Total Points League (1 Viewer)

[-OZ-]

I'm commish for the first total points league I've ever been in, so I'm wondering what you all think about them,

I can see the advantages, but does it detract from the fun?

 

[butcher boy]

Voted no.

H2H is just more fun for me. Having matchups between teams increases trash talk and builds rivalries that makes up half the fun. It also helps keep the ####ty teams interested a bit longer.

You can always keep a good chunk of prize money for the high points scorer to reward that team, but H2H + playoffs is the way to go.

 

[Sweat Hog]

I'm in 2 total points leagues. A buddy of mine started the one league in '94 and that was my intro to FF. I've done both and prefer total points. I know H2H is supposedly "more realistic" but IMO it's too easy to have the best team all year and then get punked in the playoffs by lesser teams that get lucky for that one week and blow you out of the water. Total points measures the best overall team managed for the entire season.

That said, I have also been in a "hybrid" league where we had 2 divisions and played H2H and prize money was awarded for the division winners and ultimate champion AND for like the top 4 point scoring teams. A majority of the total pot went to the point scorers but those that prevailed H2H also got a cut. I've been lobbying my commish to go this route for a couple years but no go unfortunately.

One thing that can add some excitement to the total points league is the high point total for the week gets $10 or $15 and we also award $25 bonus to the high week for the season. It spreads the cash around a bit and keeps even the lower teams interested. Typically our champ will win 2-4 weeks with the rest of the weekly winners spread out pretty well.

 

[Zoomanji]

My "main" league is total points and I like it better than H2H. You don't get penalized for a bad week 14, 15 or 16.

We also do H2H with a portion of the pot and after 11 years no one has ever won both.

 

[Stingdiddy]

Total points leagues are the true measure of a fantasy team from week 1-16 or 1-17. Head to head leagues are a joke.

Head to head leagues are 70% luck of the draw. Total points leagues award the best team, week in and week out, no questions asked. I've argued this with people before...95% of those that argue against total points leagues have never been in one.

Sub par fantasy owners will always argue in favor of a head to head league.

With all of that being said, I don't see a problem with giving $100 (considering your league is $100 buy in) or so to the head to head champion of a league. The total points winner should get the rest and be considered the league champion.

 

[code]

I'm commish for the first total points league I've ever been in, so I'm wondering what you all think about them,I can see the advantages, but does it detract from the fun?

The first year of our league, and the first year of FF for most of us, we were total points...by about week 8 several teams were completely out of it and it was not much fun down the stretch...we switched to a double header league the following year...slightly less biased than h2h but it still maintains some of the rivalry and scheduling fun...double header > all play >>> head to head >>>>>> total points

 

[lafan68]

I'm commish for the first total points league I've ever been in, so I'm wondering what you all think about them,I can see the advantages, but does it detract from the fun?

Much like others here, I think doing a hybrid is the best alternative. Total points reduces the luck factor of a streaky late week champion, but by having some of the prize money based on the playoffs, you still get the H2H fun. Been in a hybrid for 15 years and still going strong and I can't think of a good reason not to do both in the same league.

 

[CalBear]

Head to head leagues are 70% luck of the draw. Total points leagues award the best team, week in and week out, no questions asked. I've argued this with people before...95% of those that argue against total points leagues have never been in one.

I've been in multiple total points leagues. My main league is a head-to-head league and I've never failed to make the playoffs, but have only won the title once.Big deal, that's the way it goes. The head to head leagues are way more fun than the total points leagues. Half the league is already eliminated by halfway through the season in total points, and it's almost never close at the end. Total points for fantasy is about as much fun as total points would be for the NFL.

 

[code]

Total points leagues are the true measure of a fantasy team from week 1-16 or 1-17. Head to head leagues are a joke. Head to head leagues are 70% luck of the draw. Total points leagues award the best team, week in and week out, no questions asked. I've argued this with people before...95% of those that argue against total points leagues have never been in one. Sub par fantasy owners will always argue in favor of a head to head league.With all of that being said, I don't see a problem with giving $100 (considering your league is $100 buy in) or so to the head to head champion of a league. The total points winner should get the rest and be considered the league champion.

I've commished a total points league and I understand it's ability to "measure" the best fantasy team and if that's all you're after it is great...but for me FF is also about emulating the NFL and enjoying the entire season with a little competition amongst friends...on those terms total points fails miserably...However, for reference, in our double header league we do offer an award to the season's total point champion...they essentially get their entire entry fee back and the season is free...

 

[JohnnyU]

Teams bail too quickly when they see they can't make up the points, which in turn reduces league activity. Total points is for baseball, not football imo. The only thing total points should be used for in football is to award some cash for being the points leader, and / or award a playoff spot.

 

[Cromedog]

I started my league 17 years ago and it was Total Points...that's all I knew at the time. Over the years our league evolved just like everything else including more scoring options, etc. Then the biggest change was to add HTH along with Total Points. Our league has both and we award money to 1st-3rd in both HTH and Total Points. In addition, out Total Points part runs thru the Super Bowl. This adds even another dimension to drafting and trading. I think having both keeps everyone involved. If your team stinks, you can make trades (sometimes for non playoff talent) and still have a shot at the HTH title (everyone makes the playoffs, top 4 teams have a bye the first week). It also takes care of having the best team all year only to get upset by 1 poor performance in the playoffs. I currently play in 4 other leagues and have been in several others throuought the years and this is BY FAR the BEST set-up.

Usually 4-5 (about equally split between the two) teams will end up in the money for HTH or Total Points. Never had 6, meaning completely different people in 1st-3rd for both and last year was the first year we had an exact duplicate...ie 1st-3rd were the exact same teams in the same order. It is also rare that the Champion is the same. We recognize our Total Points Winner as the yearly champ and the payout is slightly (very slightly) more for Total Points.

 

[Stingdiddy]

Teams bail too quickly when they see they can't make up the points, which in turn reduces league activity. Total points is for baseball, not football imo.

Get into a competative league with good owners. This won't be a problem. It's a joke to me that people base leagues on "trying to make sure everyone plays until the end". If you're worried about people participating until the end in your league, get into a different league. In my total points league everyone fights from beginning to end with the exception of one owner. The rogue owner is just lazy (it's an all year thing). The top 6 teams in my total points league make the "playoffs" (we do a little head to head playoff for a small chunk of the prize money). Usually there's at least 9-10 owners with a shot to make the top 6. I'm not sure I understand the argument that head to head leagues keep everyone in it until the end and total points leagues don't. Also, in a total points league, every owner is in the game from week 1-16 or 1-17. In a head to head league, at least half of the owners are eliminated after week 13. I'll bet weeks 14, 15, 16 and 17 aren't much fun for those owners that didn't make the playoffs. I've got owners in my league fighting and scrapping in those weeks to win various side bets that have been made.

 

[JohnnyU]

Teams bail too quickly when they see they can't make up the points, which in turn reduces league activity. Total points is for baseball, not football imo.

Get into a competative league with good owners. This won't be a problem. It's a joke to me that people base leagues on "trying to make sure everyone plays until the end". If you're worried about people participating until the end in your league, get into a different league. In my total points league everyone fights from beginning to end with the exception of one owner. The rogue owner is just lazy (it's an all year thing). The top 6 teams in my total points league make the "playoffs" (we do a little head to head playoff for a small chunk of the prize money). Usually there's at lease 9-10 owners with a shot to make the top 6. I'm not sure I understand the argument that head to head leagues keep everyone in it until the end and total points leagues don't. Also, in a total points league, every owner is in the game from week 1-16 or 1-17. In a head to head league, at least half of the owners are eliminated after week 13. I'll bet weeks 14, 15, 16 and 17 aren't much fun for those owners that didn't make the playoffs. I've got owners in my league fighting and scrapping in those weeks to win various side bets that have been made.

I like the idea that a team that just barely makes the playoffs has a shot at the Super Bowl. One year in MOX 1 I was 11-2 and got eliminated in the first round by a sub 500 team. Now even though the joke was on me, I like the element of an upset, just like in the NFL. Total points leagues separate the good teams from the lesser teams to a greater degree. Like someone said, if that's what you are after, then that's the league for you. In my leagues 6 out of 12 make the playoffs, so there is competition among most teams all year. Division winners get a first round bye, so there's that element also.

 

[CalBear]

Teams bail too quickly when they see they can't make up the points, which in turn reduces league activity. Total points is for baseball, not football imo.

Get into a competative league with good owners. This won't be a problem. It's a joke to me that people base leagues on "trying to make sure everyone plays until the end". If you're worried about people participating until the end in your league, get into a different league.

It's a joke to me that sanctimonious twits even bother spending their time talking with people who they find beneath them.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

All Play > Total Points

in total points, you can have a dominant team for the first half of the year, have the worst team for the latter half of the year, and make it into the playoffs as the worst team in the league at the time.

in all play, you need to have a better-than-average team for a majority of the year to make it to the playoffs. while the same problem might pop up (of your team being terrible leading up to the playoffs), the chances are MUCH lower than in total points.

 

[Biabreakable]

Pole flawed. No smoo option.

 

[smackdaddies]

If your going to do HtH, have weekly payouts (in addition to end of year)- that way anyone has a shot to win something, even if they are out for the season

I play in both, I prefer hth, but tp can be ok

 

[-OZ-]

Teams bail too quickly when they see they can't make up the points, which in turn reduces league activity. Total points is for baseball, not football imo.

Get into a competative league with good owners. This won't be a problem. It's a joke to me that people base leagues on "trying to make sure everyone plays until the end". If you're worried about people participating until the end in your league, get into a different league. In my total points league everyone fights from beginning to end with the exception of one owner. The rogue owner is just lazy (it's an all year thing). The top 6 teams in my total points league make the "playoffs" (we do a little head to head playoff for a small chunk of the prize money). Usually there's at lease 9-10 owners with a shot to make the top 6. I'm not sure I understand the argument that head to head leagues keep everyone in it until the end and total points leagues don't. Also, in a total points league, every owner is in the game from week 1-16 or 1-17. In a head to head league, at least half of the owners are eliminated after week 13. I'll bet weeks 14, 15, 16 and 17 aren't much fun for those owners that didn't make the playoffs. I've got owners in my league fighting and scrapping in those weeks to win various side bets that have been made.

I like the idea that a team that just barely makes the playoffs has a shot at the Super Bowl. One year in MOX 1 I was 11-2 and got eliminated in the first round by a sub 500 team. Now even though the joke was on me, I like the element of an upset, just like in the NFL. Total points leagues separate the good teams from the lesser teams to a greater degree. Like someone said, if that's what you are after, then that's the league for you. In my leagues 6 out of 12 make the playoffs, so there is competition among most teams all year. Division winners get a first round bye, so there's that element also.

To me, this is a double edged sword. If a team is among the best in 14 of the 16 (or 17) weeks, they shouldn't get taken out because one average team has one hot week. But I do understand and appreciate your point of view.If you're concerned about teams staying active, Will a team that starts out 0-4 or even 2-6 be any more active than a team that is 100 or more points behind the leader?

 

[-OZ-]

If your going to do HtH, have weekly payouts (in addition to end of year)- that way anyone has a shot to win something, even if they are out for the season

This is how my main league does it - $ for top score each week and for for the top 3 teams for the season, then also for division champs, SB champs, etc. I like it. But, I tried to keep this league somewhat simpler for the standings, it's complicated enough with lineups. Part of the reason I went TP is we start 11 on O (2 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 2 R/W, 2 W/T). In a 14 team league, that's a lot of players. I figured TP would make things more in line with who actually fielded the best team.

 

[elcohiba]

We've done both for 15 years and its good. (specially if you go pig)...More monies are paid out on the total points side of the ledger.

 

[CalBear]

To me, this is a double edged sword. If a team is among the best in 14 of the 16 (or 17) weeks, they shouldn't get taken out because one average team has one hot week.

Why not? It happens in the NFL all the time.

 

[-OZ-]

To me, this is a double edged sword. If a team is among the best in 14 of the 16 (or 17) weeks, they shouldn't get taken out because one average team has one hot week.

Why not? It happens in the NFL all the time.

I suppose that's another part of the debate. Do we want to mimic the NFL as close as possible, or give credit to the person who fields the best team?

 

[BAT1man]

I only play in leagues where the emphasis is placed on (and most prize money is directed) towards the total points leader, with a small amount of the pot going to the H2H superbowl winner.

That way, the best team wins every time, yet you get all the fun that can be had from a H2H league in talking trash, etc.

In my main league, the winners of the H2H matchups for the week each win $2 (the price of a waiver). Manwhile, the losers of each matchup have to pay between $2-$10 dollars based upon how badly they lost their H2H matchup. It builds up the pot nicely for the eventual total points winner.

 

[CalBear]

To me, this is a double edged sword. If a team is among the best in 14 of the 16 (or 17) weeks, they shouldn't get taken out because one average team has one hot week.

Why not? It happens in the NFL all the time.

I suppose that's another part of the debate. Do we want to mimic the NFL as close as possible, or give credit to the person who fields the best team?

Neither. We want to have the most fun. Head to head is more fun for more people for more of the season.

 

[Lambert]

Teams bail too quickly when they see they can't make up the points, which in turn reduces league activity. Total points is for baseball, not football imo.

Get into a competative league with good owners. This won't be a problem. It's a joke to me that people base leagues on "trying to make sure everyone plays until the end". If you're worried about people participating until the end in your league, get into a different league.

In my total points league everyone fights from beginning to end with the exception of one owner. The rogue owner is just lazy (it's an all year thing). The top 6 teams in my total points league make the "playoffs" (we do a little head to head playoff for a small chunk of the prize money). Usually there's at lease 9-10 owners with a shot to make the top 6. I'm not sure I understand the argument that head to head leagues keep everyone in it until the end and total points leagues don't.

Also, in a total points league, every owner is in the game from week 1-16 or 1-17. In a head to head league, at least half of the owners are eliminated after week 13. I'll bet weeks 14, 15, 16 and 17 aren't much fun for those owners that didn't make the playoffs. I've got owners in my league fighting and scrapping in those weeks to win various side bets that have been made.

I like the idea that a team that just barely makes the playoffs has a shot at the Super Bowl. One year in MOX 1 I was 11-2 and got eliminated in the first round by a sub 500 team. Now even though the joke was on me, I like the element of an upset, just like in the NFL. Total points leagues separate the good teams from the lesser teams to a greater degree. Like someone said, if that's what you are after, then that's the league for you. In my leagues 6 out of 12 make the playoffs, so there is competition among most teams all year. Division winners get a first round bye, so there's that element also.

To me, this is a double edged sword. If a team is among the best in 14 of the 16 (or 17) weeks, they shouldn't get taken out because one average team has one hot week. But I do understand and appreciate your point of view.If you're concerned about teams staying active, Will a team that starts out 0-4 or even 2-6 be any more active than a team that is 100 or more points behind the leader?

Exactly. Teams are just as likely to "give up" because they're out of the running in a HTH league as in a total points league. At least total points is somewhat less luck-driven.

 

[bigfishboy]

I play in a points league with people I don't know for money. I wouldn't play in it if it were H2H, too much variability and luck.

I play in several league with friends, it is all about trash talking and beating their arses, They would be no fun if they were points.

So, I guess it depends on what you want out of it.

 

[gem IV]

I'm in 2 total points leagues. A buddy of mine started the one league in '94 and that was my intro to FF. I've done both and prefer total points. I know H2H is supposedly "more realistic" but IMO it's too easy to have the best team all year and then get punked in the playoffs by lesser teams that get lucky for that one week and blow you out of the water. Total points measures the best overall team managed for the entire season.That said, I have also been in a "hybrid" league where we had 2 divisions and played H2H and prize money was awarded for the division winners and ultimate champion AND for like the top 4 point scoring teams. A majority of the total pot went to the point scorers but those that prevailed H2H also got a cut. I've been lobbying my commish to go this route for a couple years but no go unfortunately.One thing that can add some excitement to the total points league is the high point total for the week gets $10 or $15 and we also award $25 bonus to the high week for the season. It spreads the cash around a bit and keeps even the lower teams interested. Typically our champ will win 2-4 weeks with the rest of the weekly winners spread out pretty well.

I'm in both types of leagues; both are fun, both are competitive.In one of my leagues we do something very similar to the "hybrid" you described, but with a twist.In a nutshell:1) Total Points determines the overall League Champion.2) There are two divisions and play H2H each week to determine divisional winners ($$ prize for each).3) The twist is that the losers of the weekly H2H match-ups have to pay $10 into the League coffers. Keeps the Franchise fee low; builds up the prize money; and everyone stays ‘interested’ for 17 weeks.

 

[bigfoamfinger]

We pay out mostly for the total points winner, then 15% to a head to head winner. Everyone is happy.

 

[chris1969]

Done both, like both and also like All Play. The all have different advantages.

 

[cstu]

Total points leagues are the true measure of a fantasy team from week 1-16 or 1-17. Head to head leagues are a joke.

Head to head leagues are 70% luck of the draw. Total points leagues award the best team, week in and week out, no questions asked. I've argued this with people before...95% of those that argue against total points leagues have never been in one.

Sub par fantasy owners will always argue in favor of a head to head league.

With all of that being said, I don't see a problem with giving $100 (considering your league is $100 buy in) or so to the head to head champion of a league. The total points winner should get the rest and be considered the league champion.

Is the WCOFF a total points league?