Jump to content

The home of high stakes fantasy football.

Welcome! Please take a second to register.

Photo

Dynasty Suggestions for 2016


  • Please log in to reply
98 replies to this topic

#1 HEADBANGER1967

HEADBANGER1967

    Batboy

  • Members
  • 60 posts
  • LocationMaryland
  • Occupation:Sales

Posted 29 December 2015 - 02:18 PM

Not sure if FFPC posts an open thread or if dynasty owners make suggestions but I have a couple of thoughts I would like to see discussed:

 

 

I would like to suggest we increase the size of the number of players we keep during the season to 22 and end of season to 18.  I agree keeping things competitive by limiting the players we keep but we are already forced to keep at least 1 kicker and 1 defensive team at all times.  I feel it's not good we have to drop players still developing to get under the 16 player cap by end of February.  If not willing to expand the number of players by 2 we could add 3 slots for players in their first 3 NFL years designated as "developmental players".  That would still keep teams from being too stacked with producing veterans and give owners more time to keep additional younger talent on their team. 

 

 

Is there a reason we can not trade for future picks more than 1 year out?  If we trade away a 1st round pick next year we have to pay extra deposit money, same $ rule could apply ANY picks two years out as well.  That would give more flexibility for trading and still protect everyone involved financially.

 

 

Why is the trade deadline so early (before week 10 starts) in dynasty???  Weeks 10 thru 13 seem like perfect opportunity for trades to happen especially for non contenders looking to trade with contending teams.  In a redraft league there is less need to trade this time while dynasty leagues seems like an opportunistic time for various reasons specific to being in a dynasty league (ie veteran/producing players for younger players/prospects or future draft picks).  Cutting off trading before week 10 starts seems counter intuitive to being in a dynasty format.  I see no real reason trade deadline could not be extended till week 13 ends since each league is self policing as is.

 

 

Do we want to consider getting rid of the kicker position all together (seriously!)  ???  There is little to no skill involved in drafting or keeping a kicker in dynasty format (other than 2-4 long time steady guys).  The variance week to week and year to year is mind blowing and frustrating to say the least.  No one I know spends time evaluating rookie or free agent kickers but that position can cause wins and losses each week based on the high variance.  We also waste FAAB on them to cover bye weeks or waste a draft pick for those owners wanting to carry 2 kickers.

 

 

I would love to hear from other owners & Dave ideas and thoughts on how to make dynasty leagues better for everyone.  Last year I don't think any changes were proposed and I was not involved before this year.  If these were discussed before maybe we can discuss them or other ideas again now the season is over (sad-cry). 

 

 

Thanks, Steve



#2 joikd

joikd

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 31 December 2015 - 11:12 AM

Good post. As a current FFPC dynasty team owner, these are some very important subjects to me as well. This past year was just my first year, but I am definitely in it for the long term. Hopefully, we can also get thoughts from folks who have had teams here for multiple years.

 

Anyways, for what it's worth, here are my thoughts:

 

Regarding expanding the roster - Yes! Please! I would love to have a max. 22 in-season/18 off-season cut AND 3 slots for developmental players. Right now it just seems like we have too little roster space to let players develop. Forget about keeping rookie tight ends even if they might project to be studs in the future (can't have a slot tied up for 3 to 4 years while they develop!!!). If I had to prioritize the three items, it would be: 18 player cut, 3 developmental players, 22 in-season player max.

 

Absolutely allow the trading of picks two years out (require the same extra deposit). This would give player trading much more flexibility and open up the trading of stud players significantly. 

 

Regarding the trade deadline - I can see the pros/cons of the current cut-off vs through week 13. More trading flexibility/opportunity vs last second trade right before the playoffs start that can immediately have a huge impact a coupe days later. I can see how the temptation of a week 13 trade might cause some ridiculous trades at the last second, and cause trade protests to be unresolved as the playoffs start. So, maybe bump it to week 11 or 12?

 

Kickers - Hate them! Flip of a coin type results, which doesn't really fit the analytical side of dynasty so much. On the other hand, they are part of football, and they alone sometimes determine the outcome of a real game. So, their volatile scoring in fantasy kind of reflects the real world. I can go either way on this one, but lean towards getting rid of them since potentially big $$$ are at stake, and I would hate the winner of $$$ to be decided by a kicker. 



#3 Invictus.

Invictus.

    Lanista ~ Dominus

  • Members
  • 3083 posts
  • LocationAnywhere you feel the grip of fear

Posted 31 December 2015 - 09:47 PM

I haven't posted on here in well over a year at least. I check in about three times a year, due to the policing of the MB and the constant suggesting of rule changes every end of season.

 

My question is always the same. Why did you join a league you want to change the rules in? You guys lobbying for larger rosters, yet using kickers as a 'luck factor' in deciding outcomes. The kicker is basically a luck factor, but by increasing roster sizes you're also negating the skill of the better owners way more then what a kicker might do. 

 

How much skill is involved in hoarding the extra players on a roster for a couple seasons then throwing him in when he happens do go off that week? There is much more skill in evaluating who to drop yearly, and weekly for your optimal lineup, short and long term. It also facilitates trading more. The larger the rosters, the less trades occur.  When the owner has to go drop someone early, or bid high to get Rawls or West, that's much more skill based then having a half ass crappy roster you can store C Michael on for example. And if you want to keep him or Josh Gordon, at least with the current roster size you need to pay a price for holding him for three years when he sucks.

 

I personally am more concerned with owning my oldest Dynos 5-6 seasons and now seeing the prize money altered for the small % of owners who MAY decide to use a Credit Card to pay for their entry for the year. Especially when you have won and using your winnings to pay for the new season, now I'm cashing even less and penalized for winning?? Let the owner who decides to use CC pay the extra fee. Maybe that should be more the issue then looking to increase rosters to make it easier and more like the same large Dynasty leagues that bore the shite out of everyone inside of two years.


  • Aunt Jemima and Chapelboy like this



 


#4 joikd

joikd

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 31 December 2015 - 11:37 PM

Since my options for high stakes dynasty were quite limited, I joined the one that was the closest match to what I was looking for, and the FFPC was it (very much enjoying myself so far!). I am pretty sure most folks have at least one thing they would like to see tweaked in almost every league they play in unless they are the commish who 100% controls everything. Even then they might make a tweak that they did not prefer if they majority of the other teams desired it. I can 100% accept and play by the rules as-is, while at the same time desiring changes and have a thoughtful conversation about such changes.

 

I would argue that the skill you are referring to that may be negated by an increased roster size is more of a re-draft-type skill than dynasty (short term vs. long term).

 

I agree that larger rosters might reduce trading in some cases, but that would depend on the size of the change. Although, I believe the opposite might take place (increased trading) if rosters sizes became large enough that the free agent pool becomes useless. Would two additional roster slots significantly reduce trading? 

 

I am not following that smaller roster sizes equal greater skill. Following that line of reasoning, would the ultimate in skill be demonstrated by 10-man rosters? I think the type of skill you are referring to needs to be identified. But, it doesn't sound like much like a dynasty-type skill to me (more re-draft). In a dynasty league, I much prefer that success be determined more by good drafting rather than by good free agent pick-ups.

 

All that I am saying is that on the fantasy football continuum that goes from daily to re-draft to keeper to dynasty, I would like to see the FFPC dyansty leagues to shift slightly more towards the dynasty end. Right now I see it somewhere between keeper and dynasty, which is not good or bad, but just not my exact preference when I think of a long-term dynasty league. In any case, rule changes or no rule changes, I am here to stay and have fun!

 

Regarding the credit card change - I am not a fan. Maybe that should be a more of an issue, maybe not. I will leave that to the collective group of owners to decide. 



#5 Aunt Jemima

Aunt Jemima

    Benchwarmer

  • Members
  • 446 posts
  • LocationMedia, PA

Posted 01 January 2016 - 11:26 AM

As mentioned in prior years, these are more 'keeper' leagues vs a true dynasty and I think that is a good thing. If we've learned anything over the past several years it is that some people have the ability to really screw up a team and then leave the league. The biggest issue is getting interested owners to take over those teams when people leave. I see bigger rosters and trading of picks 2 years out giving owners the ability to screw up so bad that it could be impossible in some situations to get someone to buy that team (even with the deposits). I myself am pretty good with the rules as they are, I don't see the need for any major changes.


  • Invictus. and House of Cards like this

#6 joikd

joikd

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 02:13 PM

That seems like a very fair point, AJ. The preventative measure for that would be to raise the deposit amount to the point that (1) the owner would not make crazy, high risk win-now-at-all-costs moves (though, that can't account for stupidity), (2) the amount invested would keep the owner from abandoning, and/or (3) the deposit amount is increased to the point that an abandoned team could be taken over for free for the first year if a buyer could not be found (with the requirement to pay for at least one subsequent year immediately upon taking over the team in case the new owner jumps ship after one year). But, I doubt this is something most folks would like to see.

 

I, too, am satisfied with the current rules for the most part. I guess for me it's the cut down to 16 (14 skill players) that I would really like to eliminate (or reduce/alter - i.e. don't have to carry a kicker and defense through the cut).



#7 mman

mman

    Newborn

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 09:54 PM

I am in three dynasty leagues, 2 $500 and 1 $750. My suggestion would be to allocate more prize money to the two regular season top VP teams, or at least to the top VP team. With only a two week playoff system, a team can dominate the regular season, then fall short in the playoffs and wind up with little return for a great regular season.

 

Mike


  • Invictus. likes this
mman

#8 Invictus.

Invictus.

    Lanista ~ Dominus

  • Members
  • 3083 posts
  • LocationAnywhere you feel the grip of fear

Posted 01 January 2016 - 10:58 PM

I am in three dynasty leagues, 2 $500 and 1 $750. My suggestion would be to allocate more prize money to the two regular season top VP teams, or at least to the top VP team. With only a two week playoff system, a team can dominate the regular season, then fall short in the playoffs and wind up with little return for a great regular season.

 

Mike

I agree with this as well, which is more about changing the money allocation to reduce luck, then rule changes. Another option that works in a league I play in is counting the points from the week 14 games as well for a three week total for the final four teams competing. We also reward a heavier prize for the top 1 and 2 seeds with the one earning more then the two. I've always felt 13 weeks is more indicative then 2 and should be reflected in the prize weighing. At least more then traditionally as it is now.


  • mman likes this



 


#9 menobrown

menobrown

    Starter - First Team

  • Members
  • 1390 posts

Posted 02 January 2016 - 01:37 PM

 

I am in three dynasty leagues, 2 $500 and 1 $750. My suggestion would be to allocate more prize money to the two regular season top VP teams, or at least to the top VP team. With only a two week playoff system, a team can dominate the regular season, then fall short in the playoffs and wind up with little return for a great regular season.

 

Mike

I agree with this as well, which is more about changing the money allocation to reduce luck, then rule changes. Another option that works in a league I play in is counting the points from the week 14 games as well for a three week total for the final four teams competing. We also reward a heavier prize for the top 1 and 2 seeds with the one earning more then the two. I've always felt 13 weeks is more indicative then 2 and should be reflected in the prize weighing. At least more then traditionally as it is now.

 

 

 

I agree with this as well and also only one of two rule changes I would look at,well really one since I don't consider payouts a rule change so much as an allocation of money change.

 

I only play in $500-$750 leagues so don't know payouts in the two higher leagues but I think it's a shame in the $500 leagues that you can be a top 2 seed and not even win your entry fee if you finish 4th in the playoffs. Only winning 60% of your entry fee back for being a top two team the first 13 weeks of the season is a turrible thing.

 

 

The one actual rule change I'd like to see, and I do post this same thing every year, is the way the draft playoffs work. I don't get why it's H2H when the real playoffs are not and feel like it should be set up exactly like the real playoffs with reverse seeding. So seeds #11 and #12 get a bye in week 14. Seeds #7-10 are in total points race in week 14 with top two advancing to compete in total points race in weeks 15 and 16 versus #11-12 seeds.

 

And yes I'm very sore about the prize chopping for CC transactions, don't think things like that should be done to existing leagues.



#10 JAM/RV

JAM/RV

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 02 January 2016 - 05:14 PM

I understand the dilemma with the extra costs due to people wanting to put there entry fees on credit cards and I believe it is an option people should have. I don't believe it is the responsibility of the league owners or the other players to pay for that option. I know it will take a little computer time but I do not believe it is more than a simple addition to the system to charge those using credit cards individually the extra cost. This would save the league money and not penalize those who use prior winnings or  those who have it directly taken out of their bank account.

I do think we need to work on the playoff scoring tracking it is probably the worst system in the FFPC. When you have multiple teams in Dynasty playoffs it gets pretty ridicules trying to figure how you stand live.

That being said I think it is the most well run league and Alex and Dave work very hard to work thru each and every problem. We may not agree with their decisions, but they try to make it work best for all.



#11 Alex

Alex

    Commissioner

  • Administrators
  • 8445 posts
  • LocationNYC
  • Occupation:FFPC co-founder

Posted 02 January 2016 - 05:31 PM

I know it will take a little computer time but I do not believe it is more than a simple addition to the system to charge those using credit cards individually the extra cost. This would save the league money and not penalize those who use prior winnings or  those who have it directly taken out of their bank account.

 

Guys, let's just be clear here. This is not an option and it's not simple by any means. The current FFPC registration system takes funds from the FFPC account and is not able to distinguish whether these funds were added via credit cards, ACH or via previous year's prize winnings. The only way to do it is as we have announced with regards to the slightly decrease in prize payouts.

 

As for the other suggestions and topics, these are all open for discussion and I'm sure Dave will be commenting on them here. One thing I personally do agree on is raising the Seed 1 & 2 prizes to the level of the entry fee for that particular league. That is how the non-Dynasty VP leagues are structured and I think we should consider this change for Dynasty as well.


Alex Kaganovsky
alex@myffpc.com

FFPC co-founder


#12 Invictus.

Invictus.

    Lanista ~ Dominus

  • Members
  • 3083 posts
  • LocationAnywhere you feel the grip of fear

Posted 02 January 2016 - 06:34 PM

 

I know it will take a little computer time but I do not believe it is more than a simple addition to the system to charge those using credit cards individually the extra cost. This would save the league money and not penalize those who use prior winnings or  those who have it directly taken out of their bank account.

 

Guys, let's just be clear here. This is not an option and it's not simple by any means. The current FFPC registration system takes funds from the FFPC account and is not able to distinguish whether these funds were added via credit cards, ACH or via previous year's prize winnings. The only way to do it is as we have announced with regards to the slightly decrease in prize payouts.

 

As for the other suggestions and topics, these are all open for discussion and I'm sure Dave will be commenting on them here. One thing I personally do agree on is raising the Seed 1 & 2 prizes to the level of the entry fee for that particular league. That is how the non-Dynasty VP leagues are structured and I think we should consider this change for Dynasty as well.

 

Alex,

 

Can't the 4 % fee the CC companies incur just be added to the price of those owners league dues that choose to use the CC option? Having that preset price? If you pay with CC this is your dues, if you pay with winnings or check etc. this is your dues.




 


#13 Alex

Alex

    Commissioner

  • Administrators
  • 8445 posts
  • LocationNYC
  • Occupation:FFPC co-founder

Posted 02 January 2016 - 07:12 PM

 

 

I know it will take a little computer time but I do not believe it is more than a simple addition to the system to charge those using credit cards individually the extra cost. This would save the league money and not penalize those who use prior winnings or those who have it directly taken out of their bank account.


Guys, let's just be clear here. This is not an option and it's not simple by any means. The current FFPC registration system takes funds from the FFPC account and is not able to distinguish whether these funds were added via credit cards, ACH or via previous year's prize winnings. The only way to do it is as we have announced with regards to the slightly decrease in prize payouts.

As for the other suggestions and topics, these are all open for discussion and I'm sure Dave will be commenting on them here. One thing I personally do agree on is raising the Seed 1 & 2 prizes to the level of the entry fee for that particular league. That is how the non-Dynasty VP leagues are structured and I think we should consider this change for Dynasty as well.
Alex,

Can't the 4 % fee the CC companies incur just be added to the price of those owners league dues that choose to use the CC option? Having that preset price? If you pay with CC this is your dues, if you pay with winnings or check etc. this is your dues.

That's not possible as the goal is to automate the registration process and what you are suggesting can only be done manually. When we were starting the Dynasty leagues, we thought it would be a 5-10 league thing. Now that it's at 56 leagues and growing each year, we have to automate the registration process. Dynasty leagues are still very high maitanance and time consuming leagues to manage, year to year so we had to streamline the registration process in order for us to continue giving them as much attention as they deserve in all the other areas.


  • House of Cards likes this

Alex Kaganovsky
alex@myffpc.com

FFPC co-founder


#14 Hunter

Hunter

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 91 posts

Posted 07 January 2016 - 03:28 PM

With the exception of the ugly credit card issue, I understand the basis upon which most of the dyno decisions have been made.  The rules exist to level the playing field.  Look at all the teams already up for sale.  With expanded rosters, it would be much harder to get new owners for those teams.  (BTW, some-- but certainly not all-- of those owners were obviously in it as an attempted money grab, and should be ashamed... and banned from further participation; forgive my digression)  Anyhow, I think you can forget about expanded rosters.  But I have a few comments on tech issues, which is not, admittedly, my milieu.  They are:

1.  2 thumbs way up for the global FA search tool on the team page (which covers both dynos and seasonals).  What a time-saver!  Kudos.

2.  2 thumbs way down (and maybe even an extra one in the stink zone) for the "whom to root for" tool.  Does anyone use/like that?  Seems like the time used on developing that could have been set aside for...

3.  my only suggestion:  can you have your tech team bump the most-recently edited MB posts to the top of the list?  That would really help in very active leagues, like the grand-daddy, $500 #1.

 

Thanks.


  • Aunt Jemima likes this

#15 Alex

Alex

    Commissioner

  • Administrators
  • 8445 posts
  • LocationNYC
  • Occupation:FFPC co-founder

Posted 07 January 2016 - 04:21 PM

With the exception of the ugly credit card issue, I understand the basis upon which most of the dyno decisions have been made.  The rules exist to level the playing field.  Look at all the teams already up for sale.  With expanded rosters, it would be much harder to get new owners for those teams.  (BTW, some-- but certainly not all-- of those owners were obviously in it as an attempted money grab, and should be ashamed... and banned from further participation; forgive my digression)  Anyhow, I think you can forget about expanded rosters.  But I have a few comments on tech issues, which is not, admittedly, my milieu.  They are:

1.  2 thumbs way up for the global FA search tool on the team page (which covers both dynos and seasonals).  What a time-saver!  Kudos.

2.  2 thumbs way down (and maybe even an extra one in the stink zone) for the "whom to root for" tool.  Does anyone use/like that?  Seems like the time used on developing that could have been set aside for...

3.  my only suggestion:  can you have your tech team bump the most-recently edited MB posts to the top of the list?  That would really help in very active leagues, like the grand-daddy, $500 #1.

 

Thanks.

 

1. Thanks. We will continue upgrading and adding new features to the MyTeams page.

2. This was done by a 3rd party so our dev-team spent zero development time on it. And frankly, we did get some good feedback on it. You're welcome to post your thoughts here: http://boards.myffpc...new-rostertool/

3. Please send a detailed request to Dave so that he can make sure we either have this on the to-do list or add it. Or it may be a quick fix.


Alex Kaganovsky
alex@myffpc.com

FFPC co-founder


#16 Aunt Jemima

Aunt Jemima

    Benchwarmer

  • Members
  • 446 posts
  • LocationMedia, PA

Posted 21 February 2016 - 02:30 PM

Not sure how hard this one would be. As I make trades and drop players in February prior to cutdown it would be nice to see the players that are available in the draft, i.e. open the waiver wire screen so you can at least see who is out there. Couldn't we use whatever list is being used for the current DE type leagues (obviously minus the guys on rosters). It seems that might be an easy one

 

or maybe I just don't know how to do this?? Any info is appreciated



#17 House of Cards

House of Cards

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN
  • Occupation:IT Director

Posted 21 February 2016 - 04:34 PM

Not sure how hard this one would be. As I make trades and drop players in February prior to cut-down it would be nice to see the players that are available in the draft, i.e. open the waiver wire screen so you can at least see who is out there. Couldn't we use whatever list is being used for the current DE type leagues (obviously minus the guys on rosters). It seems that might be an easy one

 

or maybe I just don't know how to do this?? Any info is appreciated

 

If you click on Stats from the League Home Page, you can see players who are available. Most of the rookies are loaded too. You can also click the various headers and sort the players accordingly. Is this what you are looking for?


  • Dave likes this

2016 Dynasty $500 #26 Champion

2015 Scout DFWC World Champion

2015 FBG League Champion

2015 Dynasty $500 #20 Champion 

 


#18 Aunt Jemima

Aunt Jemima

    Benchwarmer

  • Members
  • 446 posts
  • LocationMedia, PA

Posted 21 February 2016 - 06:49 PM

lol yep thanks Bip, I'm a little slow :unsure:



#19 B & B Twin Power

B & B Twin Power

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 18 March 2016 - 04:52 PM

Personally don't really see how adding 1 or 2 roster spots is really going to make that much difference in the overall skill of the game, but don't really care that much.  I would like to see if the timing of the spring roster cuts could be moved back until after the first few weeks of free agency.  There is no "skill" in trying to guess where different players are going to sign in free agency.  Even the real league GM's don't know this and they have inside information that we don't.  I understand wanting to have a decent pool of veteran players for new owners to be able to choose from in the draft along with the incoming rookies, but it seems to me the way it is a "skillful" owner who may have constructed a good, deep roster is penalized by having to decide who to cut from his roster without knowing where they'll be playing next year. 

The unexpectedness of a lot of the moves this season are a great example, especially amongst the TE position. Guys who drafted or picked up Jesse James or Maxx Williams last year and then kept them all year have to be feeling a bit burned knowing now that those guys may have another year of development before they become relevant.  Imagine if you finished the season with Fleener, M. Williams, Ben Watson, and Greg Olsen as your TE's.  I don't see many teams keeping 4 TE's into the cut, most only keep 2 or 3.  I'm pretty certain your decision making would be very different deciding about those 4 players the week before and the week after free agency began. 

I don't think you can really argue that predicting Fleener would be taking Watson's place who was going to move ahead of Williams is really "skill" as it relates to being a dynasty owner.  Just lucky. 


  • Hunter and Fish like this

#20 GoWithWhatYouGot

GoWithWhatYouGot

    Batboy

  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • LocationFlorida
  • Occupation:Donating Cash....

Posted 19 March 2016 - 11:23 AM

Agree cuts are too soon.... But I also prefer 2 spots more on the roster

#21 menobrown

menobrown

    Starter - First Team

  • Members
  • 1390 posts

Posted 19 March 2016 - 07:48 PM


 

 

Sorry but disagree with a lot of the post about pushing back the FA date.

 

I like cuts the date they are and while FA is a guessing game with some homework you can give yourself a better shot. I'd never have cut Fleener knowing he was approaching FA and stood a great chance of finally getting Colts TE job to himself or getting signed to be a full time starter on a team.

 

Same thing for Ladarius Green and I did what you say most teams don't do which was keep him as my 4th TE on a team mainly on the chance he landed the Saints gig but figured he'd land a starter job somewhere.

 

The draft class is weak at TE and there were a lot of attractive TE openings. Sure Fleener landed in the homerun spot but chances both of these guys landed  as full time starting TE's was strong to me. Had they ended up in say Atlanta,Green Bay, Giants, Colts and a few more places I think anyone who cut them would have had second thoughts about it.

 

We might define luck different but putting studying the market and putting yourself in a position to take advantage of an opportunity is not luck to me.

 

Consequently counting on Jesse James to be the new starting TE in Pittsburgh and it not working out is also not bad luck to me.

 

I've had more misses than hits by the way in terms of holding FA players hoping for a sweet landing or cutting someone who ended up landing sweet, but at not point when I missed did I feel the cut down date needed to be pushed back. In fact to me it only reaffirmed the early cut down date was doing what it was meant to do, which was add to the rookie/FA draft  pool.

 

It's also made FA that much more fun to follow.


  • Dave, SPORTSBETTINGMAN, Invictus. and 3 others like this

#22 Henry Muto

Henry Muto

    Benchwarmer

  • Members
  • 517 posts
  • LocationGeneva
  • Occupation:Plant process admin

Posted 15 April 2016 - 09:03 PM

To be able to see guest leagues again would be cool.


  • menobrown and House of Cards like this

2014 RTS Fantasy Championship National Champion w/Rachel Talty $200,000 (2460 teams)
2012 NFFC Online National Champion $100,000 (1872 teams)
2014 DFWC National Champion w/Jason Jenks $7,500 (288 teams)

2015 RTS Fantasy Championship 2nd Place overall w/Michael Cobb $25,000 (3120 teams) 
2012 NFFC Online 4th Place $10,000 (1872 teams)
2013 FFPC 16th place overall w/Jason Jenks (5808 teams)
2012 2nd Place Overall Pros vs Joes w/Jake Waid (132 teams)
Kentucky Wildcats National Champions 2012 1998 1996 1978 1958 1951 1949 1948
The Ohio State Buckeyes National Champions 2014 2002 1970 1968 1961 1957 1954 1942


#23 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 285 posts

Posted 17 April 2016 - 10:00 AM

I would LOVE to click on STATS and be able to sort by FFPC Fantasy Points scored for past season(s). Once the code is correct, couldn't you add a few more years to past data?  I am patient enough to wait for 2 or 3 years and have it all there then, but not having such an important (and sortable) stat like FFPC FP is strange.


  • Fish and menobrown like this

#24 Fish

Fish

    Special Teams

  • Members
  • 647 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, TX

Posted 17 April 2016 - 10:42 AM

I would LOVE to click on STATS and be able to sort by FFPC Fantasy Points scored for past season(s). Once the code is correct, couldn't you add a few more years to past data?  I am patient enough to wait for 2 or 3 years and have it all there then, but not having such an important (and sortable) stat like FFPC FP is strange.

 

I agree.

 

On the FootballGuys site you can go to.......>stats >historical stats and pull up a sortable stat table.  It's awesome!  You can sort by years, time frames within a season and scoring platforms (which include FFPC scoring).

 

I don't think you need a FBG subscription to get this over there, but I could be mistaken about that. 

 

Since the FFPC and FBG are partners to a degree, maybe there is some way to "borrow" the coding (or whatever it takes) to replicate this on the FFPC site?


  • SPORTSBETTINGMAN likes this
The difference between ordinary and extraordinary is that little extra." ~Jimmy Johnson


#25 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 285 posts

Posted 21 April 2016 - 10:31 AM

It might be just me, but there seems to be a lag time in sending out trade offer emails and the like that wasn't like that before.  It comes in handy to have them sent immediately...especially in the heat of getting close to a perfect back-and-forth match before bedtime! ;-)

 

For example, I sent out two offers this morning, and have yet to receive the email confirmations after like 10 minutes.  I noticed last night I was getting them in a big batch with many different time stamps many minutes apart, but they all came at once.

 

Just out of curiosity, I had my bank send me a code, and I got the email right away...and still am waiting on the trade emails.  Something is not right.



#26 Alex

Alex

    Commissioner

  • Administrators
  • 8445 posts
  • LocationNYC
  • Occupation:FFPC co-founder

Posted 21 April 2016 - 11:43 AM

It might be just me, but there seems to be a lag time in sending out trade offer emails and the like that wasn't like that before.  It comes in handy to have them sent immediately...especially in the heat of getting close to a perfect back-and-forth match before bedtime! ;-)

 

For example, I sent out two offers this morning, and have yet to receive the email confirmations after like 10 minutes.  I noticed last night I was getting them in a big batch with many different time stamps many minutes apart, but they all came at once.

 

Just out of curiosity, I had my bank send me a code, and I got the email right away...and still am waiting on the trade emails.  Something is not right.

 

I'll pass this on to the tech team and see if this is something they can ID.


Alex Kaganovsky
alex@myffpc.com

FFPC co-founder


#27 rsroberson

rsroberson

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • Occupation:Producer

Posted 27 April 2016 - 05:04 PM

Alex,

 

When is the Kings of Dynasty page going to be updated?  



#28 Alex

Alex

    Commissioner

  • Administrators
  • 8445 posts
  • LocationNYC
  • Occupation:FFPC co-founder

Posted 29 April 2016 - 08:27 AM

Alex,

 

When is the Kings of Dynasty page going to be updated?  

 

Working on it now. Sorry for the delay. This is a manual data entry process which is time consuming so haven't had the available man-hours for it until today.


Alex Kaganovsky
alex@myffpc.com

FFPC co-founder


#29 Alex

Alex

    Commissioner

  • Administrators
  • 8445 posts
  • LocationNYC
  • Occupation:FFPC co-founder

Posted 29 April 2016 - 10:33 AM

 

Alex,

 

When is the Kings of Dynasty page going to be updated?  

 

Working on it now. Sorry for the delay. This is a manual data entry process which is time consuming so haven't had the available man-hours for it until today.

 

 

Finished!! :)

 

http://myffpc.com/ff...ngs-of-dynasty/


  • rsroberson likes this

Alex Kaganovsky
alex@myffpc.com

FFPC co-founder


#30 rsroberson

rsroberson

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • Occupation:Producer

Posted 29 April 2016 - 10:42 PM

YES!!!!!  Thanks Alex.  






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users