When/is does the Subscriber contest come out> (1 Viewer)

[TheGrizzlyOne]

Anybody got an answer?

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I think early August is normal

 

[msudaisy26]

Early August is correct

 

[Joe Bryant]

Anyone into this?...

 

[Dacomish]

Anyone into this?...

If you mean if you put it out early and I'll lose work productivity for 2 months rather than the normal 1 month I'm totally in to it...lol!

 

[Joe Bryant]

Anyone into this?...

If you mean if you put it out early and I'll lose work productivity for 2 months rather than the normal 1 month I'm totally in to it...lol!

I feel bad enough affecting workplace productivity as it is...

 

[msudaisy26]

Anyone into this?...

If you mean if you put it out early and I'll lose work productivity for 2 months rather than the normal 1 month I'm totally in to it...lol!

I feel bad enough affecting workplace productivity as it is...

If you put it out early, I promise not to let it affect my workplace productivity!

 

[Scoresman]

Contest pricing coming out in mid-June would be a fun change. It would also reward those who pay attention to injuries and updates up until kickoff.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Contest pricing coming out in mid-June would be a fun change. It would also reward those who pay attention to injuries and updates up until kickoff.

And maybe a June 30 lock...

 

[Scoresman]

Contest pricing coming out in mid-June would be a fun change. It would also reward those who pay attention to injuries and updates up until kickoff.

And maybe a June 30 lock...

Well that's just not fair...

 

[msudaisy26]

Contest pricing coming out in mid-June would be a fun change. It would also reward those who pay attention to injuries and updates up until kickoff.

And maybe a June 30 lock...

Well that's just not fair...

Sounds like we should have two contests!

 

[Joe Bryant]

Or a new scoring system.

 

[Ruffrodys05]

Keep it the same or change it up a little (or a lot)..........the resulting mania will be exactly the same as previous years. Fun times!!!

 

[TheWinz]

Here is a link to last year's thread, which was started 26 days before the contest actually opened

Thread '2024 FBG Subscriber Contest'

Jul 5, 2024

Okay folks, we are about a month away from the contest opening. Thought I would start the thread and provide some useful links.

Previous year's contest threads. I could go back further if anyone wants, but figured 3 years would be fine.
2023 - https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/2023-fbg-subscriber-contest.808976/
2022 - https://forums.footballguys.com/thr...s-10k-5k-to-food-bank-of-their-choice.804787/
2021 - https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/2021-fbg-subscriber-contest.798569/

2024 contest querier -...

• TheWinz
• Replies: 2,855
• Forum: The Shark Pool (NFL Talk)

• 
• 
• 

If no one starts this year's thread by 4 Jul this year, I will lose my mind and start it.

 

[Anarchy99]

An interesting wrinkle (although likely impractical and maybe not feasible) would be to open the contest up early (call it 7/1) but have it like the stock market. Have the player pricing change weekly and people could add or drop players from their team up until the contest locked at the regular closing date before the start of the season with the team having the cost of each player set at the time he was added to the roster. Pricing could change with injuries, trades, announcements of starting spots, roster cuts, etc.

For example, let's say Achane is priced at $25, Wright is $5, and Nick Chubb is $8 on 7/1. In the past, those would have been the prices and folks could take those guys at those costs up until the first week of September. But let's say Achane suffered a season ending injury in training camp. Guys that already had Wright on their roster could keep him for $5. But Wright's price could change to $20. Then say Chubb ended up in MIA as a late training camp addition. Guys that rostered him for $8 could keep him for that price, but new adds might cost $17.

In the past, if Achane did go down with an injury before the season started, contest teams would just ignore him, and he would go unrostered. No no real change with him in my example. But a ton of teams would have swooped in and added Wright for $5. But the other players could see their values fluctuate, and there would be an advantage in buying someone early. If that guy didn't look like he would have a role or get picked up by another team, the team owner could still drop him before the rosters locked.

I don't know if it is possible to have content rosters with variable player pricing. But IMO it would make the contest more interesting (and get people engaged and paying attention from the second the contest went live). Just a thought . . . although it would make things way more difficult for FBG.

 

[TheWinz]

An interesting wrinkle (although likely impractical and maybe not feasible) would be to open the contest up early (call it 7/1) but have it like the stock market. Have the player pricing change weekly and people could add or drop players from their team up until the contest locked at the regular closing date before the start of the season with the team having the cost of each player set at the time he was added to the roster. Pricing could change with injuries, trades, announcements of starting spots, roster cuts, etc.

For example, let's say Achane is priced at $25, Wright is $5, and Nick Chubb is $8 on 7/1. In the past, those would have been the prices and folks could take those guys at those costs up until the first week of September. But let's say Achane suffered a season ending injury in training camp. Guys that already had Wright on their roster could keep him for $5. But Wright's price could change to $20. Then say Chubb ended up in MIA as a late training camp addition. Guys that rostered him for $8 could keep him for that price, but new adds might cost $17.

In the past, if Achane did go down with an injury before the season started, contest teams would just ignore him, and he would go unrostered. No no real change with him in my example. But a ton of teams would have swooped in and added Wright for $5. But the other players could see their values fluctuate, and there would be an advantage in buying someone early. If that guy didn't look like he would have a role or get picked up by another team, the team owner could still drop him before the rosters locked.

I don't know if it is possible to have content rosters with variable player pricing. But IMO it would make the contest more interesting (and get people engaged and paying attention from the second the contest went live). Just a thought . . . although it would make things way more difficult for FBG.

Sounds like fun, but a ton of work for FBG staff, and likely never to happen. That being said, can I roster Ridley at his current WR39 value?

 

[Joe Bryant]

An interesting wrinkle (although likely impractical and maybe not feasible) would be to open the contest up early (call it 7/1) but have it like the stock market. Have the player pricing change weekly and people could add or drop players from their team up until the contest locked at the regular closing date before the start of the season with the team having the cost of each player set at the time he was added to the roster. Pricing could change with injuries, trades, announcements of starting spots, roster cuts, etc.

For example, let's say Achane is priced at $25, Wright is $5, and Nick Chubb is $8 on 7/1. In the past, those would have been the prices and folks could take those guys at those costs up until the first week of September. But let's say Achane suffered a season ending injury in training camp. Guys that already had Wright on their roster could keep him for $5. But Wright's price could change to $20. Then say Chubb ended up in MIA as a late training camp addition. Guys that rostered him for $8 could keep him for that price, but new adds might cost $17.

In the past, if Achane did go down with an injury before the season started, contest teams would just ignore him, and he would go unrostered. No no real change with him in my example. But a ton of teams would have swooped in and added Wright for $5. But the other players could see their values fluctuate, and there would be an advantage in buying someone early. If that guy didn't look like he would have a role or get picked up by another team, the team owner could still drop him before the rosters locked.

I don't know if it is possible to have content rosters with variable player pricing. But IMO it would make the contest more interesting (and get people engaged and paying attention from the second the contest went live). Just a thought . . . although it would make things way more difficult for FBG.

Thanks. I don't disagree that could be fun but I know we'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I could see some sort of bonus for locking a lineup early. That might be interesting.

 

[Joe Bryant]

And to be super clear- I'm just spitballing stuff here. NONE of this is official. LOL.

 

[Anarchy99]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

 

[FlagDynasty]

I’m not sure exactly when the subscriber contest drops, but usually they announce it pretty close to the start date

 

[TheWinz]

I’m not sure exactly when the subscriber contest drops, but usually they announce it pretty close to the start date

Contest Turk is the one who opens the contest, and he typically posts a link to the entry form in the yearly thread around the first week of August. Last year he posted the link July 31st. The contest deadline is typically right before kickoff of the first game, so us lunatics get to spend a solid month tweaking our entries.

 

[Joe Bryant]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

 

[msudaisy26]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

 

[Joe Bryant]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

 

[msudaisy26]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

 

[TheGrizzlyOne]

WOW! Thanks. And yes, I ;love that contest even if I have no chance.

 

[TheWinz]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

One year I suggested they "accidentally" change the scoring by removing the decimal point in the rushing yards category. Most people wouldn't even notice you get 10 points per yard instead of .10 points. A RB with 100 yds would score you 1000 points!

 

[Joe Bryant]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

Sure. We'll kick that around. I know tons of people love that the contest is so challenging. It's punishing.

But I also know lots would like to make it easier to field a great team. We can kick that around a little.

 

[Moonlight]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

Sure. We'll kick that around. I know tons of people love that the contest is so challenging. It's punishing.

But I also know lots would like to make it easier to field a great team. We can kick that around a little.

I don’t think you need to change anything it’s not broken. But like other folks I’m excited to get working at it because you know this is the year I’m going to win it. <g>

 

[BigTex]

I can’t think about this now I won’t be able to sleep someone wake me up when it starts.

Tex

 

[mphtrilogy]

looking forward to it!

 

[Rubi]

Anyone into this?...

If you mean if you put it out early and I'll lose work productivity for 2 months rather than the normal 1 month I'm totally in to it...lol!

I feel bad enough affecting workplace productivity as it is...

Don't

 

[JoeSteeler]

I somehow missed the deadline last year

 

[Joe Bryant]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

Sure. We'll kick that around. I know tons of people love that the contest is so challenging. It's punishing.

But I also know lots would like to make it easier to field a great team. We can kick that around a little.

I don’t think you need to change anything it’s not broken. But like other folks I’m excited to get working at it because you know this is the year I’m going to win it. <g>

Thanks. Here's a thought from my perspective though. And I FULLY realize my perspective is radically different from the forums. I think the contest is massively broken in this way:

Overall, (not here!) participation is pathetic.

Folks here are obviously huge fans. But overall, it's terrible.

We should have 50,000 people in the contest. We put a boat load of cash money into this. And yet a small percentage of the people choose to put an entry in that is free to them (after purchasing a subscription).

For us to continue putting such a huge amount (at least for us) of cash into this, I've got to figure out a way to make it more valuable to more people.

Again, I know most everyone reading this ALREADY loves it. But it's way too unpopular compared to the expenditure we lay out for it.

I also realize, nobody here cares about my problems. And certainly nobody wants a ton more people in the contest.

So I expect near total disagreement here on this. But from my perspective, it's a major issue.

 

[Scoresman]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

One year I suggested they "accidentally" change the scoring by removing the decimal point in the rushing yards category. Most people wouldn't even notice you get 10 points per yard instead of .10 points. A RB with 100 yds would score you 1000 points!

Another idea is to make rushing/receiving yards for all positions worth .2 instead of .1. Seems like a minor change but this catapults rushing QBs to the top of the rankings even more than normal, really separating them from other QBs. One of my leagues did this and I won the league with Daniel Jones that year. He was QB5!!

 

[Joe Bryant]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

One year I suggested they "accidentally" change the scoring by removing the decimal point in the rushing yards category. Most people wouldn't even notice you get 10 points per yard instead of .10 points. A RB with 100 yds would score you 1000 points!

Another idea is to make rushing/receiving yards for all positions worth .2 instead of .1. Seems like a minor change but this catapults rushing QBs to the top of the rankings even more than normal, really separating them from other QBs. One of my leagues did this and I won the league with Daniel Jones that year. He was QB5!!

Thanks. I love stuff like that as it plays right into the big thing we sell at FBG - Custom rankings for YOUR scoring system. Seems to make sense to lean into that angle with the contest too.

 

[msudaisy26]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

Sure. We'll kick that around. I know tons of people love that the contest is so challenging. It's punishing.

But I also know lots would like to make it easier to field a great team. We can kick that around a little.

I don’t think you need to change anything it’s not broken. But like other folks I’m excited to get working at it because you know this is the year I’m going to win it. <g>

Thanks. Here's a thought from my perspective though. And I FULLY realize my perspective is radically different from the forums. I think the contest is massively broken in this way:

Overall, (not here!) participation is pathetic.

Folks here are obviously huge fans. But overall, it's terrible.

We should have 50,000 people in the contest. We put a boat load of cash money into this. And yet a small percentage of the people choose to put an entry in that is free to them (after purchasing a subscription).

For us to continue putting such a huge amount (at least for us) of cash into this, I've got to figure out a way to make it more valuable to more people.

Again, I know most everyone reading this ALREADY loves it. But it's way too unpopular compared to the expenditure we lay out for it.

I also realize, nobody here cares about my problems. And certainly nobody wants a ton more people in the contest.

So I expect near total disagreement here on this. But from my perspective, it's a major issue.

Not that the lower prices would fix everything, but I think a few more people would take it more seriously if the roster had more flexibility and more players they know.

Another idea is more than the survivor aspect. Maybe some free subscriptions to the top 10ish scorers for the entire season even if you get eliminated or sharing teams like you have done before with whoever you are partnering with, or some random prizes like t-shirts or subscriptions for the best team names etc.

I still think an "I outlasted all the pros" tshirt would be really cool. Have that on the front and on the back have your logo and come up with a cool name for the tournament, the front slogan could be better too.

 

[Joe Bryant]

We'd never be able to keep up with accurately pricing if it was a moving target.

You'd have to check with your cracker jack IT staff, but it may not be as complicated as it may sound. There's probably a way to verify a player salary at a certain point in time. Once that is validated, it wouldn't even need to be checked again if that roster spot didn't change. Total team roster costs could be added up the same way as you've been doing it. I don't think there would need to be some crazy coding or querying involved. I get that you may not want to change the rules or the process after all these years, but apps development folks might be able to do this without having the world collapse. Like you said, just spit balling ideas here.

Thanks. That one I'm pretty sure we can't do as I don't like the changing salaries. But I do think some scoring tweaks could be fun. And keep the ideas rolling.

I am not sure if you remember this idea I brought up in the past, but I think after you guys complete your pricing, then you should knock every player down roughly 10 percent. This would would lead to higher scoring and everyone likes higher scores.

Thanks. That's a thought. So more stars on each team?

Or more depth that helps cover.bye weeks or injuries.

Sure. We'll kick that around. I know tons of people love that the contest is so challenging. It's punishing.

But I also know lots would like to make it easier to field a great team. We can kick that around a little.

I don’t think you need to change anything it’s not broken. But like other folks I’m excited to get working at it because you know this is the year I’m going to win it. <g>

Thanks. Here's a thought from my perspective though. And I FULLY realize my perspective is radically different from the forums. I think the contest is massively broken in this way:

Overall, (not here!) participation is pathetic.

Folks here are obviously huge fans. But overall, it's terrible.

We should have 50,000 people in the contest. We put a boat load of cash money into this. And yet a small percentage of the people choose to put an entry in that is free to them (after purchasing a subscription).

For us to continue putting such a huge amount (at least for us) of cash into this, I've got to figure out a way to make it more valuable to more people.

Again, I know most everyone reading this ALREADY loves it. But it's way too unpopular compared to the expenditure we lay out for it.

I also realize, nobody here cares about my problems. And certainly nobody wants a ton more people in the contest.

So I expect near total disagreement here on this. But from my perspective, it's a major issue.

Not that the lower prices would fix everything, but I think a few more people would take it more seriously if the roster had more flexibility and more players they know.

Another idea is more than the survivor aspect. Maybe some free subscriptions to the top 10ish scorers for the entire season even if you get eliminated or sharing teams like you have done before with whoever you are partnering with, or some random prizes like t-shirts or subscriptions for the best team names etc.

I still think an "I outlasted all the pros" tshirt would be really cool. Have that on the front and on the back have your logo and come up with a cool name for the tournament, the front slogan could be better too.

Possibly. In the past, we have put $30,000 towards this each year so I don't see adding more money to it. But maybe we change around some things.

 

[TheWinz]

Thanks. Here's a thought from my perspective though. And I FULLY realize my perspective is radically different from the forums. I think the contest is massively broken in this way:
Overall, (not here!) participation is pathetic.
Folks here are obviously huge fans. But overall, it's terrible.
We should have 50,000 people in the contest. We put a boat load of cash money into this. And yet a small percentage of the people choose to put an entry in that is free to them (after purchasing a subscription).
For us to continue putting such a huge amount (at least for us) of cash into this, I've got to figure out a way to make it more valuable to more people.
Again, I know most everyone reading this ALREADY loves it. But it's way too unpopular compared to the expenditure we lay out for it.
I also realize, nobody here cares about my problems. And certainly nobody wants a ton more people in the contest.
So I expect near total disagreement here on this. But from my perspective, it's a major issue.

I assume there are roughly 50K paying subscribers, because you said there should be 50K in the contest. If that's the case, the average has been between 22-33% of the paying members submitting, if you count for the folks not eligible for prizes.

Entries by year:
2024 - 11,723
2023 - 9,966
2022 - 12,281
2021 - 9,767
2020 - 10,207
2019 - 12,586
2018 - 15,115

"For us to continue putting such a huge amount (at least for us) of cash into this, I've got to figure out a way to make it more valuable to more people."
Since 2018's 15K turnout, the contest has been pretty steady. Right around 11K entries, give or take. Actually, last year it was above the 6 year average, by 635. During this time, COVID probably accounted for the biggest decline, but I have no reason as to why 2023 participation dropped. One thing I would look at is the actual percentages of eligible paying members per year vs how many submit entries. If that number has remained constant, then it is what it is. But if that number has been dropping, I would try to figure out why.

"Again, I know most everyone reading this ALREADY loves it. But it's way too unpopular compared to the expenditure we lay out for it."
I won't claim to know everything here, but the prize pool last year was $24k in cash, along with $10.4K in subscriptions (totaling roughly $35K). So, the prizes cover 730 of the cheapest level paying members (like me). Of course, I know you have to account for plenty of money to actually host the contest (paying the Turk, etc.) and I truly have no idea how much that is. But I can say, with 100% certainty, at least 730 people pay the $47.88 fee JUST for this contest! I am one of them. FBG is the only site I have ever paid, and I wouldn't be doing it without this contest.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

I like the contest and I appreciate how much time and effort guys like @TheWinz put into it, but it is not a draw for me. I probably put a grand total of 15-20min per year into the contest and the results show!

I am a big fan of the Footballguys Bowl, though, especially if we get some Shark Pool only leagues running.

 

[TheWinz]

I like the contest and I appreciate how much time and effort guys like @TheWinz put into it, but it is not a draw for me. I probably put a grand total of 15-20min per year into the contest and the results show!

I am a big fan of the Footballguys Bowl, though, especially if we get some Shark Pool only leagues running.

Yeah, the FBG Bowl was great last year, but kind of a bummer at the same time. I ended up in a league with literally no other Shark Poolers and complete silence.

 

[Chaka]

I don't care when it drops, I just need to figure out how to work the pricing into the Draft Dominator and let it choose my team.

#championship

 

[Joe Bryant]

I like the contest and I appreciate how much time and effort guys like @TheWinz put into it, but it is not a draw for me. I probably put a grand total of 15-20min per year into the contest and the results show!

I am a big fan of the Footballguys Bowl, though, especially if we get some Shark Pool only leagues running.

We'll definitely have more Shark Pool Leagues this year. There's also hope we can get real talk generating with all the leauges. There was some vibe last year that Shark Pool folks wouldn't play in the regular tourament but wanted their own clique leagues. That was discouraging as i'd hoped the Shark Pool folks might be more willing to engage with new folks. Maybe that will happen more this year. But I also know it'll probably be easier just to have leagues for Shark Pool folks that we can have here.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It requires a completely different tech flow to allow a different signup and sorting flow for special leagues for Shark Pool folks but we're working on that to see what can do.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

I like the contest and I appreciate how much time and effort guys like @TheWinz put into it, but it is not a draw for me. I probably put a grand total of 15-20min per year into the contest and the results show!

I am a big fan of the Footballguys Bowl, though, especially if we get some Shark Pool only leagues running.

We'll definitely have more Shark Pool Leagues this year. There's also hope we can get real talk generating with all the leauges. There was some vibe last year that Shark Pool folks wouldn't play in the regular tourament but wanted their own clique leagues. That was discouraging as i'd hoped the Shark Pool folks might be more willing to engage with new folks. Maybe that will happen more this year. But I also know it'll probably be easier just to have leagues for Shark Pool folks that we can have here.

I was lucky enough to be in a league with 2 other Sharkpoolers and there was pretty good chatter between us, but most of the other players were silent and one was a complete no-show from draft to playoffs.

 

[Joey Wright]

I like the contest and I appreciate how much time and effort guys like @TheWinz put into it, but it is not a draw for me. I probably put a grand total of 15-20min per year into the contest and the results show!

I am a big fan of the Footballguys Bowl, though, especially if we get some Shark Pool only leagues running.

Hey all! I don't want to give away too much [insert evil laughter] but we have some fun ideas being built to make communication a bigger part of 2025 including Shark Pool only leagues. One of the big things I CAN tell you about is all league communication from the commissioner like announcements will be done on the Footballguysbowl.com website clearing the way for the Sleeper chats to be used as... you guessed it... CHATS! We also want to encourage the usage of the Forums and/or Discord and have some ways to incorporate both! With the Shark Pool the chatter among your Shark Pool leagues I feel will become very natural in here and we will make sure to set up a Footballguys Bowl 2025 channel for sure. Thanks everyone!!!