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

#61 GoWithWhatYouGot

GoWithWhatYouGot

    Batboy

  • Members
  • 57 posts
  • Occupation:Podiatrist

Posted 30 December 2016 - 11:24 AM

An easier way to track what players were cut for waivers please....



#62 northga

northga

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 31 December 2016 - 08:29 AM

I'm going to echo the other posts on the loser's brackets and determination of the draft picks. As it is now, it seems inherently biased against the worst two teams in every league. Bottom teams are bad for a reason and need the help of top picks to become competitive. Tanking during the season can always be addressed by the Commissioner to avoid scenarios where a marginal team is trying to lose in order to obtain a better draft slot; however, a bad team is a bad team and generally can't beat even a marginal team and needs the help of the draft to make the team more competitive.

I'd be interested in knowing statistically how many #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6 teams in the loser's bracket won the first draft slot. I know in the 4 leagues that I am in the #2, #6, #4 and #6 won the first draft slot. 75% of the winners of the consolation playoffs were ranked #4 or higher. I'd suspect that percentage is close to the overall percentage for all the dynasty leagues.

IMO, this needs reexamination and future changes.

#63 Fish

Fish

    Special Teams

  • Members
  • 645 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, TX

Posted 31 December 2016 - 11:05 AM

I'm going to echo the other posts on the loser's brackets and determination of the draft picks. As it is now, it seems inherently biased against the worst two teams in every league. Bottom teams are bad for a reason and need the help of top picks to become competitive. Tanking during the season can always be addressed by the Commissioner to avoid scenarios where a marginal team is trying to lose in order to obtain a better draft slot; however, a bad team is a bad team and generally can't beat even a marginal team and needs the help of the draft to make the team more competitive.

I'd be interested in knowing statistically how many #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6 teams in the loser's bracket won the first draft slot. I know in the 4 leagues that I am in the #2, #6, #4 and #6 won the first draft slot. 75% of the winners of the consolation playoffs were ranked #4 or higher. I'd suspect that percentage is close to the overall percentage for all the dynasty leagues.

IMO, this needs reexamination and future changes.

 

After reading this I looked at my 4 leagues....the following seeds won the #1 pick:  4-5-3-5

 

Not sure the 1 and 2 seeds would have fared any better in a 2 weeks point race though.

 

Not sure what the best system is.


The difference between ordinary and extraordinary is that little extra." ~Jimmy Johnson


#64 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 31 December 2016 - 03:00 PM

IMO, having the BYE week for the two worst teams and giving them a free pass (and a puncher's chance) into the 1.01-1.04 picks is fair enough to rebuild. 

 

Having the four teams fight it out two weeks for the top draft pick is quite a bit of fun as well. :)

 

(side note)

 

It seems there could be an error in the code that sets the future draft slot order. (???)  I assume that the final four playing for the cash prizes are also the bottom four picks in the 1st round.  The current listing has one of the top four teams (Cat-Like) with pick 1.08 when he should be 1.09 I believe. (???)  ($500 #15)


  • menobrown likes this

#65 Chef Paul

Chef Paul

    Unrestricted Free Agent

  • Members
  • 2335 posts
  • LocationBoca Raton
  • Occupation:Fucking Alpha Chef

Posted 01 January 2017 - 12:34 AM

Lance, you and i need to be in  a dyno league together......lets go!!


  • SPORTSBETTINGMAN likes this
Peace, Love and The 6x SB Champion Pittsburgh Steelers

#66 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 01 January 2017 - 04:01 PM

Lance, you and i need to be in  a dyno league together......lets go!!

 

I'm like a cowboy sitting quietly in the corner of an old saloon sipping whiskey, eyeballin' that crazy chef who came bursting through the swinging doors trying to rile up a posse to go get that $2500 dynasty reward! :D


  • BaldisBeautiful likes this

#67 Chef Paul

Chef Paul

    Unrestricted Free Agent

  • Members
  • 2335 posts
  • LocationBoca Raton
  • Occupation:Fucking Alpha Chef

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:12 AM

yessir....guilty as charged


Peace, Love and The 6x SB Champion Pittsburgh Steelers

#68 Dave

Dave

    Capo

  • Administrators
  • 3943 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:14 AM

IMO, having the BYE week for the two worst teams and giving them a free pass (and a puncher's chance) into the 1.01-1.04 picks is fair enough to rebuild. 

 

Having the four teams fight it out two weeks for the top draft pick is quite a bit of fun as well. :)

 

(side note)

 

It seems there could be an error in the code that sets the future draft slot order. (???)  I assume that the final four playing for the cash prizes are also the bottom four picks in the 1st round.  The current listing has one of the top four teams (Cat-Like) with pick 1.08 when he should be 1.09 I believe. (???)  ($500 #15)

 

That is not actually correct as far as seeding goes. Any team that makes the playoffs and does not cash goes into a tiebreaker which I think is total points related.



#69 GoWithWhatYouGot

GoWithWhatYouGot

    Batboy

  • Members
  • 57 posts
  • Occupation:Podiatrist

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:16 AM

yessir....guilty as charged

 

 

You Big Boys have it out, i'm way to scared of that.........



#70 Dave

Dave

    Capo

  • Administrators
  • 3943 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:19 AM

I am open to ideas on this as I do think there are valid points to the argument that a team that barely missed the playoffs should not get the #1 pick. The counter to that argument is that weeks 14-16 are more fun AND that 1.01 picks are not actually such sure things. I recall Tavon Austin, Cord. Patterson, Ingram (who was a bust for a long time) etc going #1 overall while Odell Beckham, Cooks, A Rob, were going mid-first into the 2nd round. 

 

Any ideas better than the current system or going back to the old one?

 

The initial setup was that picks 1-3 were given to the 3 worst teams, with the highest points out of those three getting #1. (to avoid tanking). 

 

I would ideally like to offer some sort of action and also try to prevent motivation for tanking. That is a pretty tall order.



#71 Fish

Fish

    Special Teams

  • Members
  • 645 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, TX

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:31 AM

I am open to ideas on this as I do think there are valid points to the argument that a team that barely missed the playoffs should not get the #1 pick. The counter to that argument is that weeks 14-16 are more fun AND that 1.01 picks are not actually such sure things. I recall Tavon Austin, Cord. Patterson, Ingram (who was a bust for a long time) etc going #1 overall while Odell Beckham, Cooks, A Rob, were going mid-first into the 2nd round. 

 

Any ideas better than the current system or going back to the old one?

 

The initial setup was that picks 1-3 were given to the 3 worst teams, with the highest points out of those three getting #1. (to avoid tanking). 

 

I would ideally like to offer some sort of action and also try to prevent motivation for tanking. That is a pretty tall order.

Great points Dave.

Let's not remove the "battle" for draft picks weeks 14-16.  I think it's great fun to actually get to play those weeks if you are not in the money playoffs.

 

Looking through all this, I don't advocate any changes.

Worst 2 teams are guaranteed a top 4.  That should be enough to help rebuild.  As you stated, #1 overall is not a guarantee anyway and you have to do more than draft to rebuild.


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


#72 House of Cards

House of Cards

    Member

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

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:41 AM

 

I am open to ideas on this as I do think there are valid points to the argument that a team that barely missed the playoffs should not get the #1 pick. The counter to that argument is that weeks 14-16 are more fun AND that 1.01 picks are not actually such sure things. I recall Tavon Austin, Cord. Patterson, Ingram (who was a bust for a long time) etc going #1 overall while Odell Beckham, Cooks, A Rob, were going mid-first into the 2nd round. 

 

Any ideas better than the current system or going back to the old one?

 

The initial setup was that picks 1-3 were given to the 3 worst teams, with the highest points out of those three getting #1. (to avoid tanking). 

 

I would ideally like to offer some sort of action and also try to prevent motivation for tanking. That is a pretty tall order.

Great points Dave.

Let's not remove the "battle" for draft picks weeks 14-16.  I think it's great fun to actually get to play those weeks if you are not in the money playoffs.

 

Looking through all this, I don't advocate any changes.

Worst 2 teams are guaranteed a top 4.  That should be enough to help rebuild.  As you stated, #1 overall is not a guarantee anyway and you have to do more than draft to rebuild.

 

I agree with Fish too. If someone wants to tank, they will tank anytime whether you tweak playoffs or not. Top 4 pick is definitely a good motivator for worst 2 teams. If worst team gets #1 seed, we might need to micro-manage a lot of leagues from mid-season because everyone who feels they might not make playoffs, may try to strategize to score lowest points or have worst record. I see a lot of this happening in non-FFPC high stakes.....I suggest we leave it as-is....


2016 Dynasty $500 #26 Champion

2015 Scout DFWC World Champion

2015 FBG League Champion

2015 Dynasty $500 #20 Champion 

 


#73 Invictus.

Invictus.

    Lanista ~ Dominus

  • Members
  • 3078 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 03 January 2017 - 01:05 PM

Here is my choice, suggested by MenoBrown and SportsbettingMan and fully concur. We do this now in our own league:

 

The mirror of the Playoffs, the bottom two teams earn a week 14 bye. The other 4 teams that didn't make the playoff have a total points finish with the two winners going on to meet the bottom two in weeks 15 and 16, designating the 1-4 draft picks. This way they're guaranteed at least a top 4, and still offers plenty incentive and excitement for the rest of the non playoff teams.


  • SPORTSBETTINGMAN, Chef Paul and Minvike like this



 


#74 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 03:42 PM

 

IMO, having the BYE week for the two worst teams and giving them a free pass (and a puncher's chance) into the 1.01-1.04 picks is fair enough to rebuild. 

 

Having the four teams fight it out two weeks for the top draft pick is quite a bit of fun as well. :)

 

(side note)

 

It seems there could be an error in the code that sets the future draft slot order. (???)  I assume that the final four playing for the cash prizes are also the bottom four picks in the 1st round.  The current listing has one of the top four teams (Cat-Like) with pick 1.08 when he should be 1.09 I believe. (???)  ($500 #15)

 

That is not actually correct as far as seeding goes. Any team that makes the playoffs and does not cash goes into a tiebreaker which I think is total points related.

 

 

If that includes the money won via top two seeding, then I think it is currently wrong, as Cat-Like was a top two seed.



#75 Dave

Dave

    Capo

  • Administrators
  • 3943 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 03:51 PM

 

 

IMO, having the BYE week for the two worst teams and giving them a free pass (and a puncher's chance) into the 1.01-1.04 picks is fair enough to rebuild. 

 

Having the four teams fight it out two weeks for the top draft pick is quite a bit of fun as well. :)

 

(side note)

 

It seems there could be an error in the code that sets the future draft slot order. (???)  I assume that the final four playing for the cash prizes are also the bottom four picks in the 1st round.  The current listing has one of the top four teams (Cat-Like) with pick 1.08 when he should be 1.09 I believe. (???)  ($500 #15)

 

That is not actually correct as far as seeding goes. Any team that makes the playoffs and does not cash goes into a tiebreaker which I think is total points related.

 

 

If that includes the money won via top two seeding, then I think it is currently wrong, as Cat-Like was a top two seed.

 

 

You may be right, let me check into it and I will email tech on this if it needs to be corrected.



#76 Long Johns

Long Johns

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 04:02 PM

I know it would be alot more work but I think that if the teams for sale were offered for an auction  with a minimum amount that could bring some more excitement to the orphan teams plus potentially provide additional revenue if the team got bid up over the entry fee....just a crazy thought.....not that I am selling or buying at the moment....just something that struck me as an interesting wrinkle......



#77 Dave

Dave

    Capo

  • Administrators
  • 3943 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 05:27 PM

 

 

 

IMO, having the BYE week for the two worst teams and giving them a free pass (and a puncher's chance) into the 1.01-1.04 picks is fair enough to rebuild. 

 

Having the four teams fight it out two weeks for the top draft pick is quite a bit of fun as well. :)

 

(side note)

 

It seems there could be an error in the code that sets the future draft slot order. (???)  I assume that the final four playing for the cash prizes are also the bottom four picks in the 1st round.  The current listing has one of the top four teams (Cat-Like) with pick 1.08 when he should be 1.09 I believe. (???)  ($500 #15)

 

That is not actually correct as far as seeding goes. Any team that makes the playoffs and does not cash goes into a tiebreaker which I think is total points related.

 

 

If that includes the money won via top two seeding, then I think it is currently wrong, as Cat-Like was a top two seed.

 

 

You may be right, let me check into it and I will email tech on this if it needs to be corrected.

 

 

The way we have it set up is based on these rules:

 

It is only looking at the prize money awarded in the most recent playoffs which is just the prize money awarded after week 16. It does not take into account prize money won during the regular season such as the $400 Cat Like Reflexes won for #1/#2 seed

 

The other 6 playoff teams will be slotted in inverse order of the TOTAL amount of prize money awarded in the most recent playoffs.  In event of a tie between teams, the following tiebreakers will apply:

1.  Team with more total points scored during the regular season will get the lower (worse pick, meaning 1.11 vs. 1.10, for example) draft pick.

2.  Head to Head winner during the regular season will be slotted lower.

3.  Coin flip.



#78 northga

northga

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 08:19 PM

"Battling", "duking", or "playing" it out for the 1.01 doesn't seem to be statistically working. Again, a bad team just isn't going to beat a team that just missed out of the playoffs likely 90% of the time. While we all agree 1.01 picks are not sure things, we should all be able to agree that a 1.01 pick holds much more value than a 1.04 pick before or at draft time. That value is what can benefit that really bad team by potentially trading it away for a seasoned vet or two and a later pick. Plus some 1.01s actually turn out to be gems, Elliot e.g.

The worry about tanking can be addressed by the Commissioner, especially if it is reported by leaguemates, who should be reporting in high stakes leagues like we play in.

The current rules is an issue that likely creates an imbalance in most leagues that creates more orphan teams than usual. That can't be advantageous to FFPC.

If you really wanted to "battle" it out on a level playing field, than add a handicap to the bottom field like you would in bowling leagues.

Finally do any of us really think that the Browns or the 49'ers would regularly beat the Buccaneers or the Saints or the Broncos or the Redskins in a loser's bracket playoff for the 1.01 pick?

#79 northga

northga

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 08:21 PM

Tanking worries me much less than those questionable trades we all see occur.

#80 Cavalier King Charles

Cavalier King Charles

    Walk On

  • Members
  • 303 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 12:24 AM

Here is my choice, suggested by MenoBrown and SportsbettingMan and fully concur. We do this now in our own league:

 

The mirror of the Playoffs, the bottom two teams earn a week 14 bye. The other 4 teams that didn't make the playoff have a total points finish with the two winners going on to meet the bottom two in weeks 15 and 16, designating the 1-4 draft picks. This way they're guaranteed at least a top 4, and still offers plenty incentive and excitement for the rest of the non playoff teams.

I prefer this suggested method.  I too think that guaranteeing a top 4 pick to the 2 worst teams is good enough for balance (rather than guaranteeing a top 2).



#81 bodey24

bodey24

    Newborn

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 06:00 AM

My recommendation would be for seeds 5 and 6 in the losers bracket to get those rookie picks. Then the 4 worst teams battle it out for the number 1 pick. Maybe have a 3 week points race between those 4 teams. Seeds 5 and 6 likely aren't going to tank because they will be battling for the playoffs up until the end. Those teams are usually teams that just miss the playoffs.

I think that would give the bad teams a better chance to rebuild. The system we have now a team that just misses the playoffs only has to beat two of the worst teams in the league to secure a top two pick which is happening quite often. Giving these teams players like Zeke, Cooper, Gurley, Gordon etc just over the past two years.

#82 Coltsfan

Coltsfan

    Special Teams

  • Members
  • 646 posts
  • LocationEvansville, IN
  • Occupation:Realtor

Posted 04 January 2017 - 07:32 AM

My thought is that teams 5 and 6 are probably engaged in trying to make the playoffs and are probably not tanking.  They shouldn't be eligible for the 1.1. since they are normally much better than the lowest seeded teams.  Perhaps they play for picks 5 and 6.  Then you have a system where the bottom 4 teams compete for picks 1-4.  This could be a total points or head to head match ups.  But I do like the ideas where the 5 and 6 seeds aren't competing for 1.1

 

 

Wayne


  • BaldisBeautiful likes this

#83 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 11:21 AM

 

 

 

 

IMO, having the BYE week for the two worst teams and giving them a free pass (and a puncher's chance) into the 1.01-1.04 picks is fair enough to rebuild. 

 

Having the four teams fight it out two weeks for the top draft pick is quite a bit of fun as well. :)

 

(side note)

 

It seems there could be an error in the code that sets the future draft slot order. (???)  I assume that the final four playing for the cash prizes are also the bottom four picks in the 1st round.  The current listing has one of the top four teams (Cat-Like) with pick 1.08 when he should be 1.09 I believe. (???)  ($500 #15)

 

That is not actually correct as far as seeding goes. Any team that makes the playoffs and does not cash goes into a tiebreaker which I think is total points related.

 

 

If that includes the money won via top two seeding, then I think it is currently wrong, as Cat-Like was a top two seed.

 

 

You may be right, let me check into it and I will email tech on this if it needs to be corrected.

 

 

The way we have it set up is based on these rules:

 

It is only looking at the prize money awarded in the most recent playoffs which is just the prize money awarded after week 16. It does not take into account prize money won during the regular season such as the $400 Cat Like Reflexes won for #1/#2 seed

 

The other 6 playoff teams will be slotted in inverse order of the TOTAL amount of prize money awarded in the most recent playoffs.  In event of a tie between teams, the following tiebreakers will apply:

1.  Team with more total points scored during the regular season will get the lower (worse pick, meaning 1.11 vs. 1.10, for example) draft pick.

2.  Head to Head winner during the regular season will be slotted lower.

3.  Coin flip.

 

 

As Walter told The Dude after hearing about Smokey being a fragile pacifist..."I did not know that." :D

 

Works for me.

 

Maybe adding a line to clarify that the seed money = regular season and does not factor in.



#84 menobrown

menobrown

    Starter - First Team

  • Members
  • 1390 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 12:42 PM

I would not want to see teams 5 and 6 not be able to compete for pick 1.1.

 

We talk about tanking, and I've seen it happen a few times so it does down. It's usually not so obvious as starting a player on bye, but I've seen it every year in at least one league every year. You start saying teams 5 and 6 are excluded and you'll start to see some teams tanking or not putting out proper effort in final few weeks to ensure they are 1-4. That to me would be horrible for teams competing for playoffs or playoff seeding as it becomes extremely hard to make ground when a few teams start tanking which has impact of getting at least one VP for teams making an effort fairly easy.

 

Other than tanking or making a half ass effort(which is more common than tanking) is the draft playoffs keep teams at times from trading off players that might help them in draft playoffs or releasing older type current productive players who they don't plan to keep but would be asset for teams playing for something. This to me has impact on real playoffs and I encourage rules to help minimize it.

 

For the most part I like the system just like it is I just wish it mirrored the format of the real playoffs which mean no H2H, just simply reverse where two lowest VP teams are treated like two highest VP teams in real playoffs.


  • SPORTSBETTINGMAN likes this

#85 menobrown

menobrown

    Starter - First Team

  • Members
  • 1390 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 12:44 PM

 

Lance, you and i need to be in  a dyno league together......lets go!!

 

I'm like a cowboy sitting quietly in the corner of an old saloon sipping whiskey, eyeballin' that crazy chef who came bursting through the swinging doors trying to rile up a posse to go get that $2500 dynasty reward! :D

 

Bald/Jack, you can make this happen. Just a lot smaller stakes.



#86 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 05:40 PM

Let's face it...the "worst team in the league" will be an underdog in any competitive draft slot scenario.  This is DYNASTY FOOTBALL!!!  Injury woes are minimized by the IR and the ability to keep injured players until healed. You are allowed to trade anyone on your roster and can trade your future draft picks.

 

If you have all of those options and yet remain the worst team in the league for more than two years...I'd like to cordially invite you into my startup!  ;)


  • Dave, Invictus. and Fish like this

#87 Dave

Dave

    Capo

  • Administrators
  • 3943 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 10:47 PM

Tanking worries me much less than those questionable trades we all see occur.

 

Feel free to protest any trade you have an issue with. We do overturn them on occasion, but if you say nothing, you get no ruling. 



#88 Dave

Dave

    Capo

  • Administrators
  • 3943 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 11:02 PM

Okay, I at least see a message board consensus on consolation mirroring the championship round with not using H2H. FFPC will commit to that change for 2017, should be easy and does make sense to reduce H2H variance. Not sure yet on what to do about 5/6. 

 

What about this idea?:

 

Teams 4, 5 and 6 do a three week playoff for picks 4, 5 and 6 and teams 1, 2 and 3 do a three week playoff for the top three picks? In my experience in dynasty, there is a distinctive difference between 1-3 vs 4-6. Having said that, there is a lot to play for to move from 6 pick to 4 pick and from 3 to 1 of course, so everyone has incentive and it makes it compelling and fun. Also, teams 1-3 are generally pretty rough with similar scoring while 4-6 will be more competitive.

 

The worry is then about tanking. So long as owners report tanking in a timely fashion, I do change those "bench Mike Evans for John Brown" lineups, even on Mondays. 


  • SPORTSBETTINGMAN, BaldisBeautiful, menobrown and 2 others like this

#89 menobrown

menobrown

    Starter - First Team

  • Members
  • 1390 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 11:42 PM

Okay, I at least see a message board consensus on consolation mirroring the championship round with not using H2H. FFPC will commit to that change for 2017, should be easy and does make sense to reduce H2H variance. Not sure yet on what to do about 5/6. 

 

What about this idea?:

 

Teams 4, 5 and 6 do a three week playoff for picks 4, 5 and 6 and teams 1, 2 and 3 do a three week playoff for the top three picks? In my experience in dynasty, there is a distinctive difference between 1-3 vs 4-6. Having said that, there is a lot to play for to move from 6 pick to 4 pick and from 3 to 1 of course, so everyone has incentive and it makes it compelling and fun. Also, teams 1-3 are generally pretty rough with similar scoring while 4-6 will be more competitive.

 

The worry is then about tanking. So long as owners report tanking in a timely fashion, I do change those "bench Mike Evans for John Brown" lineups, even on Mondays. 

 

 

 

Big fan of doing away with H2H, would prefer all 6 non playoff teams were in league playoff with chance to get a #1 pick however.

 

Would like to get clearer guidelines on what makes up tanking? What about when a team just recklessly spends all their money so they can't make roster moves? What about when they start a guy that maybe 2-3 out of 100 people could see being the right guy to start but they insist it's who they want? I just think the tanking I normally see is subtle. This may not be tanking but when I see teams make zero effort to improve themselves in season and throw out junk players in their lineup and when the draft playoffs start making moves like their life depended on it to me it's just as bad as tanking.

 

But to be fair not sure any rule fixes the tanking issue, can just try and minimize it and I do think guaranteeing top 3 picks and making such a difference between being third or fourth worst team in the league is going to be more temptation than some can avoid. I want teams not afraid to gun for playoffs, not assessing things with a few weeks to go and wondering if they might be better off just losing.

 

Again just my opinion and I know others have differing viewpoints and I for one appreciate you listening to the suggestions.


  • SPORTSBETTINGMAN likes this

#90 SPORTSBETTINGMAN

SPORTSBETTINGMAN

    Tee-Baller

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 12:40 AM

 

"...making such a difference between being third or fourth worst team in the league is going to be more temptation than some can avoid."

 

I agree.

 

Nobody purposely misses out on the top six money playoffs if there remains hope, but if the top six run away in VP and you are hopeless and can slack off and get into the bottom three in Victory Points, many will choose that route as it makes sense to do so.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users