Has PPR scoring become the new "standard" scoring? (1 Viewer)

[two_dollars]

As I've been playing fantasy football, I've noticed more and more leagues pop up with PPR scoring. I am all for it. I believe it equalizes value across different positions requiring a GM to do more research. I think that's a good thing. I've also noticed expanded rosters. Most league I was in back in the day used standard scoring, 1qb, 2rb, 2wr, 1te.. and now I've been in a PPR league with 1qb, 2rb, 3wr, 1te, 1 flex. 2 more starters. It even seems the "official" big money leagues are leaning to this trend. But why?

Is this the natural evolution of fantasy football because it keeps it new and fresh? OR is it because there is logic behind the math and people are seeking a more balanced league across the board?

 

[footballnerd]

I find 1pt per rec is too much, but 0.5 pts per rec gives a great balance between all offensive positions. 3 out of 4 of my leagues use 0.5pts/rec.

 

[Cecil_Pooples]

Only played PPR leagues the last 3-4 years and won't go back.

 

[two_dollars]

I find 1pt per rec is too much, but 0.5 pts per rec gives a great balance between all offensive positions. 3 out of 4 of my leagues use 0.5pts/rec.

I agree in some situations. The method I actually prefer is 0.5pt for rb's, 1pt for wr's, and either 1pt or 1.5pts for te's.

 

[two_dollars]

Only played PPR leagues the last 3-4 years and won't go back.

Most people I play PPR say the same thing. What is it about PPR though. The higher scoring? The greater pool of options for players? Do you feel it's more balanced? I can say for sure though I DO NOT miss the days where the first 2 rounds were 80-90% rb's.

 

[az_prof]

As I've been playing fantasy football, I've noticed more and more leagues pop up with PPR scoring. I am all for it. I believe it equalizes value across different positions requiring a GM to do more research. I think that's a good thing. I've also noticed expanded rosters. Most league I was in back in the day used standard scoring, 1qb, 2rb, 2wr, 1te.. and now I've been in a PPR league with 1qb, 2rb, 3wr, 1te, 1 flex. 2 more starters. It even seems the "official" big money leagues are leaning to this trend. But why?Is this the natural evolution of fantasy football because it keeps it new and fresh? OR is it because there is logic behind the math and people are seeking a more balanced league across the board?

I like PPR because TD heavy leagues seem more influenced by luck--since one guy can drive the team downfield and then the FB or QB or TE gets the TD. Predicting TDs is much more luck than science compared to predicting receptions. I also like it because for a while there drafts were so predictable where almost everyone took two RBs in the first and second round since we all knew that was the key to winning. PPR tends to narrow the gap between fantasy productivity of WRs and RBs. This means you have to evaluate the relative value of players more carefully.Bottom line: IMHO PPR takes more skill and that's good for the game.

 

[TC]

Hiya- The reason many leagues have adjusted and added PPR is because they became tired of the elite rushers being so important to a team's success. Prior to PPR, there were perhaps 7 RBs amoung the top ten players every week. Many FFLers grew to realize that there are other players on the roster that are not RBs.

Personally, PPR was an 'adjustment' that I initially was luke warm about. However after a half-season of it, I saw the great options that it allowed every team in the league. Since being 'sold' on PPR, I really, really prefer it. Where else is TE Clark as import as RB Addai?

 

[DudeWheresMyRB]

PPR = balance between stud WRs/RBs

Discussed above.

PPR = larger player pool

3rd down backs and possession receivers are rosterable with PPR. Without it, they are about as much value as blocking TEs.

PPR = west coast RBs >>> power O RBs

This is one downside since it rewards one offensive scheme over another, all things being equal.

Consider:

1400 YDs Rush

14 Rush TDs

versus

1000 YDs Rush

400 YDs Rec

10 Rush TDs

4 Rec TDs

40 Receptions

Is the west coast back that much more valuable to his team relative to the first? I think not, which is why I have always liked a team-based rushing bonus to offset this bias (used in pen-and-paper leagues in the 90s but not so much recently).

 

[dparker713]

As I've been playing fantasy football, I've noticed more and more leagues pop up with PPR scoring. I am all for it. I believe it equalizes value across different positions requiring a GM to do more research. I think that's a good thing. I've also noticed expanded rosters. Most league I was in back in the day used standard scoring, 1qb, 2rb, 2wr, 1te.. and now I've been in a PPR league with 1qb, 2rb, 3wr, 1te, 1 flex. 2 more starters. It even seems the "official" big money leagues are leaning to this trend. But why?

Is this the natural evolution of fantasy football because it keeps it new and fresh? OR is it because there is logic behind the math and people are seeking a more balanced league across the board?

I like PPR because TD heavy leagues seem more influenced by luck--since one guy can drive the team downfield and then the FB or QB or TE gets the TD. Predicting TDs is much more luck than science compared to predicting receptions. I also like it because for a while there drafts were so predictable where almost everyone took two RBs in the first and second round since we all knew that was the key to winning. PPR tends to narrow the gap between fantasy productivity of WRs and RBs. This means you have to evaluate the relative value of players more carefully.Bottom line: IMHO PPR takes more skill and that's good for the game.

Why not just double the points across the board for yards then? Diminishes the importance of TDs without distorting the value of yards earned on the ground versus through the air.

 

[footballnerd]

I find 1pt per rec is too much, but 0.5 pts per rec gives a great balance between all offensive positions. 3 out of 4 of my leagues use 0.5pts/rec.

I agree in some situations. The method I actually prefer is 0.5pt for rb's, 1pt for wr's, and either 1pt or 1.5pts for te's.

Interesting. I'll have to look into that for sure.

 

[Saint]

We use .5 pt for RB, 1 pt WR, and 1.5 pt TE.... in addition.. QB TDs are 6 pts...

I have found that you get a wide variety of drafting at the first couple of rounds.... much more exciting then watching 24 RBs go off the board right away. I think PPR definitely adds balance.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

First, to each his own. (obviously)

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

Adjusting lineup requirements will will affect relative value between positions. Start 2 RB and 4 WR to boost WR value, or 1 RB, 4 WR, and a flex.

If you do add ppr, do not make 1 reception = 10 yards. 5 receptions for 50 yards DOES NOT equal 100 yards rushing.

Many ppr leagues only give a point for WR and TE receptions. So this is what happens:

Rudi Johnson 1430+ yards, 12 TDs. Very solid. 215 fantasy points.

Hines Ward 1000 yards, 6 TDs, 74 rec. Pretty average. 210 fantasy points.

400 fewer yards, 6 fewer TDs, the same fantasy points. C'mon.

~~~

Frankly, if you believe that RBBC is on the rise, the whole reason most often quoted for ppr (evening out WRs and RBs) goes out the window.

 

[Chairshot]

I prefer PPR scoring. But, I also like being in a couple leagues with different scoring. I wouldn't want all my leagues to have PPR, I wouldn't really see the point of being in 4 or 5 leagues with very similar scoring.

Of the 5 leagues I'm in 2 do not use PPR, 1 uses .5 per reception and 2 use PPR. While I do prefer PPR, I also like the variety of different scoring systems.

 

[fozzy fosbourne]

I've always wondered about a league that rewarded 1st downs. Has anyone played in a league like that?

 

[ArlingtonTerp]

All you need to do is require 3 WR and 1 RB and have one flex RB/WR and WRs are more valuable relative to RBs than in a 2 RB, 2/3 WR and a flex PPR league. Just plug it into any VBD sheet and it is obvious. Basically if a WR scores more than a RB, he's worth more in such a system, and WRs are more in demand. Using FBG VBD sheet with the FBG numbers, the cheat sheet rankings for my league had 26 of the top 50 picks WRs and only 17 RBs. (It would have had more QBs if I could replicate my league's scoring on the sheet). This (1 RB option) fits with what is actually on the field anyway.

In fact, PPR doesn't create total parity, but makes some RBs even more valued just because they catch passes, creating super-backs for no good reason, or making marginal backs into legit fantasy players. You could also have a rule to give a point for every time a guy over 6'3 gets a first down. It would really help the TEs (and Brandon Jacobs and the tall WRs but that's OK I guess). I also have no idea why possession receivers catching dump-off are more valued than big play-makers.

 

[LAUNCH]

We do 1pt for every 8 yards for receivers, rb's get 1pt for every 10. It evens things out pretty nicely.

 

[DeadhorseGM]

"In fact, PPR doesn't create total parity, but makes some RBs even more valued just because they catch passes, creating super-backs for no good reason, or making marginal backs into legit fantasy player."

While I understand your point, don't you believe that if you asked most NFL GM's to choose a back such as Rudi Johnson, who didn't catch the ball, or a similar back who could catch the ball, they'd go after the latter? PPR leagues do value backs who catch the ball more (and perhaps at times, too much), but aren't they more dynamic players in real football as well?

 

[Routilla]

PPR has changed FF forever. I am in my first 2 QB league this year and I can't say I'm excited moving forward. I will seek out an old school league next year with no PPR and 1 QB just to keep me grounded.

 

[cst2006]

I've always wondered about a league that rewarded 1st downs. Has anyone played in a league like that?

Thought of this prior to this season but none of the sites I'm playing on this year could accommodate the request. Hopefully next year they'll include it as a statistical option, first downs are a much more important and relevant statistic than receptions IMO (I do play in a .3 ppr league however, and think this rewards high reception players appropriately.)

 

[footballnerd]

I've always wondered about a league that rewarded 1st downs. Has anyone played in a league like that?

Thought of this prior to this season but none of the sites I'm playing on this year could accommodate the request. Hopefully next year they'll include it as a statistical option, first downs are a much more important and relevant statistic than receptions IMO (I do play in a .3 ppr league however, and think this rewards high reception players appropriately.)

Wonder if they could include dropped passes too.

 

[SSOG]

As I've been playing fantasy football, I've noticed more and more leagues pop up with PPR scoring. I am all for it. I believe it equalizes value across different positions requiring a GM to do more research. I think that's a good thing. I've also noticed expanded rosters. Most league I was in back in the day used standard scoring, 1qb, 2rb, 2wr, 1te.. and now I've been in a PPR league with 1qb, 2rb, 3wr, 1te, 1 flex. 2 more starters. It even seems the "official" big money leagues are leaning to this trend. But why?

Is this the natural evolution of fantasy football because it keeps it new and fresh? OR is it because there is logic behind the math and people are seeking a more balanced league across the board?

I like PPR because TD heavy leagues seem more influenced by luck--since one guy can drive the team downfield and then the FB or QB or TE gets the TD. Predicting TDs is much more luck than science compared to predicting receptions. I also like it because for a while there drafts were so predictable where almost everyone took two RBs in the first and second round since we all knew that was the key to winning. PPR tends to narrow the gap between fantasy productivity of WRs and RBs. This means you have to evaluate the relative value of players more carefully.Bottom line: IMHO PPR takes more skill and that's good for the game.

Why not just double the points across the board for yards then? Diminishes the importance of TDs without distorting the value of yards earned on the ground versus through the air.

All of my longest-running leagues have switched to a yardage-heavy format (1 point for 5 yards rushing/receiving, 1 point for 10 yards passing, 6 points for all TDs). I love it. It increases the predictability without unnaturally inflating the value of NFL role players (Kevin Faulk, Mewelde Moore) or unnaturally skewing the value of a possession receiver vs. a deep threat.Also, if you really want to increase the demand for one position relative to another, the way to go about it isn't to create a completely different set of scoring rules to skew that position's production... it's to increase positional scarcity (i.e. increase the number of starting receiver/QB slots, decrease the number of starting RB slots, add some more flexes, etc). In the most extreme example, if you created a league where teams can start 5 defenses a week, I imagine the first three rounds would be nothing but defenses (because you'd have to grab as many as you could or risk rolling into a matchup where you're starting one defense and the other guy is starting 5).

I think that scoring should be relatively balanced across all positions, mostly to prevent in-game injuries from completely destroying your chances of winning. The yardage-heavy format tends to equalize QB/RB/WR scoring pretty well. Generally, 30 points is a very good game, regardless of position. 25+ is a good game, 15+ is an acceptable game, <15 is a total woofer. Epic games can eclipse 60 points. Portis's 254 yard, 5-TD masterpeice against the Chiefs in 2003 actually topped 80 points.

 

[Catbird]

It seems to me that PPR attempts to balance inter-positional value by rewarding something that doesn't matter. If a guy catches 5 passes for 50 yards and another guy ten passes for 50 yards, the benefit to their team is interchangeable - but in PPR one game is worth twice the other. Its a better game IMO when you reach the goal by adjusting the cast of starters, not manipulating irrelevent statistics.

 

[kinghill]

Not sure if it is the standard. Is it?

3 of the 4 leagues I'm in do not use PPR. The 2 money leagues I'm in do not use PPR.

Not a fan really. Points for touchdowns and yards is plenty enough for me. Like another guy said why should a reception for 1 yard be .5 or 1 FF pt?

 

[cobalt_27]

First, to each his own. (obviously)

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

I disagree. The argument for awarding a point for the reception is that you are rewarding the efforts made to earn that reception. A handoff is just that. Arguably much less skill in taking a hand off than it is checking the read on the corner, adjusting the route, coming out of your break, and on some occasions making a brilliant catch. The skill involved to earn that 10- or 20- or whatever-yard reception justifies the extra 1pt, and in theory, those who exercise those skills before they even see the ball, should be rewarded accordingly.

 

[FUBAR]

The league I commish also gives points to the individual for return yardage. As with PPR, you have to be careful not to go overboard with the scoring however. Sometimes the weekly high scorers are surprising; Cribbs outscored Randy Moss last week and Sproles wasn't too far behind (Cribbs was #8 overall, Sproles #11). It adds an element to the game and gives value to players that impact the game but rarely get credit. We also have high defensive scoring where a top D can outscore the offense - Philly outscored Brees last week and the other top Ds were around #10-15. And QBs get negative points for incomplete passes (.25) and positive for complete passes (.25).

There's a lot of variety out there if you want something new, just be careful that it isn't so different if you have owners who aren't going to understand the rules. an FBG league could have very unique scoring, your work league probably should stick to the basics.

 

[FUBAR]

First, to each his own. (obviously)

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

I disagree. The argument for awarding a point for the reception is that you are rewarding the efforts made to earn that reception. A handoff is just that. Arguably much less skill in taking a hand off than it is checking the read on the corner, adjusting the route, coming out of your break, and on some occasions making a brilliant catch. The skill involved to earn that 10- or 20- or whatever-yard reception justifies the extra 1pt, and in theory, those who exercise those skills before they even see the ball, should be rewarded accordingly.

That leads me to a question I almost asked in my first post; if we have PPR, why not add points per completion for the QB? Not a lot of point of course, but .25 per with negative for incomplete passes makes sense IMO.

 

[UnknownCoach]

I really hope it doesnt. Giving PPRs to RBs is horrible IMO. A RB who catches a 5 yard pass gets 3 times as many points as a RB who runs for 5 yards.

 

[puckalicious]

One league I'm in just switched to PPR. I think I'm a few years too late since now most teams use RBBC and there are no more stud RBs and RBs just aren't worth anything anymore. We only start 2 WR (1 flex) and even with this WR are way overvalued when you add in PPR - IMO. I can only imagine if we had to start 3 WR like some leagues, nobody would even draft a RB until round 4.

 

[ArlingtonTerp]

"don't you believe that if you asked most NFL GM's to choose a back such as Rudi Johnson, who didn't catch the ball, or a similar back who could catch the ball, they'd go after the latter? PPR leagues do value backs who catch the ball more (and perhaps at times, too much), but aren't they more dynamic players in real football as well?

It doesn't matter in and of itself. It is true you'd rather have a versatile player who runs for a 1000 and catches for 500 over a guy who runs for 1000, but it would be no better than a guy who runs for 1500 who is basically kept out of passing downs for some little back (possibly because the 1500 yard stud is so darn valuable). Versatility only matters as it relates to productivity. That comes out in normal non-PPR scoring. You don't have to make starting roster limits strange for WRs to be more valuable. It is the current "normal" roster starting limits that are very odd. Many leagues require 2 RBs and then let you add another with a flex. This makes no sense; you never see three rbs at a time, and even two is getting rarer (and almost never two real runners). But teams do play four wides frequently, 3 wides very frequently, and even 5 wides sometimes). A league that requires only one RB ad lets you add another with a flex, but requires 3 (or even 2) WRs totally changes the value of WRs to be as, or more, valuable than RBs.

 

[CMU37484]

First, to each his own. (obviously)

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

I disagree. The argument for awarding a point for the reception is that you are rewarding the efforts made to earn that reception. A handoff is just that. Arguably much less skill in taking a hand off than it is checking the read on the corner, adjusting the route, coming out of your break, and on some occasions making a brilliant catch. The skill involved to earn that 10- or 20- or whatever-yard reception justifies the extra 1pt, and in theory, those who exercise those skills before they even see the ball, should be rewarded accordingly.

What about the point that a RB or WR gets when the QB throws the ball forward to them immediately after the ball is snapped? Or screen pases to RB's? Why should a catch for -2 yards ever get a full point in fantasy scoring? It does in most PPR leagues.I don't mind PPR, we use it too actually, but my league lets RB's get .5 PPR and WR/TE get 1 PPR. Either do it, or don't. I watch Stafford throw an out pass to Calvin Johnson and see the cornerback immedialty light him up for a gain of -1 yards. THAT gets a point yet a RB catching a screen pass only deserves a .5 point? Come on.......neither play deserves a point.

What I hate about PPR is that in my league last year 22 WR's scored over 200 fantasy points, only 11 RB's. It doesn't equal out positions, it makes WR's much more valuable.

My league ALSO only starts 1 RB, 2 WR's and then 2 flex. So with our scoring system you can start 4 WR's and most guys try to. Don't get me wrong, I'm still pretty darn successful in my league and adjust accordingly, but I don't like what we've evolved into.

Donald Driver catching 10 catches for 75 yards is better than Clinton Portis rushing for 100 yards and a TD.

 

[fsufan]

I really hope it doesnt. Giving PPRs to RBs is horrible IMO. A RB who catches a 5 yard pass gets 3 times as many points as a RB who runs for 5 yards.

this is why i do not like PPR. i find it for a player to get 1 PT for a reception that gets very few yards, zero yards or negative yards. i think PPR overvalues the average/mediocre RBs and WRs

 

[fsufan]

What I hate about PPR is that in my league last year 22 WR's scored over 200 fantasy points, only 11 RB's. It doesn't equal out positions, it makes WR's much more valuable.

you are right, it does not equal out the position, the NFL is a pass happy league now. 22 WRs over 200 FF PTs is

 

[Pip's Invitation]

We do 1pt for every 8 yards for receivers, rb's get 1pt for every 10. It evens things out pretty nicely.

One of my leagues is similar. 1 pt per 10 yards for WR/TE, 1 per 12 for RB.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

That leads me to a question I almost asked in my first post; if we have PPR, why not add points per completion for the QB? Not a lot of point of course, but .25 per with negative for incomplete passes makes sense IMO.

I am in a league with a very odd scoring system that includes essentially .5 per reception and .2 per completion. It was designed from scratch about 25 years ago, before FF had magazines and websites and standards. And hasn't changed. It also essentially awards 3.5 for a touchdown, not 6.

 

[pollardsvision]

It's starting to seem more common than non-PPR in my experience.

The one league I commish uses 0.5 and I prefer that (though I'd like to try that 0.5/1.0/1.5 RB/WR/TE scoring).

What it comes down to, is that standard scoring just kind of stinks. Imo, standard scoring may as well be a TD-only league. Someone's generally worthless to you if they don't score a TD in standard scoring.

To each his own, but I don't like when TDs account for so much. It's the most difficult thing to predict, yet it's what decides games in most formats.

PPR seems to help balance the "TD heavy"ness just a bit.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

This may interest readers of this thread:

Points Per Deception - Pasquino

 

[ArlingtonTerp]

I don't like when TDs account for so much.

There's a much simpler and more elegant way to de-emphasize TDs than propping up a random stat. You know, give fewer points for TDs. PPR was not started because people were watching the games and thought, "man, catching is awesome; we must give points for that." It was done as a clunky solution to balance RBs and WRs. There are much better ways to do that. The simplest is to have starting rosters requirements that more closely resemble how NFL teams actually play.

 

[roadkill1292]

I've always wondered about a league that rewarded 1st downs. Has anyone played in a league like that?

Thought of this prior to this season but none of the sites I'm playing on this year could accommodate the request. Hopefully next year they'll include it as a statistical option, first downs are a much more important and relevant statistic than receptions IMO (I do play in a .3 ppr league however, and think this rewards high reception players appropriately.)

My local league has done PPFDR for a couple of years now. As long time Ravens watchers, we didn't want to award a point for a two yard catch on third-and-five, of which the Ratbirds were the masters. A first down catch is a valuable one and narrows the scoring gap considerably. It's been a boon to our leeg.CBS tracks this, BTW.

 

[FUBAR]

To each his own, but I don't like when TDs account for so much. It's the most difficult thing to predict, yet it's what decides games in most formats.

somebody should petition the NFL, those TDs usually decide the game there too. j/k, but I have no problem with TDs counting for a lot, I just don't like TD only leagues.

 

[firstseason1988]

Anyone who prefers PPR scoring doesn't undestand the essence of fantasy football.

In fantasy football you try to make the best team as if you are a NFL general manager. Players values are determined by stats. What's the most important stat? Points. Next most important is yards gained. A reception is nice, but a 3 yard reception being valued higher than a 10 yard rush is inane. It skews a player's value in an weird way. Yeah short yardage TD vultures get skew stats some, but there are very few of those and like someone else said, if that bothers you make yardage more important in your league.

As far as making the positions of equal value, who is most valuable, well the o-line, but that is reflected in the postion players for that team so. Most important, QB-RB-WR-TE in that order, points should be skewed to that order because it reflects the value of that player to the team. Normal season top 20 players scoring should be 10-12 QBs, 6-8 RBs, 2-4 WRs. A whole another discussion about tiering effects could be here but most of you know that one.

I have no respect for PPR leagues or anyone who plays in them. For the layman, for the masses, not for the true player.

have fun.

 

[w.stubbs]

When I first fell in love with PPR:

Derek Loville rb 1995 218 rsh / 723 YDs 10td 87rec 662 yds YDs 3 TD

 

[firstseason1988]

When I first fell in love with PPR: Derek Loville rb 1995 218 rsh / 723 YDs 10td 87rec 662 yds YDs 3 TD

Thanks for making my point more clear.

 

[pollardsvision]

I don't like when TDs account for so much.

There's a much simpler and more elegant way to de-emphasize TDs than propping up a random stat. You know, give fewer points for TDs. PPR was not started because people were watching the games and thought, "man, catching is awesome; we must give points for that." It was done as a clunky solution to balance RBs and WRs. There are much better ways to do that. The simplest is to have starting rosters requirements that more closely resemble how NFL teams actually play.

I've done that in the past (making TDs count less) and I do like that.I don't like PPR because it is in line with what's important in actual football (though I do like rewarding guy's with the skills to be effective in passing situations, thus being on the field and catching passes). There are other, maybe more effective ways to de-emphasize TDs, but I think PPR helps with that.The PPRFD would be more preferred over PPR, but I've never played on a site that supports that.

 

[pollardsvision]

To each his own, but I don't like when TDs account for so much. It's the most difficult thing to predict, yet it's what decides games in most formats.

somebody should petition the NFL, those TDs usually decide the game there too. j/k, but I have no problem with TDs counting for a lot, I just don't like TD only leagues.

I see your point and I do understand that (obviously) in real football, TDs are all that matter at all.I'm just not that concerned about having fantasy mirror reality. I have and love real football. I'm just concerned with making fantasy more fun.

Part of that, for me, is about making fantasy about predictable things (I realize that may fly in the face of advocating for PPR for some). TD's just aren't that predictable for fantasy purposes. TDs accounting for so much is a major part of the luck factor in FFB.

I liken it to point spreads in gambling. Point spreads are completely irrelevant in terms of real football (we always hope, at least). They are merely to make the gambling more fun.

 

[w.stubbs]

When I first fell in love with PPR:

Derek Loville rb 1995 218 rsh / 723 YDs 10td 87rec 662 yds YDs 3 TD

Thanks for making my point more clear.

es⋅sence - noun - the basic, real, and invariable nature of a thing or its significant individual feature or featuresSorry the essence of fantasy football is fantasy. To tally points awarded for performance of players in the NFL. If you want to simulate NFL games go play Madden.

GO PPR!

Side note for those interested: the scoring system for this PPR league did not award points for rush or rec yards until the player reached 100 yards. In which case there were still very few elite RB's.

 

[Klimtology]

Anyone know if the scoring for the World Championship of FF is PPR?

TIA

 

[pollardsvision]

Anyone who prefers PPR scoring doesn't undestand the essence of fantasy football.

In fantasy football you try to make the best team as if you are a NFL general manager. Players values are determined by stats. What's the most important stat? Points. Next most important is yards gained. A reception is nice, but a 3 yard reception being valued higher than a 10 yard rush is inane. It skews a player's value in an weird way. Yeah short yardage TD vultures get skew stats some, but there are very few of those and like someone else said, if that bothers you make yardage more important in your league.

As far as making the positions of equal value, who is most valuable, well the o-line, but that is reflected in the postion players for that team so. Most important, QB-RB-WR-TE in that order, points should be skewed to that order because it reflects the value of that player to the team. Normal season top 20 players scoring should be 10-12 QBs, 6-8 RBs, 2-4 WRs. A whole another discussion about tiering effects could be here but most of you know that one.

I have no respect for PPR leagues or anyone who plays in them. For the layman, for the masses, not for the true player.

have fun.

I can fully understand and appreciate a man taking his fantasy football seriously. That's why most of us are here. Making character judgements about someone based on the fantasy point system they choose does seem a tad over the top though.

 

[w.stubbs]

One thought on the .5 ppr rb. I have never done this. Instead my league awards 1pt per 5 carries.

 

[firstseason1988]

Anyone who prefers PPR scoring doesn't undestand the essence of fantasy football.

In fantasy football you try to make the best team as if you are a NFL general manager. Players values are determined by stats. What's the most important stat? Points. Next most important is yards gained. A reception is nice, but a 3 yard reception being valued higher than a 10 yard rush is inane. It skews a player's value in an weird way. Yeah short yardage TD vultures get skew stats some, but there are very few of those and like someone else said, if that bothers you make yardage more important in your league.

As far as making the positions of equal value, who is most valuable, well the o-line, but that is reflected in the postion players for that team so. Most important, QB-RB-WR-TE in that order, points should be skewed to that order because it reflects the value of that player to the team. Normal season top 20 players scoring should be 10-12 QBs, 6-8 RBs, 2-4 WRs. A whole another discussion about tiering effects could be here but most of you know that one.

I have no respect for PPR leagues or anyone who plays in them. For the layman, for the masses, not for the true player.

have fun.

I can fully understand and appreciate a man taking his fantasy football seriously. That's why most of us are here. Making character judgements about someone based on the fantasy point system they choose does seem a tad over the top though.

I didn't mean that if I saw you and were a PPR man I would spit on you or anything just that I don't respect you as a true fantasy football player. That you don't get the essence of fantasy football if you play it. It really bothers me that PPR is becoming more the norm than not. I guess it is the old school in the old man. Another subject for another thread is when people try to "even out the value" of the positions. Makes no sense to me why anyone feels the need to do that. I will never play in a fantasy football league that has PPR unless it is free with possible prizes to win, like on this site.

 

[FUBAR]

Anyone who prefers PPR scoring doesn't undestand the essence of fantasy football.

In fantasy football you try to make the best team as if you are a NFL general manager. Players values are determined by stats. What's the most important stat? Points. Next most important is yards gained. A reception is nice, but a 3 yard reception being valued higher than a 10 yard rush is inane. It skews a player's value in an weird way. Yeah short yardage TD vultures get skew stats some, but there are very few of those and like someone else said, if that bothers you make yardage more important in your league.

As far as making the positions of equal value, who is most valuable, well the o-line, but that is reflected in the postion players for that team so. Most important, QB-RB-WR-TE in that order, points should be skewed to that order because it reflects the value of that player to the team. Normal season top 20 players scoring should be 10-12 QBs, 6-8 RBs, 2-4 WRs. A whole another discussion about tiering effects could be here but most of you know that one.

I have no respect for PPR leagues or anyone who plays in them. For the layman, for the masses, not for the true player.

have fun.

I can fully understand and appreciate a man taking his fantasy football seriously. That's why most of us are here. Making character judgements about someone based on the fantasy point system they choose does seem a tad over the top though.

I didn't mean that if I saw you and were a PPR man I would spit on you or anything just that I don't respect you as a true fantasy football player. That you don't get the essence of fantasy football if you play it. It really bothers me that PPR is becoming more the norm than not. I guess it is the old school in the old man. Another subject for another thread is when people try to "even out the value" of the positions. Makes no sense to me why anyone feels the need to do that. I will never play in a fantasy football league that has PPR unless it is free with possible prizes to win, like on this site.

The essence? Dude, it's a game. With many ways to play it. It seems you're the guy who doesn't "get the essence of fantasy football."