...ideas brought to me so far...
1) Payout structure -- award teams with best GMing (i.e. the "Eff" column on the Power Rankings which measures the % of you potential FF points you actually started) ... and/or ... reward the "all play" records somehow.
2) Change either the mechanism for determining the wild card teams to all-play records or total points; possibly not requiring two teams from each conference.
3) Expansion to 12 teams.
4) "Parity" (per Codwagon). I'll put some more up here when I understand what he is hoping we may do differently...
...what else?
Full Version: List of stuff to look at this offseason
The Huddle Fantasy Football Forums > League Forums > BoTH Fantasy Football League Forums > Cowboys and Indians
There are only 4 RB's in the top 30 performers.
Some parity please.
Through Week 17's games...
Top 10 players:
2005: 1 QB, 5 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE
2006: 4 QBs, 5 RBs, 1 WRs, 0 TEs
2007: 5 QBs, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 0 TE
AVERAGE: 3.3 QBs, 4.0 RBs, 2.3 WRs, 0.3 TE
Top 20 players:
2005: 3 QBs, 6 RBs, 10 WRs, 1 TE
2006: 7 QBs, 7 RBs, 6 WRs, 0 TEs
2007: 8 QBs, 2 RBs, 8 WRs, 2 TEs
AVERAGE: 6.0 QBs, 5.0 RBs, 8.0 WRs, 1.0 TE
Top 30 players:
2005: 11 QBs, 8 RBs, 10 WRs, 1 TE
2006: 8 QBs, 8 RBs, 13 WRs, 1 TEs
2007: 10 QBs, 4 RBs, 12 WRs, 4 TEs
AVERAGE: 9.7 QBs, 6.7 RBs, 11.7 WRs, 2.0 TE
Top 60 players:
2005: 15 QBs, 14 RBs, 24 WRs, 7 TEs
2006: 17 QBs, 16 RBs, 23 WRs, 4 TEs
2007: 16 QBs, 14 RBs, 24 WRs, 6 TEs
AVERAGE: 16.0 QBs, 14.7 RBs, 23.7 WRs, 5.7 TE
Top 100 players:
2005: 23 QBs, 25 RBs, 40 WRs, 12 TEs
2006: 23 QBs, 28 RBs, 37 WRs, 12 TEs
2007: 19 QBs, 25 RBs, 44 WRs, 12 TEs
AVERAGE: 21.7 QBs, 26.0 RBs, 40.3 WRs, 12.0 TE
Top 10 players:
2005: 1 QB, 5 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE
2006: 4 QBs, 5 RBs, 1 WRs, 0 TEs
2007: 5 QBs, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 0 TE
AVERAGE: 3.3 QBs, 4.0 RBs, 2.3 WRs, 0.3 TE
Top 20 players:
2005: 3 QBs, 6 RBs, 10 WRs, 1 TE
2006: 7 QBs, 7 RBs, 6 WRs, 0 TEs
2007: 8 QBs, 2 RBs, 8 WRs, 2 TEs
AVERAGE: 6.0 QBs, 5.0 RBs, 8.0 WRs, 1.0 TE
Top 30 players:
2005: 11 QBs, 8 RBs, 10 WRs, 1 TE
2006: 8 QBs, 8 RBs, 13 WRs, 1 TEs
2007: 10 QBs, 4 RBs, 12 WRs, 4 TEs
AVERAGE: 9.7 QBs, 6.7 RBs, 11.7 WRs, 2.0 TE
Top 60 players:
2005: 15 QBs, 14 RBs, 24 WRs, 7 TEs
2006: 17 QBs, 16 RBs, 23 WRs, 4 TEs
2007: 16 QBs, 14 RBs, 24 WRs, 6 TEs
AVERAGE: 16.0 QBs, 14.7 RBs, 23.7 WRs, 5.7 TE
Top 100 players:
2005: 23 QBs, 25 RBs, 40 WRs, 12 TEs
2006: 23 QBs, 28 RBs, 37 WRs, 12 TEs
2007: 19 QBs, 25 RBs, 44 WRs, 12 TEs
AVERAGE: 21.7 QBs, 26.0 RBs, 40.3 WRs, 12.0 TE
So, each team should be able to have a starting and back up QB in the top 100 ... two RBs in the top 100 ... four WRs in the top 100 ... and ... one TE in the top 100 ... making them competitive each week.
Is that what you mean by parity?
Is that what you mean by parity?
QUOTE(muck @ 12/20/07 6:41pm) 
So, each team should be able to have a starting and back up QB in the top 100 ... two RBs in the top 100 ... four WRs in the top 100 ... and ... one TE in the top 100 ... making them competitive each week.
Is that what you mean by parity?
Is that what you mean by parity?
Example from wk 15 :
RB - 15rush 116 yds 2TDs 2rec 7yds = 27.70pts
WR - 8rec 114yds 1TD = 29.40pts
A look at the stats vs. points awarded = no parity. More total yards, more TDs, fewer points.
Perhaps a tweak in points per reception? RB=0.20pts, WR=1.5pts, TE=2.0pts. Or maybe pts per rush attempt?
FWIW, the scoring has worked exactly how I hoped it would...
A QB gets 300 points by having (for example), 3600 yards passing, 25 TDs and 10 INTs.
A RB gets 300 points by having (for example), 300 touches (rushes and receptions), 10 TDs and 1800 total yards from scrimmage.
A WR gets 300 points by having (for example), 80 receptions, 10 TDs and 1200 total yards from scrimmage.
Who had a better season?
In my book, each one helped their team out about the same...and the fantasy points awarded reflect that.
A QB gets 300 points by having (for example), 3600 yards passing, 25 TDs and 10 INTs.
A RB gets 300 points by having (for example), 300 touches (rushes and receptions), 10 TDs and 1800 total yards from scrimmage.
A WR gets 300 points by having (for example), 80 receptions, 10 TDs and 1200 total yards from scrimmage.
Who had a better season?
In my book, each one helped their team out about the same...and the fantasy points awarded reflect that.
The top ten "Receiving 1st downs":
68 Chad Johnson
65 Randy Moss
64 Terrell Owens
62 TJ Houshmandzadeh
60 Reggie Wayne
59 Brandon Marshall
58 Marques Colston
57 Wes Welker
56 Bobby Engram
56 Torry Holt
Total = 605 first downs
These WRs have a total of 868 receptions...69.7% of them are for first downs.
...........
The top ten "rushing 1st downs":
66 Brian Westbrook
65 Ladanian Tomlinson
60 Joseph Addai
60 Adrian Peterson
56 Willis McGahee
53 Clinton Portis
52 Justin Fargas
50 LenDale White
49 Thomas Jones
49 Willie Parker
Total = 560 first downs
These RBs have a total of 2,643 rushing attempts...21.2% of them are for first downs.
NOTE: There are only two RBs with more than 12 rushing attempts / game (average) who are getting first downs more frequently than 25% of the time (Adrian Peterson at 27.5% and Brian Westbrook at 26.0%).
...........
For this season, 52.2% of all receptions results in a first down.
For this season, 21.8% of all rushing attempts result in a first down.
For this season, there have been 14,925 pass attempts, 9,149 completions and 4,779 first downs.
For this season, there have been 12,207 rushing attempts and 2,675 first downs.
...........
Because moving the chains is an integral part of successful football, I believe that the PPR for WRs vs. the pts per rushing attempt is balanced out pretty well.
68 Chad Johnson
65 Randy Moss
64 Terrell Owens
62 TJ Houshmandzadeh
60 Reggie Wayne
59 Brandon Marshall
58 Marques Colston
57 Wes Welker
56 Bobby Engram
56 Torry Holt
Total = 605 first downs
These WRs have a total of 868 receptions...69.7% of them are for first downs.
...........
The top ten "rushing 1st downs":
66 Brian Westbrook
65 Ladanian Tomlinson
60 Joseph Addai
60 Adrian Peterson
56 Willis McGahee
53 Clinton Portis
52 Justin Fargas
50 LenDale White
49 Thomas Jones
49 Willie Parker
Total = 560 first downs
These RBs have a total of 2,643 rushing attempts...21.2% of them are for first downs.
NOTE: There are only two RBs with more than 12 rushing attempts / game (average) who are getting first downs more frequently than 25% of the time (Adrian Peterson at 27.5% and Brian Westbrook at 26.0%).
...........
For this season, 52.2% of all receptions results in a first down.
For this season, 21.8% of all rushing attempts result in a first down.
For this season, there have been 14,925 pass attempts, 9,149 completions and 4,779 first downs.
For this season, there have been 12,207 rushing attempts and 2,675 first downs.
...........
Because moving the chains is an integral part of successful football, I believe that the PPR for WRs vs. the pts per rushing attempt is balanced out pretty well.
QUOTE(muck @ 12/20/07 11:39pm)
FWIW, the scoring has worked exactly how I hoped it would...
A QB gets 300 points by having (for example), 3600 yards passing, 25 TDs and 10 INTs.
A RB gets 300 points by having (for example), 300 touches (rushes and receptions), 10 TDs and 1800 total yards from scrimmage.
A WR gets 300 points by having (for example), 80 receptions, 10 TDs and 1200 total yards from scrimmage.
Who had a better season?
In my book, each one helped their team out about the same...and the fantasy points awarded reflect that.
A QB gets 300 points by having (for example), 3600 yards passing, 25 TDs and 10 INTs.
A RB gets 300 points by having (for example), 300 touches (rushes and receptions), 10 TDs and 1800 total yards from scrimmage.
A WR gets 300 points by having (for example), 80 receptions, 10 TDs and 1200 total yards from scrimmage.
Who had a better season?
In my book, each one helped their team out about the same...and the fantasy points awarded reflect that.
Per your example - 300 RB touches / 80 WR touches = 3.75x
Per your scoring - 1.5 WR touches / 0.2 RB touches = 7.50x
In order for your example to fairly portray your scoring a RB would need 600 touches, which is unheard of.
Also IMO, 1,800 total yards by a RB is far better than a 1,200 yard season by a WR.
I'm assuming that you like having a WR league and my suggestion won't be making the list.
QUOTE(Codwagon @ 12/21/07 3:29pm)
Also IMO, 1,800 total yards by a RB is far better than a 1,200 yard season by a WR.
Just had time to do this for 2007 YTD and 2006...stats provided by DMD...
...2006 first...
Twenty-Three RBs with more than 1,200 yards from scrimmage (includes any receiving yards)
2,334 Stephen Jackson
2,323 Ladanian Tomlinson
2,199 Larry Johnson
2,180 Frank Gore
2,127 Tiki Barber
2,069 Brian Westbrook
1,716 Willie Parker
1,599 Ladell Betts
1,504 Chester Taylor
1,433 Rudi Johnson
1,432 Ahman Green
1,418 Deuce McAllister
1,406 Joseph Addai
1,388 Fred Taylor
1,377 Maurice Jones-Drew
1,376 Edgerrin James
1,364 Thomas Jones
1,310 Warrick Dunn
1,307 Reggie Bush
1,289 Travis Henry
1,284 Ronnie Brown
1,247 Jamal Lewis
1,226 Julius Jones
Eight WRs with more than 1,200 yards from scrimmage (includes any rushing yards)
1,379 Chad Johnson
1,366 Marvin Harrison
1,311 Lee Evans
1,310 Reggie Wayne
1,310 Roy Williams
1,292 Lee Evans
1,231 Anquan Boldin
1,227 Steve Smith
............
...2007 YTD next... note that 1,050 through 14 games is equivalent to 1,200 for a full season...
Eighteen RBs with more than 1,050 yards from scrimmage (includes any receiving yards)
1,896 Brian Westbrook
1,772 Ladanian Tomlinson
1,525 Adrian Peterson
1,480 Willie Parker
1,428 Willis McGahee
1,396 Clinton Portis
1,370 Joseph Addai
1,291 Frank Gore
1,289 Jamal Lewis
1,217 Stephen Jackson
1,197 Justin Fargas
1,193 Edgerrin James
1,190 Earnest Graham
1,160 Thomas Jones
1,149 Fred Taylor
1,130 Marion Barber
1,074 LenDale White
1,060 Marshawn Lynch
Nine WRs with more than 1,050 yards from scrimmage (includes any rushing yards)
1,343 Randy Moss
1,307 Terrell Owens
1,287 Chad Johnson
1,284 Reggtie Wayne
1,170 Braylon Edwards
1,166 Larry Fitzgerald
1,162 Brandon Marshall
1,096 Torry Holt
1,092 Marques Colston
I'd like to address (again) being able to start a 3rd running back as a lineup option. If the league scoring is designed for parity, then it shouldn't matter if you can start a 3rd running back. Would give us an additional option building our teams.
QUOTE(Chief Dick @ 12/24/07 2:13pm)
I'd like to address (again) being able to start a 3rd running back as a lineup option. If the league scoring is designed for parity, then it shouldn't matter if you can start a 3rd running back. Would give us an additional option building our teams.
I would vote yes for that one.
I've been thinking about the expansion issue also. In the past I've been in favor of expansion, but is seems as time goes on people are coming and going from leagues a lot faster.
We have 10 good owners now: I might hesitate to disrupt that at this point. Need to think on it some more. And if we end up do expanding, I would think smaller rosters would make some sense, combined with adding the 3rd running back starter possibility.
We have 10 good owners now: I might hesitate to disrupt that at this point. Need to think on it some more. And if we end up do expanding, I would think smaller rosters would make some sense, combined with adding the 3rd running back starter possibility.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.