Football Forum

View the Forum Registry


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: RIFC - League Parameters

Posted by: Guru
- [330592710] Fri, Jul 09, 2004, 16:01

I have selected the following 14 Gurupies to participate in the inaugural season of the RIFC (RotoGuru Invitational Football Challenge):

CanEHDian Pride
Challenger
culdeus
deepsnapper
Ender
GoatLocker
Guru
leggestand
Mike V
Motley Crue
Perm Dude
Sludge
Taxman
TB

I used a variety of criteria in making these selections, although I did require that everyone in the first season come from the list of existing GuruPatrons. I am not interested in debating the merits of anyone on this list. In my view, they are all qualified and deserving. Of course, there are many others who are comparably qualified and deserving. Those who are interested (GuruPatrons or not) are invited to join a RIFC qualifying league, which I'm sure will be formed soon. Those leagues should be similar in structure to the RIFC league, but do not need to be exactly the same. In particular, I realize that some qualifying leagues will probably be run on a free site such as Yahoo, and that may limit some of the options. The RIFC will probably be hosted at a pay site, but that has not yet been determined.

The next step is to begin to settle on league parameters. I'll begin that process in a moment. Please stand by...

Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.]
116Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 12:56
I believe that the following list summarizes our results so far. Open issues are in italics.

Roster
1 QB
2 RB
3 WR
1 TE
1 K
1 Team def
1 DL
2 IDP (flex)
8 bench
20 Total

Offense Category
Passing TD 4
Other TD 6
Passing-2pt conv 1
Other-2pt conv 2
Passing yard 1/25
Rushing yard 1/10
Receiving yard 1/10
Punt return yard 1/10
Kick return yard 1/25
Kick return 0
Decimal scoring: yes
Int, fumbles lost -1
Extra point made 1
Extra point missed -1
FG under 40 yards 3
FG 40-49yds 4
FG 50+ yards 5
Missed FG <30 -1
Missed FG 30+ 0

Team Defense
Sack 1
Interception 2
Fumble recovered 2
TD 6
Safety 2
Blocked kick 2
Shutout 10
1-6 points allowed 7
7-13 points allowed 4
14-20 points allowed 1
21-27 points allowed 0
28-34 points allowed -1
35+ points allowed -4


Indiv Defensive Players
Solo Tackle 1
Asst Tackle 0.5
Pass defensed 1
Sack 2 (half sack=1)
Interception 2
Fumble recovery 2
TD 6
Safety ?
Blocked kick 2
IDP also receive points for offensive categories, if applicable

All free agents are subject to weekly waivers

Playoffs
8 teams
Top 6 W/L records are seeded 1-6
Top remaining total points are seeded 7-8
Teams with equivalent W/L records are seeded based on total points
Bracket is fixed (no reseeding after each round)

Schedule
13 week round robin
Doubleheaders weeks 1-13, if available
Single elimination playoffs, weeks 14-16


Please correct me if anything looks wrong or is missing.

Here are the open issues that I would like to resolve with a final vote:

1. Passing TD: 4 or 6
(note, if we use 6 pts, then passing 2-pt conv will be worth 2)

2. Per kick return: 0 or -.5

3. Int, fumble lost (offensive): -1 or -2

4. Team defense sacks: 1 or 2

5. Team defense safety: 2 or 4

6. IDP safety: 2 or 4

Please vote on these final 6 issues.

117leggestand
      Sustainer
      ID: 451036518
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 13:35
1. Passing TD: 4 pts
2. Per kick return: 0
3. Int, fumble lost (offensive): -2
4. Team defense sacks: 1
5. Team defense safety: 2
6. IDP safety: 2
118MikeV
      SuperDude
      ID: 25924115
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 14:07
1. 4 Pts
2. -.05
3. -2
4. 1
5. 2
119TB
      Leader
      ID: 31811922
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 14:18
1. Passing TD: 6 pts
2. Per kick return: 0
3. Int, fumble lost (offensive): -2
4. Team defense sacks: 2
5. Team defense safety: 3
6. IDP safety: 3
(If I have to pick either 2 or 4 for the two safety questions, instead of going with 3, then I will pick 2)
120Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 14:26
By the way, I'm still awaiting a second set of random numbers. (see last sentence, post 94)
121Ender
      ID: 442215
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 14:47
1. 6 pts
2. 0
3. -2
4. 2
5. 2
6. 2

Mike V, I assume that was -0.5 not -.05 ;) Also what happened to your #6?
122youngroman
      ID: 59242611
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:02
one thought of mine:
have you thought about the use of fumbles forced for IDP instead of fumbles recovered? forcing a fumble is more skill for the individual player then recovering it, which in most cases is pure luck. fumble recovering is still included in team defense, where it makes sense because of the luck-factor. it would also help some defense players to get up to 10 more points and makes them worth a bit more
123Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:10
Good point, YR.

I received the second set of random numbers. I'll post the draft2 order in a moment.
124Perm Dude
      ID: 2343587
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:16
1. 6 points

2. -.5/kr (making touchbacks an automatic -.5, right?)

3. -2

4. 1

5 & 6. 4 points
125Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:16
For draft ordering, I started with the list of teams in the order that they appear in post 1. excluding me. I then resequenced that list based upon the first set of random numbers received (from TB). That new list was then seeded using a second set of random numbers submitted (by deepsnapper).

Here is the resulting order:
1 Mike V
2 leggestand
3 Challenger
4 culdeus
5 Taxman
6 Perm Dude
7 Sludge
8 CanEHDian Pride
9 TB
10 Ender
11 Motley Crue
12 GoatLocker
13 deepsnapper
14 Guru

To clarify, this does not mean that Mike V has the first draft pick. This means that Mike V gets to select his draft order first. He could choose to pick 1st (and then 28th, 29th, 56th, etc.), or he could select some other draft priority.

Please wait until the scoring rules are finalized before we start the draft2.
126Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:18
PD - I don't think that a touchback counts as a kickoff return. I think it is a non-event.
127Perm Dude
      ID: 2343587
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:23
OK, thanks. Wasn't sure if it was considered a KR with zero yards (an individual stat) or a team stat of a touchback.
128leggestand
      Sustainer
      ID: 451036518
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:32
I think the same thing goes for fair catches on PR's.
129leggestand
      Sustainer
      ID: 451036518
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:35
On youngroman's thought: My initial reaction would be to include points for IDP's for FF's and FR's. I think team defense should only get credit for FR's, because their are many instances of fumbles in games that are "non-forced" (i.e. a botched handoff that is fallen on by the QB/RB) where no IDP or team should get credit.
130Perm Dude
      ID: 2343587
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:36
Hmmm. Clearly the $5 I PayPal'd the Guru this morning had no real effect on the pick order...
131TB
      Leader
      ID: 31811922
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 15:50
LOL.
132Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:03
PD - you're assuming that the first five didn't each pay me more than $5?
133Doug
      ID: 57352917
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:07
I agree with YR... for IDPs, most leagues I am have FFs at 2 points, and FRs at 0-2 points (depending on the league), and the combined FF and FR points usually equal the INT points. Since this league already has agreed to set INTs to 2 points, my two cents would be to make FF=1 and FR=1.

I'm a little confused by legg's comment. I agree that opponents "accidental fumbles" should not reward a team or IDP... for teams specifically, that is the point of using the "forced fumbles (FFs)" stat rather than just plain old "fumbles" stat. So I don't get why only IDPs should get credit for FF (not teams), yet BOTH get credit for FRs...
134GoatLocker
      Sustainer
      ID: 60151121
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:09
1. 4
2. 0
3. -2
4. 1
5. 2
6. 2

Cliff
135Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:25
I've spent some time slogging through the league setup using Fanball.com. The setup seemed pretty intuitive, and I believe there is only one scoring issue that cannot be accommodated.

In the broad sense, the issue is that offensive scoring stats cannot be applied to IDP. This means that PR and KR yardage cannot be applied to IDP. It also means that if Warren Sapp (for example) catches a TD pass, he won't get the 6 points (or the receiving yardage). IDPs get TD points only for interception returns and fumble recoveries.

It appears that all other features can be accommodated, including our weekly waiver process, doubleheader scheduling, IDP & team defense, and all other scoring options specified above. Thus, we have a decision to make:

1. Find another hosting system that will not have this limitation.

2. Live with the limitation.

3. Live with the limitation, but have the Commissioner manually override the TD limitation. (In other words, all TDs would count for all players, regardless of the type of TD).

As Commissioner, I offer the third option because I don't think it will require much effort, since there will be limited exceptions. However, I'm unwilling to manually adjust all IDP for return yardage points.

Some of you have suggested alternate league hosting sites, and I've browsed a number of them. Unfortunately, the process of figuring out all of the potential issues is tedious. However, if any of you want to do some scouting and flesh out the capabilities of your own "pet" system, please do so and post your findings here. Among those that have been suggested are Sandbox plus, ESPN, CBS Sportsline, and perhaps some others that I've forgotten about.

I'll give you all until the middle of next week (say Wednesday?) to research and post the benefits and constraints of any other hosting site that you want us to seriously consider. At that point, we'll make a decision.

136leggestand
      Sustainer
      ID: 451036518
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:26
Re Doug: I didn't know if accidental fumbles were technically counted as forced fumbles by a team D. If they aren't, then my point is moot.
137deepsnapper
      ID: 2344179
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:31
1) 4 Pts
2) 0
3) -2
4) 2
5) 4
6) 4

Mike V - don't make us Texans look bad (do #6) ;)
138Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:34
Can someone define what constitutes a "pass defensed"? Specifically, would an inteception also count as a pass defensed?
139TB
      Leader
      ID: 31811922
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:41
Pass Defensed Definition from ESPN:
Any pass which a defender, through contact with the football, causes to be incomplete.

The NFL leader last year was Ty Law with 23 for the season.
141TB
      Leader
      ID: 31811922
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:45
My 2 cents to post 135. I think we should live with the limitation. We have plenty of scoring rules and we are all subject to the same rules. Keep it simple.
142MikeV
      SuperDude
      ID: 25924115
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 16:55
6. 4
143Perm Dude
      ID: 2343587
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 17:03
Re 135: If it's not too much of a hassle, I'd go for the commish overide to grant points to all scoring players. I'd also send a note to fanball asking for this as an option in this or future seasons. They seem like they have a good game, almost certainly a result of player input.
144culdeus
      Leader
      ID: 43105818
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 18:21
1. 6 points
2. -.5/kr
3. -2
4. 1
5 & 6. 2 points

Living with the limitation of no KR/PR for IDPs but manually entering them would be a beating of the higest possible caliber. I wouldn't live with this if I was you.

------------

As to 110, I was very unclear. The lesson as always, I'm an idiot. I meant by making much difference I meant I didn't think only KR/PR people would get many points. That's what happens when you get in a hurry and don't explain stuff well. With 3x14 WR slots I think there will be more people drawing from that slot for returners than IDP given the dominance of LBs points wise. I haven't seen too too many DB's that return kicks and provide much else than a nickel/dime presesnce. (with one or two notable execptions)
145Challenger
      Donor
      ID: 481126818
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 18:50
1. Passing TD: 6 pts
2. Per kick return: 0
3. Int, fumble lost (offensive): -2
4. Team defense sacks: 2
5. Team defense safety: 2
6. IDP safety: 2
146Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jul 29, 2004, 19:30
To be clear, I only said I'd offer to manually include return touchdowns for IDPs. I did not offer to override all PR/KR scoring.

Although I haven't looked at historical precedent, I'm assuming that an average week would require no more than 1 or 2 overrides.
147Taxman
      SuperDude
      ID: 29463114
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 02:22
1. 6
2. 0
3. -2
4. 1
5. 4
6. 4
148Sludge
      ID: 373201513
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 09:14
1. 4
2. -0.5
3. -1
4. 1
5. 4
6. 4
149Sludge
      ID: 373201513
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 09:21
Nice. For garnering your team 2 points on the field and for getting your offense the ball back, it looks like we'll award the same amount as we will for simply getting your offense the ball back.
150Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 09:26
Other the issue #3 (fumbles and ints will be -2), the other 5 issues are still undecided. We are still waiting to hear from CEHP and Motley Crue, and then from me to break any logjams.
151Perm Dude
      ID: 2343587
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 10:32
Yeah, Sludge, I agree. I pushed a safety to be four points because it's two different positive actions: A turnover and points on the board.
152deepsnapper
      ID: 2344179
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 12:21
Scratch Sandbox off the list of sites. SBX doesn't support Double-header scheduling of games/week.
153Doug
      ID: 57352917
      Fri, Jul 30, 2004, 22:54
Re: 151... true but for an IDP, you get credit for a sack, half-sack, or tackle in addition to the points you get for the safety... so an IDP is scoring 3-4 points for a "safety action" even if the safety itself is only worth 2 points.

This is why IMHO it seems like you'd want an IDP safety to be 3 points, and a team safety to be worth 4 (or else 2 and 3 respectively)... so that the combined point total for a team or IDP safety is the same. Just my uninvited two cents. =-)
154CanEHdian Pride
      ID: 46033123
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 01:45
1. Passing TD: 4 pts
2. Per kick return: 0
3. Int, fumble lost (offensive): -2
4. Team defense sacks: 2
5. Team defense safety: 3
6. IDP safety: 3
155Motley Crue
      ID: 20636257
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 09:33
Sorry for taking so long. I was in Vegas on business all week.

In response to #93:
1. Yes
2. Safety: 3 points
3. Designate one slot for DL.
4. Yes
5. Yes
6. Yes (if possible)
7. Yes
8. Yes
9. Yes
10. Yes
11. Kick returns +1 point per 25 yards
NO. I prefer +1 for each 20 yards, but -1 for each attempt. There should be a penalty per attempt, because it's basically a free chance at running the ball up the field.

12. Yes
13. Yes
14. Yes
15. A

In response to #116:

1. Passing TD: 4
2. Per kick return: See 11 above--needs some sort of penalty, so if -.5 is the only option, I'll take that.
3. Int, fumble lost (offensive):-2
4. Team defense sacks:2
5. Team defense safety: (3?)
6. IDP safety: (3?)

156Sludge
      ID: 373201513
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 10:38
Re: 151... true but for an IDP, you get credit for a sack, half-sack, or tackle in addition to the points you get for the safety... so an IDP is scoring 3-4 points for a "safety action" even if the safety itself is only worth 2 points.

Then we ought to lower the points given for an individual defensive player's TD since it will generally come as the result of recovering a fumble or intercepting a pass.

And then we ought to lower the points given for an offensive player's TD since it will always come after that player has had some other scoreable action, such as a reception, receiving yards, or rushing yards.

I mean, these players are already scoring points for a "touchdown action", so why should we be piling on the extra 6?
157deepsnapper
      ID: 2344179
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 12:04
Man I hate circular logic. It get me dizzy going around in all those circles.
158taxman
      ID: 516313111
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 12:43
Yea, but as the "big wheel" Roy, .. what other direction can you go.

Thanks for the Denton County lake history (or how Lake Dallas became Lake Lewisville) .. I actually was just trying to harass you northern types (that would be northern Texas) homesteading north of the Trinity.

Is Flower Mound where the Mounds candy bar was originated? ;o)

(snicker snicker)
159Doug
      ID: 57352917
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 14:43
Then we ought to lower the points given for an individual defensive player's TD since it will generally come as the result of recovering a fumble or intercepting a pass.

Ummm... currently an INT or fumble recovery for a TD would score 8 points for an IDP, and 8 points for a Team D... so that seems totally consistent to me... so I don't understand what the argument would be for lowering it for IDPs?

Actually... I see... you thought I was arguing the total fantasy points for a safety action should be 2!?!? If so, then you completely misunderstood my point, which was simply that I felt total fantasy scoring for a safety should be as consistent as possible between Team D and IDP (and TD as well, but then again that consistency is already in place with the current system, so I left it aside).

So let me put it this way:
If a "safety via a sack" scores 5 points for a Team D (1 for sack + 4 for safety) then that exact same action should IMHO also score 5 points for an IDP (2 for sack + 3 for safety).

I don't care what the total value is (a safety could be worth 20 points, whatever...), just that the total points on the play are consistent between Team and IDP. Since sacks and tackles are worth an extra point to an IDP vs. a Team D, I think safety's should correspondingly be worth 1 point less for IDPs, so that the total value of an identical safety play is consistent (just like it is for TDs). YMMV.
160Perm Dude
      ID: 2343587
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 14:57
Doug, it's not always going to be consistent, since safeties can be scored a number of ways. A punter who steps on the endline is a safety, as is a sack in the end zone. As far as I know (correct me here if I'm wrong) an individual player does not get credit for the safety in the first instance but does in the second (and, depending upon whether defenses are set up with ST separate or not) the team defense will be credited with safeties in both cases.

pd
161Doug
      Sustainer
      ID: 2730280
      Sat, Jul 31, 2004, 18:45
I was not arguing that ALL safeties should be consistent, but that IDENTICAL safeties should ideally be consistent (as approrpriate). I am not attempting to compare between a safety via sack vs. a safety via punter stepping on the endline... I see those as two different plays. Obviously it would not make sense for an IDP to receive points in that case (and as far as I know, you are correct... they don't).
162culdeus
      ID: 406391518
      Sun, Aug 01, 2004, 22:36
10 sacks last year were credited, I can't find the total sack number.

Much ado about nothing if you ask me.
163Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Aug 03, 2004, 11:49
Here is the latest vote tally:

Passing TDs will stay at 4. Without me, the vote was 7-6 in favor of 4, and I'll vote to make it 8-6.

Kick returns will have no deduction. Vote is 8-5.

Interceptions and fumbles lost (offensive) will be -2.

Team defense sacks will be 1. Vote was 7-6, and I'll make it 8-6. I don't find the need for symmetry with IDP to be compelling.

Regarding safeties, we seem to have 2 distinct camps - those favoring 2, and those favoring 4, with a few still wieghing in at 3, even though that wasn't a listed option. So, perhaps the best resolution is to makes safeties +3 for both team defense and IDP.

So, with these decisions, I'll recap the final rules shortly.
164Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Aug 03, 2004, 12:17
I do want to make an adjustment for forced fumbles.

For IDP, instead of allocating 2 pts for a fumble recovered, we'll award 1 point for a forced fumble and 1 point for a fumble recovery.

For team defense, I'm currently inclined to leave the formula at +2 for a fumble recovered and 0 for forced fumbles. This is consistent with the philosophy that a team defense should only be awarded if there is a turnover. (A forced fumble does not necessarily result in a turnover.)

I'm not going to put these to a vote. Scream if you object, otherwise I'll just implement these via Commisioner fiat.
165Motley Crue
      Leader
      ID: 439372011
      Tue, Aug 03, 2004, 19:02
Hey, Big G,

Did you ever decide who would receive automatic invitations to next year's RIFC? If you take all 8 playoff teams, that leaves only 6 new teams (and only 5 if you don't make the playoffs--Hey, it's possible!). Is that the way you want to go? I was thinking the more new people next year, the more pressure on all of us to do well so we get to come back. More challenge.
166Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Aug 03, 2004, 22:53
Let's move this discussion to the next thread: here.
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time.

If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating.

If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here.

Football Forum



Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days22
Last 30 days66
Since Mar 1, 20072726792