League Dilemma (1 Viewer)

[Jbl1967]

I started a topic asking if any owner played in a league in which they played their fantasy bowl in week 17. There were great responses and i appreciated each and every opinion.

The reason i asked in the first place was because we have a dilemma in our league and i could used some more well thought responses. Let me start from the beginning.

1. We play a 12 week season with double headers in weeks 2,3, 11 and 12. This gives us a 16 game season. We have never scheduled the double-header weeks on bye weeks.

2. The Texans/Ravens both had their bye weeks on week 2 due to the roof problem. We decided to scrap weeks 2 and 3 of the double headers. Week 2 because it would not have been fair for the owners that had players on those bye weeks, as i posted above, I as the commissioner have never scheduled our double header weeks on the bye weeks. I also canceled week 3 of the double headers because i wanted to either keep it at an even 14 game schedule or decide how we would make up the games in weeks 11, 12, and 13 if needed.

3. So now we have two choices as far as making up these two games.

A: Play a triple header on weeks 11, and 12.

B: Extend our season one more week and place those double-headers in week 13. Which would have us playing our fantasy bowl in week 17 for this year only.

So that is it in a nutshell, that is why the original post was asking how or if you as owners enjoyed playing in a league with a fantasy bowl in week 17.

Now here are some details about our league.

We have a 53 man roster, we play 8 IDPs, we have flexibility when it comes to starting different offensive formations.

For Example: We can go with a 1 rb, 4 wr set or a 2 wr, 2 te set.

I am big on history and it is important that we have a full 16 game season.

So once again, we can have two weeks of triple headers in weeks 11, and 12 (We already have the double headers on these weeks) or just extend the season one week and play the fantasy bowl in week 17 for this year only?

I would love to hear what you all have to say and how you would feel or vote if you were part of this league.

Thanks and hope to have as many responses as the first post i put up.

 

[gianmarco]

I think it's good you're putting this much thought and effort into this. I also understand trying to preserve the history of what you do. Unfortunately, the situations this year made it a little difficult and I'm sure everyone in your league understands this.

This is one of those things that you need to decide between 2 things.

1. Do what you think is best as commish of the league.

2. Put it up to a vote and go with the majority.

This is what commishes do and the league should just follow along as long as it's in the interest of fairness and trying to do the right thing. If you really aren't convinced that one option is better than the other, then put it up to a vote and be done with it. If you really do think one is better than the other, make the decision and your league members will go along with it. I wouldn't make a much bigger deal out of it than that, tbh.

 

[belljr]

I'm confused. If you intended on making these games up why did you cancel week 3? At the time it looked like you were not making these up so you wanted an even amount of games.

I would just play 14 this year personally. I think this decision should have been made back in week 2 and voted not now.

Of your options I would play a triple header I guess. Not a big fan of double headers to begin with but if that's your option. I would be against playing Week 17.

Any way to cut a week out of the playoffs? I would put it up for a vote also.

 

[PoolShark]

IMO, playing your championship game in wk 17 shouldn't be a consideration. That is something (at least some) owners consider when making trades & add/drops, and even when drafting their team. I don't think that would be fair to anyone who planned that far ahead, expecting no game in wk 17.

Someone asked about cutting out a week of playoffs, which I don't see as being a realistic option either. In order to do that, you would have to change the number of teams you allow into the playoffs in the first place, which is again a huge change to your format.

Playing 2 triple headers would allow you to keep your 16 wk regular season, but then you're playing 10 weeks where your score only counts toward ONE game, and 2 weeks where your score counts toward THREE games. For any team with a couple key injuries (or even one that just has a couple bad weeks), that's over 1/3 of their season down the tubes. An 8-2 team that's been doing great all season could wind up 8-8 and out of the playoffs in 2 weeks. That seems grossly unfair, especially if you're only now going to make the decision & these triple headers take place in a couple weeks.

Personally, I think the best way to go would be to just play a 14 game regular season. Call it "strike-shortened" for historical purposes.

 

[redsoxfan]

I would not move the superbowl to week 17. It's too unpredictable and people may have been planning for certain matchups already for the previously defined playoff weeks.

I also think that tripleheaders is a terrible option because one bad week can saddle a team with 3 losses. That just seems harsh and a bit unfair.

If only playing 14 games was an option back in week 3 (when you cancelled the doubleheaders for that week) then why is it NOT an option now? What changed? IMO, once you made the decision to cancel those doubleheaders in addition to the week 2 doubleheaders you set yourself on a path of only playing an abbreviated season. Personally, I don't see the big deal in only playing 14 games. Even the NFL has had abbreviated seasons in it's history.

IMO, this seems like the most fair option and that is what I would do in your situation.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

IMO, playing your championship game in wk 17 shouldn't be a consideration. That is something (at least some) owners consider when making trades & add/drops, and even when drafting their team. I don't think that would be fair to anyone who planned that far ahead, expecting no game in wk 17. Someone asked about cutting out a week of playoffs, which I don't see as being a realistic option either. In order to do that, you would have to change the number of teams you allow into the playoffs in the first place, which is again a huge change to your format.Playing 2 triple headers would allow you to keep your 16 wk regular season, but then you're playing 10 weeks where your score only counts toward ONE game, and 2 weeks where your score counts toward THREE games. For any team with a couple key injuries (or even one that just has a couple bad weeks), that's over 1/3 of their season down the tubes. An 8-2 team that's been doing great all season could wind up 8-8 and out of the playoffs in 2 weeks. That seems grossly unfair, especially if you're only now going to make the decision & these triple headers take place in a couple weeks. Personally, I think the best way to go would be to just play a 14 game regular season. Call it "strike-shortened" for historical purposes.

Totally agree. I know you like the 16-game season, but 14 is the way to go here. Sure, all the Peyton owners would love to have his week 11 and 12 scores tripled, because he faces the easiest schedule for all QB's for those 2 games. But if I own Rivers, I am sad enough to have his scores count double during 2 tough weeks. Why would you triple the misery/joy of an owner? It's more important to keep it fair this year rather than worry about total regular season games played.As for playing in week 17, no way. Owners did not draft based on playing in week 17, so they would certainly have a legitimate complaint. Also, remember that many studs may take week 17 off to prepare for the NFL playoffs.

 

[The Jerk]

I respect someone who is big on history, but I think fairness needs to trump history in unprecedented situations.

As such, I would strongly suggest no Week 17 and no tripleheaders. Really it's the simplest solution.

Philosophically, I'm against doubleheaders in some weeks only. I agree with your concept that as your schedule is currently constructed, no doubleheaders should occur on bye weeks. However, I'm not sure that is the fairest schedule, as tough matchups often are more significant than byes in terms of affecting fantasy games. A fairer and more balanced schedule is to have doubleheaders or tripleheaders EVERY week rather than some single and some double weeks.

I was once faced with a 9-team league when a team dropped out the day before the draft. Wanting to finish by week 13, I considered several options but decided that a one-division format with each team facing each other team three times with doubleheaders every week was the best way to ensure fairness across the entire season. This way, injuries or tough matchups in Weeks 2-3 and/or 11-12 don't cause more harm than they would in Weeks 7-8. With this setup, the bigger decision became to play Weeks 1-12 or Weeks 2-13 as the regular season for head-to-head matchups.