing it is foolish because 1) it isn't how you like to do it and 2) it isn't how most people like to do it. Now, I will give you credit. Your argument did evolve. Where first you merely stated your preference, you did eventually add in a fallacy of logic.

 

[[icon]]

Previous post was just saying you are either against HFA or you are for it at this point and doubtful you are going to change your mind except if you possibly ended up utliizing it in a fun with friends league and then possibly opened up to it.As far as bonuses repackaged as HFA that is the beauty you can really do anything you want with HFA as you are simply adding the bonus to the home/higher seed team. Some might be extreme but if your trying to eliminate randomness that would do it.

I guess I don't see the need in trying to overly complicate things by coming up with random bonuses that have nothing to do with "Home Field Advantage" and then calling them "home Field advantage". It sounds me to like you're trying to turn the Augusta into a Putt Putt Course with windmills and ####

One question I have is what would you expect the real difference in HFA to be for teams? Think of this like a rating system in Madden for all 32 teams?Top HFA (7-10 points a week sometimes I would bet)- GB, NE, NO, SEAWorst HFA (0-3 points a week most of the time) - CLE, JAX, MIA

There is no way in hell there is ever a 7-10pt "HFA" effect in the NFL. You'd be talking about a 14-20pt swing in the vegas line in a GB vs NE matchup depending on where it was played. That's just not the case. This isn't MLB where you can build a team with a skill set that's tailored to the unique dimensions of your ballpark. True HFA generally hovers around 3 points.

 

[[icon]]

wow. Dude really likes to hear himself speak, doesn't he.

1) The definition still stands as a hobby based on statistical scoring.

A fantasy sport (also known as rotisserie, roto, or owner simulation) is a game where participants act as owners to build a team that competes against other fantasy owners based on the statistics generated by the real individual players or teams of a professional sport.

2) I never said predominantly = exclusively but the fact that SCOTUS went through the trouble of specifying that the basis of scoring is statistical in origin is apparently completely lost on you. The reason they specify that element is because it is the element that keeps the game in "Skill based" territory and out of luck based territory (aka gambling). You sure do love to put words in my mouth with grandiose verbal flourishes. 3) I must have completely missed (possibly due to your verbosity) where you had previously mentioned using actual stats (extra kicker?) to determine the "HFA". If that is the case then I see no issue with it. As i've stated 200 times in this thread, if you're splitting a 16 game season in half and randomly determining what games someone is blindly getting 3 unearned points then that is outside the definition of the game. Doesn't mean you can't do it.

And with that, I'm out. It's been entertaining to say the least but this has gotten a bit boring. Glll in your league.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

From 2003 to 2010 all but 3 teams won more games at home then on the road. So while it may not be found in the box score there is obviously an advantage to playing at home. So why would it be "silly" or "stupid" to add this into your fantasy league. Some may think its silly to even have a serpentine draft, nfl players usually go to the highest bidder.

This has been addressed numerous times here but to summarize:• HFA in the NFL is already factored into the statistical performance and is reflected in those players points those weeks.

And it's been shown that HFA helps and hurts both teams equally because a fantasy team is composed of players playing both home and away. So the impact of NFL HFA is NOT felt in a fantasy H2H contest. It is nullified. Yet you fail to respond to that point except to say that trying to create a HFA in a fantasy context is a foolish and needless attempt at realism. Again, you assert a conclusion without any support.

• HFA in Fantasty Football (unlike other issues mentioned) is talking about directly adding points to the bottom line that weren't earned through stats scoring.

False. Our league uses an extra kicker to determine HFA points. They come directly from your precious box score. So our HFA actually conforms to your definition.

• Fantasy Football is actually DEFINED as being "based on the statistics generated by the real individual players".

True. And every league using HFA is using statistics generated by real individual players. Of course some teams award points for team defenses, which award points based on combined stats rather than individual stats. But they are generated by individual effort of players on the field. But that's a fine point and rather unimportant. What you seek to do is claim that fantasy football is defined by the exclusive use of player stats. Of course, the SCOTUS disagrees with you. So then who is your authority now when the SCOTUS disagrees with you and none of the definitions you quote actually claim that it ceases to be fantasy football unless you exclusively use individual stats in scoring?

• The SCOTUS only allowed FF a pass under UIGEA because winners/losers are determined by "accumulated statistical results of sporting events".

But there's that pesky "predominatly" word they used. Kinda kills the "exclusive" argument.

My use of the world "Silly" seems to be a sticking point and purely reflects my (and I'm sure many others') viewpoint, but in reality my entire crusade in here has been against anything that flies in the face of the very definition of the sport, dilutes the skill factor by DIRECTLY adding unEARNED points to the bottom line of a week's scoring, and potentially moves the game outside the allowed parameters outlined by the Supreme Court.

The very definition which you claim but have not proven. Well, except by argumentum ad populum. And if you take the position that by definition you are being foolish if you deviate from what the masses practice, I think we all see the validity of that argument. You don't actually believe that yourself. It's just all you have to hang your hat on in this argument.

Hope that helps

My comments in red.

 

[Mr.Underhill]

wow. Dude really likes to hear himself speak, doesn't he.

1) The definition still stands as a hobby based on statistical scoring.

A fantasy sport (also known as rotisserie, roto, or owner simulation) is a game where participants act as owners to build a team that competes against other fantasy owners based on the statistics generated by the real individual players or teams of a professional sport.

2) I never said predominantly = exclusively but the fact that SCOTUS went through the trouble of specifying that the basis of scoring is statistical in origin is apparently completely lost on you. The reason they specify that element is because it is the element that keeps the game in "Skill based" territory and out of luck based territory (aka gambling). You sure do love to put words in my mouth with grandiose verbal flourishes. 3) I must have completely missed (possibly due to your verbosity) where you had previously mentioned using actual stats (extra kicker?) to determine the "HFA". If that is the case then I see no issue with it. As i've stated 200 times in this thread, if you're splitting a 16 game season in half and randomly determining what games someone is blindly getting 3 unearned points then that is outside the definition of the game. Doesn't mean you can't do it.

And with that, I'm out. It's been entertaining to say the least but this has gotten a bit boring. Glll in your league.

You're still posting. It isn't because I like to hear you speak. 1) What you did was selectively appeal to authority. You lean on the SCOTUS when it suits you, but conveniently (and intentionally, I see now) ignore their use of "predominantly" when it directly contradicts the inference you wish to draw on from another authority.

So, fantasy sports are either exclusive or non-exclusive in their use of individual stats for scoring. SCOTUS says non-exclusive. Websters online doesn't address that narrow question directly. Where again is your authority?

Now, we all agree that fantasy sports use stats in scoring. No one, not even the HFA users, disagree with that. So then you are either wrong in implying that stats must be the exclusive source for points, or you are not making that argument and instead are making a strawman argument against a proposition which no one has advanced.

2) No, you didn't say they were equal. Instead you ignored where the SCOTUS used "predominantly" which directly refutes your contention that it isn't a real fantasy league if you award points for anything other than box score stats.

As for the faulty logic used in your argument, if I define an automobile as a four wheeled vehicle which uses the internal combustion engine to generate power, a hybrid which uses both the internal combustion engine and an electric power plant isn't disqualified from that definition. It uses the internal combustion engine and has four wheels. It meets the standard. Exclusivity in the method of generation of power is not required in the definition.

Similarly, if I have a weapon which has both a blade and a chamber/barrel for firing a projectile from gun powder ignition, that's going to be a firearm to the BATF even though it also has a knife stuck on the end.

Your quoted definitions therefore don't say what you are trying to make them say. No one disputes that stats are used in fantasy football. So repeating that stats are used in fantasy football over and over again isn't an argument. We know that and agree with you. So then, if you surrender the exclusivity argument, you have no argument.

If your position that is that stat scoring equals skill and HFA points equal luck, I can refute that one by the argumentum ad populum you love so much. Go post a FBG's poll on the impact of luck vs. skill in a TD only league. Are TD's not an individual stat in the box score?

Or do you think that in the briefs or oral arguments the SCOTUS was educated on how a draft format or H2H format actually diminishes the impact of skill in determining a winner compared to a total points, all-play or pick-em format? Do you think Ginsberg and Scalia went back and forth over whether a TD only format is more luck than skill? I don't think they were intending to put so fine a point on it. I think their qualification of fantasy sports as games of skill, not luck, was probably referring to a very low threshold and a very broad feel for the hobby.

3) You're right. It's my fault you didn't read posts even though you quote them and respond to me.

But it has been fun.

If you really are done... Peace.