Dizzy
Footballguy
And why do they call it a near miss?What's the deal with Grape Nuts?Why do we drive on the parkway?Why do we sit in the stands? Why do we park in a driveway?
And why do they call it a near miss?What's the deal with Grape Nuts?Why do we drive on the parkway?Why do we sit in the stands? Why do we park in a driveway?
You're doing it wrong.PPR scoring has worn out its useful life, with a) the NFL becoming more of a passing league, and b) the RB committee approach becoming so prevalent. It's no longer necessary to boost WR and TE value arbitrarily.
That has nothing to do with Darren Sproles and his 4 catches for 0 yards.
Not so. Just making a reception keeps drives going and that's worth something. Besides--how many times has anyone here seen this happen that the question would even come up?! It doesn't seem worth rewriting the rules to account for a once-in-a-career event. Speaking myself from a Non-PPR league where I did indeed get zero for his day. Coupled with the zero for Randle it's amazing I was even in the game.I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.
Point is, the box score shows Duce Staley outrushed Jerome Bettis 91-1.Because scoring 3 TD's has no real world value.In any format, certain players end up producing far greater in fantasy points than they do in "real" football terms. Of course, this presents an opportunity for a savvy owner to recognize the gap between fantasy and reality and seek those players.
Consider September 12, 2004 (Week 1): Jerome Bettis had 5 carries for 1 yard, with 3 TDs.
Should one yard be worth x points? Well, yes, because that's the way the scoring rules work for that league.
There is arguably more value in a TD specialist than there is in the PPR scenario outlined above, but everyone should know the rules going in and understand how they can create scenarios like 0 yards for 4 points. As others have stated, find a non-PPR league if this is a sufficiently bothersome situation.
Definition of PPR . . .I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 PointsFantasy Football for Girls
You and Leonidas should continue your standard scoring circle jerk over PM.Definition of PPR . . .I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 PointsFantasy Football for Girls
This.PPR scoring has worn out its useful life, with a) the NFL becoming more of a passing league, and b) the RB committee approach becoming so prevalent. It's no longer necessary to boost WR and TE value arbitrarily.
That has nothing to do with Darren Sproles and his 4 catches for 0 yards.
I dont think anyone is disputing that, but you all are still clearly missing the point. Yay, he caught 4 passes! But for no production. A zero, zero freaking yards. Many people understand what PPR means, you guys just look crazy trying to justify what PPR means as if many do not understand. The OP said he understands, he is talking about the 0 yards. I however agree, if you get 0 yards a player should get credit for no receptions. Its not unreasonable to see that possibility.Sproles didn't get any points for his zeros. He got points for his non-zero number of receptions.Why do people choose to reward 0's with points?
If receptions shouldn't be worth any points, then people shouldn't play in PPR leagues.
The bolded is true only if you gain YARDS.Not so. Just making a reception keeps drives going and that's worth something. Besides--how many times has anyone here seen this happen that the question would even come up?! It doesn't seem worth rewriting the rules to account for a once-in-a-career event. Speaking myself from a Non-PPR league where I did indeed get zero for his day. Coupled with the zero for Randle it's amazing I was even in the game.I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.![]()
What if he had 3 catches for 20 yards and then a 4th catch for -20.....does he get points, or no points?I dont think anyone is disputing that, but you all are still clearly missing the point. Yay, he caught 4 passes! But for no production. A zero, zero freaking yards. Many people understand what PPR means, you guys just look crazy trying to justify what PPR means as if many do not understand. The OP said he understands, he is talking about the 0 yards. I however agree, if you get 0 yards a player should get credit for no receptions. Its not unreasonable to see that possibility.Sproles didn't get any points for his zeros. He got points for his non-zero number of receptions.Why do people choose to reward 0's with points?
If receptions shouldn't be worth any points, then people shouldn't play in PPR leagues.
So you think that a player who has 3 receptions for 20 yards should get the same number of points as a player who has 4 receptions for 0 yards (with one of those receptions being for -20 yards)?I agree with this - a recpt should only count if it is positive yardage. Yes, it may take some additional coding to make the website work but it is baffling how a 4-0 yields 4 points. Now, had he not caught those passes and Brees was sacked due to no outlet would you still say Sproles had no value? What I am getting at is sometimes a players lack of production is tied to the situations he is put in to.
Yards aren't really worth anything either though. Yards don't mean jack squat.The bolded is true only if you gain YARDS.Not so. Just making a reception keeps drives going and that's worth something. Besides--how many times has anyone here seen this happen that the question would even come up?! It doesn't seem worth rewriting the rules to account for a once-in-a-career event. Speaking myself from a Non-PPR league where I did indeed get zero for his day. Coupled with the zero for Randle it's amazing I was even in the game.I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.![]()
Fantasy Football for Girls?Definition of PPR . . .I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 PointsFantasy Football for Girls
I'm not doing anything other than observe that the scoring gap between RBs and WRs/TEs that gave rise to PPR no longer exists.You're doing it wrong.PPR scoring has worn out its useful life, with a) the NFL becoming more of a passing league, and b) the RB committee approach becoming so prevalent. It's no longer necessary to boost WR and TE value arbitrarily.
That has nothing to do with Darren Sproles and his 4 catches for 0 yards.
Are you serious with this nonsense?Definition of PPR . . . Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 Points Fantasy Football for GirlsI don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?
One of these players should have 5 points and the other 4 points.So you think that a player who has 3 receptions for 20 yards should get the same number of points as a player who has 4 receptions for 0 yards (with one of those receptions being for -20 yards)?I agree with this - a recpt should only count if it is positive yardage. Yes, it may take some additional coding to make the website work but it is baffling how a 4-0 yields 4 points. Now, had he not caught those passes and Brees was sacked due to no outlet would you still say Sproles had no value? What I am getting at is sometimes a players lack of production is tied to the situations he is put in to.
You don't have the first clue about football, do you?Yards aren't really worth anything either though. Yards don't mean jack squat.The bolded is true only if you gain YARDS.Not so. Just making a reception keeps drives going and that's worth something. Besides--how many times has anyone here seen this happen that the question would even come up?! It doesn't seem worth rewriting the rules to account for a once-in-a-career event. Speaking myself from a Non-PPR league where I did indeed get zero for his day. Coupled with the zero for Randle it's amazing I was even in the game.I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.![]()
Don't be rude. What do yards alone get you? Nothing. NFL players don't play football to get yards.You don't have the first clue about football, do you?Yards aren't really worth anything either though. Yards don't mean jack squat.The bolded is true only if you gain YARDS.Not so. Just making a reception keeps drives going and that's worth something. Besides--how many times has anyone here seen this happen that the question would even come up?! It doesn't seem worth rewriting the rules to account for a once-in-a-career event. Speaking myself from a Non-PPR league where I did indeed get zero for his day. Coupled with the zero for Randle it's amazing I was even in the game.I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.![]()
And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
someone posted it alreadyWhy do we sit in the stands? Why do we park in a driveway?
a reception for -20 yards would still net a minus one overall for the play in most ppr formats... so no one guy would have five points and one would have three points.One of these players should have 5 points and the other 4 points.So you think that a player who has 3 receptions for 20 yards should get the same number of points as a player who has 4 receptions for 0 yards (with one of those receptions being for -20 yards)?I agree with this - a recpt should only count if it is positive yardage. Yes, it may take some additional coding to make the website work but it is baffling how a 4-0 yields 4 points. Now, had he not caught those passes and Brees was sacked due to no outlet would you still say Sproles had no value? What I am getting at is sometimes a players lack of production is tied to the situations he is put in to.
There is no shortage of really talented receivers. There are more of them than RBs in today's NFL.And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
Well I'd disagree but even if that's true then you almost HAVE to give RBs PPR to make them relevant at all.There is no shortage of really talented receivers. There are more of them than RBs in today's NFL.And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
But do we want to balance scoring to make less talented players closer to more talented players? Wouldn't it be better to have scoring that more realistically represented real world values?And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
That's funny.Well I'd disagree but even if that's true then you almost HAVE to give RBs PPR to make them relevant at alThere is no shortage of really talented receivers. There are more of them than RBs in today's NFL.And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?
Good response. I think you are right on.Well I'd disagree but even if that's true then you almost HAVE to give RBs PPR to make them relevant at all.There is no shortage of really talented receivers. There are more of them than RBs in today's NFL.And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
Yes/No. What you're trying to minimize is the effects of draft position on the quality of teams in your league.But do we want to balance scoring to make less talented players closer to more talented players? Wouldn't it be better to have scoring that more realistically represented real world values?And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
Since the previous scoring gap between RB's and WR's was in the other direction (RB's got way overvalued in terms of their game importance), demand drove the rise of PPR leagues.I'm not doing anything other than observe that the scoring gap between RBs and WRs/TEs that gave rise to PPR no longer exists.
Given this, it stands to reason that PPR should also no longer exist.
Yes it is. If someone gets receptions in a por league then it's absurd to say that they shouldn't get points for it.I dont think anyone is disputing that, but you all are still clearly missing the point. Yay, he caught 4 passes! But for no production. A zero, zero freaking yards. Many people understand what PPR means, you guys just look crazy trying to justify what PPR means as if many do not understand. The OP said he understands, he is talking about the 0 yards. I however agree, if you get 0 yards a player should get credit for no receptions. Its not unreasonable to see that possibility.Sproles didn't get any points for his zeros. He got points for his non-zero number of receptions.Why do people choose to reward 0's with points?
If receptions shouldn't be worth any points, then people shouldn't play in PPR leagues.
This is almost as bad as the guy that called sirius NFL network this morning complaining that Stafford shouldn't be allowed to "fake a spike" for player safety reasons.Just wondering if there's a chance OP lost by 3 points this week![]()
-QG
An auction draft is a far better solution for this problem.Yes/No. What you're trying to minimize is the effects of draft position on the quality of teams in your league.But do we want to balance scoring to make less talented players closer to more talented players? Wouldn't it be better to have scoring that more realistically represented real world values?And since there's a shortage of really talented receivers, PPR is necessary to balance scoring.I think PPR was once a valid way of attempting to balance scoring between receivers and runners. But, as noted above, since the NFL has become such a pass first league, the need is diminished or nonexistent.
PPR can also be useful to expand the pool of productive players in larger leagues (14+ teams).
But PPR too often rewards non-productive plays and elevates ordinary and less talented receivers at the expense of really talented ones. The really talented receivers gain a lot of yards and score touchdowns.
That's a decent point and I agree to an extent. But even with that, if you go non-PPR you run the risk of guessing wrong on who will/won't be the TD scorer you hoped he'd be.An auction draft is a far better solution for this problem.Yes/No. What you're trying to minimize is the effects of draft position on the quality of teams in your league.But do we want to balance scoring to make less talented players closer to more talented players? Wouldn't it be better to have scoring that more realistically represented real world values?
Well put, and I appreciate that perspective. I for one just would like to understand the reasoning behind why some people have decided that a reception is something that should be rewarded on top of whatever yardage is gained. The question asked is "why PPR"? The question most here prefer to answer is "what is PPR"? We all know what PPR is. Tell me what it is about catching a football that deserves fantasy points.Fantasy Football is driven by statistics. You choose the statistical categories you wish to reward and the basis upon which you award them, you create a league based upon that criteria, league owners agree to the scoring, and that is how you assign the points. I am open to varying rules. You value and draft players based upon that particular scoring criteria. In this instance, Sproles' value is increased by the virtue of this being a PPR league. If you prefer a different statistical criteria to reward, or another method of computing such, that is fine. PPR is not the only criteria for assessing a player's value, but why complain about the value of PPR if that is the agreed-upon set of rules?