Why Head-To-Head?

[BakoSpanks]

I will always look at all-play to see how strong my team was/wasn't...but I accept that the playoffs in HTH leagues don't always reward the best team.

 

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

[detlef]

I keep saying I'm going to do this, and one of these years I will. Thing is, I think it'll take doing it as a parallel once or twice to a more conventional set-up to work out the kinks. But I honestly think this system, once tweaked could ultimately achieve the best combo of fairness and fun. After all, as others have said, total points has its pitfalls, not rewarding teams that put up good numbers week in and week out as well as the lack of fun.

 

So, how 'bout this. It's actually borrowed from NASCAR, which for me is ironic because I've likely watched a grand total of 1.5 minutes of that my entire life. The sum of all the glimpses I caught while channel surfing.

 

Say you've got 12 teams. Each week, the high scorer gets 15 pts, 2nd place, 14 pts, and so on down to 6th, each team getting one pt less. Then you skip a few points awarding 7-12 with 5-1 pts respectively. That creates a somewhat significant pt gap between the "winners" and "losers" if FF was a perfect world. This takes out the random nature of putting up good pts, only to be facing the week's highest scorer, but it also discounts putting up massive totals from time to time. First place is worth 15 pts, whether you scored 300 pts or just barely more than the next guy. On the other hand, a guy who consistently puts up good numbers is going to finish higher than someone who goes off one week and tanks the next.

 

It should also be particularly fun, because you're nearly always going to have a rooting interest in the late games of the week. In a typical H2H, not only do you and/or your one opponent need to have players going on SNF or MNF, but the game has to be close enough to matter. In this case, the likelihood that you're near someone in the weekly standings where yours or their players going in late games could affect your standings has got to be much higher just by the sheer odds. So there's that.

 

At any rate, so that's how the standings are determined.

 

Play-offs:

So, what good is doing away with the fluky week-to-week nature of H2H, only to bring it back when the money matters? That's my issue with throwing a bone to the high points guys in terms of who makes the play-offs, you're right back to the same format you're trying to make matter less.

 

So, I thought you could do a 3-4 week "chase". Of course, the simplest way to go from here would be to just add the aggregate of all points scored during those weeks, and I think that's what the high dollar leagues do. Of course, you do then have the same issue with someone riding one insanely good week.

 

So, this is where it gets a bit complex and, frankly where the beta-testing would truly have to happen. My thought was to peel off the top 6 teams, seed them with bonus pts (again, not unlike NASCAR), which also addresses one of the flaws I've found in FF, where the team that was dominant all year long has exactly as much chance as the teams that snuck in (unless you have byes, but still that means the 3rd seed has no better shot than the 6th). An rate, you have a 3-4 pts race that works the same way as the regular season, only giving a few pts head start to the higher seeds.

 

What would make this work best, I think, would be to include all 12 teams in each week's race, so the stakes are higher (as the relative pt difference between a good finish and a bad one is higher when the spread is 15-1 than it is with less teams). Of course, to do that, you'd need to have some incentive for everyone to play, like a weekly high points cash prize.

 

The thing is, I really have no idea what a fair starting bonus is for the high seeds. You want it to matter, but not create some situation where they'd have to absolutely tank not to win it all.

 

So, perhaps the best way to try this out is to just jump in with both feet in terms of how the regular season works and do a 3 week total points deal for the play-offs (still offering cash money to keep the non-qualifiers staring teams but not getting a shot at the big loot even if they end up putting up enough pts during those 3 weeks to place) and running the little pts play-off thing and seeing if the "right" teams ended up doing well in that.

 

That might give you the insight you need to make the needed changes and go all-in the following year.

Edited December 27, 2012 by detlef

[Big Country]

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

 

 

All Play or Total Points likely do reward the best teams over the course of the season, but the big drawback to most owners is that those leagues are not as much fun as a head to head league, where you have the weekly man vs man aspect.

 

 

We ran a league here for a few years that we had to put on hold for a season that we called BDITH (Best Drafter in The Huddle). We had 12 owners and it comprised of 4 distinct leagues. We held 3 drafts, and every owner would get 1 pick in the 1-4 range, 1 pick in the 5-8 range and 1 pick in the 9-12 range. We also held an auction for the 4th league. Now, this was a draft only, best ball format league, but each week each league was an all-play format, so the high scoring team for each league would go 11-0 for the week, and so on. With 4 teams, the best an owner could do would be to go 44-0 in a week, as the overall record was an owners combined record across all 4 leagues.

 

For us, it wasa ton of fun and next to no maintenance as it was a draft only league. Drawback of course was the lack of a weekly rivalry.

[delusions of grandeur]

Perhaps someone from DAD can explain victory points. I remember it sounded pretty cool, and I believe the playoff format is also different in that no playoff teams are truly eliminated until the last week.

[Caveman_Nick]

FF is a very random pursuit. The skill is in covering and beating the randomness with your choices. Designing a system that tries to take the randomness out is, to me, like taking away boobies from wimmins. I like boobies.

 

-Players points go up and down every week.

-Players on your team get injured.

-Players whose role supports the players on your team get injured.

-Making line-up decisions with player injuries and game schedules all over the place is completely complex and you have no control over what events will take place weeke to week.

-Games get flexed, making line-up decisions tougher.

-The good and bad match-ups change with defensive injuries.

-Coaches change every year, affecting player performance.

-Coaches and/or schemes go cold

-The referees are constantly making a mess of things.

 

All of this makes FF maddeningly fun.

 

Skill plays a part in FF, but it is not a game of pure skill. It's a game of doing your best to predict and manage future events. HTH is the ultimate reminder that, no matter what you do, randomness can take you down!

[detlef]

FF is a very random pursuit. The skill is in covering and beating the randomness with your choices. Designing a system that tries to take the randomness out is, to me, like taking away boobies from wimmins. I like boobies.

 

-Players points go up and down every week.

-Players on your team get injured.

-Players whose role supports the players on your team get injured.

-Making line-up decisions with player injuries and game schedules all over the place is completely complex and you have no control over what events will take place weeke to week.

-Games get flexed, making line-up decisions tougher.

-The good and bad match-ups change with defensive injuries.

-Coaches change every year, affecting player performance.

-Coaches and/or schemes go cold

-The referees are constantly making a mess of things.

 

All of this makes FF maddeningly fun.

 

Skill plays a part in FF, but it is not a game of pure skill. It's a game of doing your best to predict and manage future events. HTH is the ultimate reminder that, no matter what you do, randomness can take you down!

 

Basically everything you mentioned still remains, so there's plenty of boobies left even if you tweak the H2H format.

[stevegrab]

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.

 

 

And I'll apologize if my post came across wrong. Its just many phrases and words you used made it sound as if H2H is flawed and using all play or total points is better. All systems are flawed, but so long as all owners know the rules and how standings/playoffs are determined and agree to that there is nothing wrong with any one system, nor is one system better than another.

 

Sure it happens that teams with lots of points miss the playoffs. The highest scoring team in our league went 5-8 and missed the playoffs. Had he won his final game he still would have missed the playoffs, because another team that was 6-7 in his division had a better division record (our first tie breaker within a division). But we also have a large pot of money (from roster moves) that is split 50/30/20% by the top 3 scoring teams in the regular season.

 

If the use of H2H isn't working for your league, use total points or all play somehow. Or find another way to reward the high scoring teams that miss the playoffs. But that doesn't make H2H flawed.

 

And just one more clarification, you use the term "H2H is used for seeding the playoffs", do you mean using H2H records as a tie breaker? (We do not use H2H and many here have argued against its use as a tie breaker) Or are you talking about W-L record based on H2H matchups being used to rank teams and determine playoff spots? I would agree that is very common, with some twists and turns as mentioned here by others like BC.

[delusions of grandeur]

All systems are flawed... But that doesn't make H2H flawed.

 

 

 

Good info here

[electricrelish]

Good info here

 

OK, that one made me snicker out loud here at work.

[electricrelish]

Perhaps someone from DAD can explain victory points. I remember it sounded pretty cool, and I believe the playoff format is also different in that no playoff teams are truly eliminated until the last week.

 

Below is how the BoTH league Dy Another Day uses victory points (VP) for a 16-team dynasty league. It is a variation based off how FFPC uses VP's for 12-team leagues. I am not saying it is better than any other scoring system. Just providing an alternative to straight H2H.

 

5.4.1 Victory Points (VP's)

Victory Points (VP's) uses a point system that awards both head to head (H2H) wins and weekly high scores. The League standings are kept with league points instead of wins and losses. Each team will earn a total of 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0 VP's each week based on the criteria below in rules 5.4.2 and 5.4.3. The weekly league standings will be based on the amount of total Victory Points each team has accumulated to date.

 

5.4.2 Victory Points (VP's) Head-to-head (H2H)

• Each week every team plays one (1) H2H game.

• Each weekly H2H Win earns 2 VP's

• Each weekly H2H tie earns 1 VP

• Each weekly H2H Loss earns 0 VP's

 

5.4.3 Victory Points (VP's) High Scores

Additional Weekly VP's distribution for the total high scores for the week is divided into a 3-bucket tier with the top 5 weekly team scores receiving 2 VP's, the middle 6 weekly scoring teams receiving 1 VP and the lowest scoring 5 teams receive 0 VP's. Detailed breakdown is below.

• Top point scoring team - 2 VP's

• No.2 point scoring team - 2 VP's

• No.3 point scoring team - 2 VP's

• No.4 point scoring team - 2 VP's

• No.5 point scoring team - 2 VP

• No.6 point scoring team - 1 VP

• No.7 point scoring team - 1 VP

• No.8 point scoring team - 1 VP

• No.9 point scoring team - 1 VP

• No.10 point scoring team - 1 VP

• No.11 point scoring team - 1 VP

• No.12 point scoring team - 0 VP

• No.13 point scoring team - 0 VP

• No.14 point scoring team - 0 VP

• No.15 point scoring team - 0 VP

• No.16 point scoring team - 0 VP

 

[stevegrab]

Good info here

 

 

I see you have a future in journalism, twisting my words around.

 

I guess I basically said that but this "the team that scored the most points didn't make the playoffs" does not mean the system is flawed. Unless you think that teams who score the most points in fantasy football should be rewarded even if their record is bad.

[detlef]

 

nor is one system better than another.

 

 

 

Again with this crap?

 

Yo, comrade Steve, it's OK for anyone to pick and follow whatever system they want for their league. But what do you have against people trying to find better ways to do things.

 

Again, what is the point of discussing anything at all if you can just fall back on, "everything is just as good as everything else"?

[stevegrab]

Again with this crap?

 

Yo, comrade Steve, it's OK for anyone to pick and follow whatever system they want for their league. But what do you have against people trying to find better ways to do things.

 

Again, what is the point of discussing anything at all if you can just fall back on, "everything is just as good as everything else"?

 

 

 

Big Country has made similar points in these threads, but for some reason he doesn't draw the endless detlef gunfire. Why is that?

 

Evidently I've ruffled your feathres along the way and now any time I make a comment like that you're going to be offended. Wow, and people say I have thin skin.

[electricrelish]

 

Big Country has made similar points in these threads, but for some reason he doesn't draw the endless detlef gunfire. Why is that?

 

Evidently I've ruffled your feathres along the way and now any time I make a comment like that you're going to be offended. Wow, and people say I have thin skin.

 

I guess Christmas is over.

[Big Country]

 

Big Country has made similar points in these threads, but for some reason he doesn't draw the endless detlef gunfire. Why is that?

 

Evidently I've ruffled your feathres along the way and now any time I make a comment like that you're going to be offended. Wow, and people say I have thin skin.

 

 

To be fair, detlef is my alias, and I don't like attacking myself, just talking to myself.

[G.K.Trey]

I guess Christmas is over.

 

 

fa-la-la-la-la-la-la-la

[BakoSpanks]

And just one more clarification, you use the term "H2H is used for seeding the playoffs", do you mean using H2H records as a tie breaker? (We do not use H2H and many here have argued against its use as a tie breaker) Or are you talking about W-L record based on H2H matchups being used to rank teams and determine playoff spots?

 

 

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

[detlef]

 

Big Country has made similar points in these threads, but for some reason he doesn't draw the endless detlef gunfire. Why is that?

 

Evidently I've ruffled your feathres along the way and now any time I make a comment like that you're going to be offended. Wow, and people say I have thin skin.

 

No, it's just that you seem be developing a habit of running to that line of "reasoning". And, again, it's particularly annoying because there's simply no point in discussing anything if we allow that to trump all other arguments.

 

Of course we can all run our leagues however we want, I would think that would be understood. Do you honestly think anyone feels otherwise? Even if they have a vehement stance on how they should be run? No, this is what we call a debate. Where people make arguments for and against ways of doing things. In the course of doing so, feathers may get ruffled.

 

I also think you're confusing the difference between what BC does, explaining that there are actually pros and cons to both total points and H2H and some sack-less fellow rushing to the "everything is just as good as everything else and you can't tell me otherwise" card.

 

And, yes, when I notice someone has willingly entered a debate, only to fall back on that cop-out "argument", it annoys me and I typically point that out.

 

ETA: I should point out, "annoyed" not "offended". I don't find your act in this regard "offensive" just "annoying"

Edited December 28, 2012 by detlef

[stevegrab]

No, it's just that you seem be developing a habit of running to that line of "reasoning". And, again, it's particularly annoying because there's simply no point in discussing anything if we allow that to trump all other arguments.

 

Of course we can all run our leagues however we want, I would think that would be understood. Do you honestly think anyone feels otherwise? Even if they have a vehement stance on how they should be run? No, this is what we call a debate. Where people make arguments for and against ways of doing things. In the course of doing so, feathers may get ruffled.

 

I also think you're confusing the difference between what BC does, explaining that there are actually pros and cons to both total points and H2H and some sack-less fellow rushing to the "everything is just as good as everything else and you can't tell me otherwise" card.

 

And, yes, when I notice someone has willingly entered a debate, only to fall back on that cop-out "argument", it annoys me and I typically point that out.

 

ETA: I should point out, "annoyed" not "offended". I don't find your act in this regard "offensive" just "annoying"

 

 

Well as I pointed out before I did not just say "do what you want no way is more right" I did provide other info, including suggestions to use total points pot money, or awarding playoff spots based on total points instead of record. But that seems to be missed once I say anything about no way is more right than another.

 

I'm not trying to end a debate or discussion, just want people to stay focused on the discussion, instead of criticizing how their league is run in an unfair way that screws people, or labeling owners/leauges who don't do it the "right" way as being retarded, silly, dumb, lazy, whatever.

 

Hopefully we can end it here, and not have this debate every time I say something like "rules are rules, no way is more right." Maybe you could just ignore that instead of bashing me with something like "again with this crap....".

[BakoSpanks]

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!

Edited December 28, 2012 by BakoSpanks