BakoSpanks

Appreciate the feedback. Picked up Campbell. Ok. How about this - L Bell, R Bush, J Bell, K Davis - Which 3 would you start? I'm leaning towards keeping K Davis on the bench. I think this could be one of those weeks where both R Bush and J Bell put up good numbers. L Bell should get plenty of work like always. Thoughts?

Pretty sure the answer to this question is NO, but I'll ask anyway - I'm currently 28 points in front of my opponent, but he's favored is week by 23. His player with the biggest upside is Josh Gordon. Should I consider starting Jason Campbell to reduce the amount of damage Gordon can do to me? Standard scoring, not PPR. My current QB is Cousins. Thanks!

When it comes to questioning win/loss records being used to seed the playoffs, there seems to be two basic responses... #1 - Yeah, a team or two might get the short end of the stick, but that's just the way it is. Luck is a part of the game. I take issue with this, because the "luck" aspect we're taking about can be greatly reduced by simply taking a look at the bigger picture of the league. I honestly can't understand why someone would be reluctant to take a look at the bigger (and possibly more accurate) picture of their league or their team. Luck is always going to be part of the fantasy football equation. Injuries, coaches, weather, refs... There will always be plenty of that to keep fantasy football unexpected, unpredictable, and fun. But if there's a way to reduce the importance of luck, and increase the amount of skill involved, I think it's worth considering. #2 - That's the way the NFL does it. High-scoring teams have losing records and miss the playoffs all the time. While that's true, you're forgetting the other half of the equation - DEFENSE. Every team in the NFL has a defense, which has as much to do with winning and losing as it's offense. We've all heard the phrase "Defense wins Championships". In the NFL, you have an effect on the number of points your opponent scores. In fantasy football, your defense has no effect on your opponent whatsoever. Defense in fantasy football is actually and offensive position, as it is only there to generate points for your team, and has no effect on the number points your opponent scores at all. To compare fantasy football games to real NFL games, is to completely ignore what HALF of what the NFL is about. My reason for starting this conversation wasn't to get validation for my own shortcomings as a fantasy football owner this year. I had a down year, but it was all my own fault. However, as a fantasy football fan, it troubles me to see so many top-notch owners miss out on the playoffs and cash prizes year after year. In the leagues where I'm commissioner, I've taken steps to reduce the luck involved in making the playoffs. In one league, best W/L record gets the #1 seed. Of the remaining teams, the one with the most points gets the #2 seed. Then back to W/L record, then back to points, and so on. In another league, we had divisions for the sake of rivalries. But when it came to seeding the playoffs, it was based on your overall performance, not how you did within your division. Nothing I hate more than seeing a guy with a 7-7 record winning a weak division, while a guy with a 9-5 record finishes 3rd in a strong division. While there those who disagree with me, it's also nice to know that there are others who also feel there may be a better way to run leagues, and do what they can to improve them. Really glad to see so many comments in this thread! Thank you for all the feedback and opinions thus far!

Using only win/loss records. In most of the leagues I'm in, the tie-breaker is total points. Sorry for any confusion.

Just curious - Would you even be in the playoffs without Charles and Martin? Regardless, the idea of waiting on RBs can work, but you run the risk of losing a few games early in the season. Just draft all the backup RBs you can, then wait for the injuries to come. I don't recommend this strategy, but have pulled it off with some success in the past. Good RBs are harder to find than good WRs. If I have a choice between an RB1 or a WR1, I'll take the RB every time.

Tomlin's 6 years in Pittsburgh - 4 division titles, 2 AFC Championships, and a Superbowl win. Tomlin is one of the best coaches in the league.

Is there a format that you feel does a better job of rewarding the best teams?

Before I go any further, I want to make sure to clarify that I'm not a fantasy novice, and not coming here to complain or cause trouble. I'm just looking for thoughts and opinions on head-to-head, and other options when it comes to seeding the playoffs. I'm very aware that I'm a rookie in this forum, and want to be respectful of those who have been here for much longer. If my initial post came off as disrespectful or confrontational, I sincerely apologize. I'm curious as to what the cons of an All-Play league are, when it comes to determining who the best owners are over the course of the regular season. To me, it seems to do the best job of rewarding the most consistently high-scoring owners in a league. I've just seen it playout that way so many times over the last few years. I understand the lack of one-on-one HTH match-ups in All-Play is a big turn-off for many players, but is there another negative aspect that I am unaware of? Also, I'm aware that HTH is by far the most popular method of seeding the playoffs. But if popularity were taken out of the equation, is it still the most accurate way to determine which owner did the best job of managing his team for the year? And if not, which one is.

Saw a guy finish 2nd in points, and tied for 1st in All-Play - And missed the playoffs. While a guy ranked 7th in points, and 6th in All-Play was the #2 seed. In another league, saw a guy finish 1st in points, 2nd in All-Play - And missed the playoffs. While another guy ranked 11th in points, and 9th in All-Play made it in. Call me crazy, but I find that troubling.

Really happy to see this! That's exactly how I seed one of my leagues! Been doing it for three years now. Which upset a guy in the league this year, which prompted me to start this discussion in the first place! Glad to know I'm not alone.

Saw a guy finish 2nd in points, and tied for 1st in All-Play - And missed the playoffs. While a guy ranked 7th in points, and 6th in All-Play was the #2 seed. In another league, saw a guy finish 1st in points, 2nd in All-Play - And missed the playoffs. While another guy ranked 11th in points, and 9th in All-Play made it in. There's a lot more luck involved in fantasy football than most are willing to admit.

My issue with head to head is in regards to seeding the playoffs. Once you're in the playoffs, head to head makes the most sense. I agree that owners lose interest in a points league as soon as they feel there is no chance of catching up. But when it comes to seeding the playoffs, points tend to show which owners do the best job of setting their line-up, and generating the most points. And since that's every owners goal each week, that seems to be the most logical way to go. Especially when you consider (as mentioned above) that you have no impact on how many points your opponent scores. In head to head, you're not actually playing against your opponent - you're playing against the schedule. This is why I'm a big fan of using the Breakdown/All-Play standings to seed the playoffs, since it negates the role that the schedule plays in determining an owners fate. The biggest problem I run into with All-Play is that people don't understand how it works. I'm working on a format that incorporates wins, points, and All-Play standings into one score (like the "Power Rankings" for CBS Sports.com leagues) to seed the playoffs in one of my leagues next year. But fear many will complain it's too complicated. I'm just looking for a way to keep quality owners from getting screwed, when inferior owners just get lucky.

Why are the majority of fantasy football players perfectly happy using win/loss records to determine who makes the playoffs, when those records are often misleading when it comes to determining who the best teams in a league are? Breakdown/All-Play is a much better method. Just looking at Total Points has it's flaws, but even that is better and more accurate that just looking at win/loss records. Every year in every league I see teams get screwed because of thier win total, while weak teams wind-up in the the playoffs. I don't understand why people seem to be so devoted to such a flawed and inaccurate system. Am I the only one who feels this way?

This year I went 14-0 in a 12 team league, and got beat in the first round.

I feel your pain. I went 14-0 with this line-up, only to lose in the first round... T Romo C Johnson T Jones L Fitz A Johnson A Boldin A Gates Saints D I was top 2 in points in 4 of my 5 leagues, but missed the playoffs in 2 of them. Yet made the playoffs with my worst team of the 5. I really don't understand why H2H is the most popular form of FF. It's fun and everything, but Points and All Play just seem so much more accurate in determining who the best teams are. For those who want smack talk and rivalries, why only play once or twice a season, when you can play your rival every week? Call me crazy...