Forum: foot
Page 5250
Subject: RIFC 2009: Regular Season

  Posted by: Guru - [330592710] Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 10:51
I'm still tinkering with the waiver settings (even culdeus is stumped on one facet - but we'll figure it out.)

However, you may now place a waiver claim on any undrafted player. We will wait until after the final preseason games are played and digested to process these claims. I currently have this set up for noon on Monday.

Following a brief moratorium after claims are processed, free agents may be added. I'm thinking of opening this up at 3pm on Monday - but let me know if there is a reason to delay this until later (since Monday is a holiday).

Even if you don't plan to claim a player, check out the waiver claim facility, and familiarize yourself with it. Note that you must set up a separate priority list for each potential round. If you have questions about this, please ask here and now.

(BTW, I see that there is a comment box for the commissioner. I have no idea what this is about. Anyone know?)

Preseason waiver priorities are in the reverse order of the first round of the draft.
 
1Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 11:01 		Question on the processing for dropped players.

In the past, dropped players have gone through a 48 hour waiver period, subject to normal waiver processes. So, anyone dropped as part of a free agent claim on Wednesday was subject to a 2-day claiming period.

We're having trouble figuring out exactly how to implement that in MFL - but this also begs the question as to whether it is necessary. Seldom were dropped players added to another roster via that process, and this also allows managers to temporarily "shield" a dropped player by dropping him within 48 hours of his kickoff - thereby ensuring that the player rolls into the next week's free agent claiming pool.

We could simply make dropped players subject to a first come, first served process - so that any player dropped via a waiver claim, and any player player dropped via F/A pickup, would be immediately available to everyone.

Thoughts?
 
2culdeus
      ID: 06532114
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 11:12 		I'm fine having no holds. String dropping can be a real irritant in idp formats.

If people are worried about a clicking contest then a second waiver tier could go into place shortly before free agents are first come first served.

 
3Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 12:32 		The waiver order gets reset weekly based on reverse standings up until week 6 if I remember correctly?
 
4Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 12:58 		correct
 
5davepyro
      ID: 207351320
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 13:48 		I think there should be no delay waiver claim period. Once a player is dropped he should be available to anyone else as a free agent on a first come basis right after the free agent draft. We all will know when the FAD happens.
 
6Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 14:02 		No lockout after being dropped is fine by me.
 
7culdeus
      ID: 587101120
      Wed, Sep 02, 2009, 21:38 		After talking to support they seem to indicate a hold off waivers is fine. What it can't support is a hold of FCFS waivers which I was also trying to implement. Though I was a little confused by the terminology they used so I'm not totally clear on what will happen without testing it out.

Bonka, and I have a league that works fine with a waiver period then FCFS later that day. It can be a clickfest once or twice a season, but other than that it works fine.

This league has such a deep bench that dropping a stud is not likely to happen very often.
 
8Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Sep 04, 2009, 10:45 		Although nobody seems to care much, I decided to split the difference. Assuming the system is properly configured (which we should be able to confirm next week), dropped players will be subject to waivers after just 1 day, not 2. This will allow any players dropped through the weekly process on Wednesday to be added in time for the Thursday game, if applicable.

 
9I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Fri, Sep 04, 2009, 16:50 		RE 8: Sounds good to me.
 
10Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sat, Sep 05, 2009, 15:12 		I just noticed that letterj had Cody Brown on his MFL roster instead of Edgerrin James. I made the correction.

Everyone should doublecheck their roster at MFL before waivers are processed on Monday, if at all possible. It's much easier to fix things now, before someone places a claim on a player who should already have been rostered.
 
11Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 13:34 		All waivers were processed today in one round (5 claims). I assume no one was expecting a second waiver pickup?

I note that the waiver priority did not reset. I'll have to reset it manually. (This may be because preseason waiver priorities were manually set to begin with.

Free agents should be available for pickup starting at 3pm this afternoon.
 
12Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 15:08 		As I suspected might be the case, dropped players do not appear to be subject to waiver claims. They are locked for a day, but there does not seem to be any way to place a claim.

This may be a case where we have to live with the status quo. MFL may just not have as much flexibility as Fanball did in this regard. Or if it does, we are not not clever enough to figure it out.
 
13Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 21:38 		I see nothing wrong with it working that way. Everyone can see who was dropped, those players are locked for a day, and then it's a first come first serve at the time of the unlock. I don't really see it being a big deal. Nobody that valuable will be dropped with the bench sizes we have.
 
14Toral
      ID: 4155487
      Fri, Sep 11, 2009, 08:24 		Doing some reconciliation of point totals. Can someone tell me what the two team defenses scored last night under RIFC rules? Thanx.
 
15judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Fri, Sep 11, 2009, 09:40 		email sent with mfl info
 
16Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Sep 11, 2009, 09:59 		Here are the points scored by MFL for everyone in last night's game:

RIFC player points

Good idea for other leagues to reconcile as much as possible, and bring out any discrepancies. I have not checked them all, but the few that I have checked seem OK.

You can easily drill down to see details by clicking on a player name, and then by clicking his weekly point total.
 
17Toral
      ID: 4155487
      Fri, Sep 11, 2009, 10:32 		Thanx. Fantrax isn't counting extra points as points scored against the defense. I'll have to find out whether this is intentional.
 
18Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Sep 11, 2009, 11:17 		First trade!

Guru trades Martellus Bennett TE-Dal) to culdeus
culdeus trades Seattle defense to Guru

Trade is now subject to review by the league. Any protests must be made within 24 hours (either post here, or send me an email).

If a trade does not receive at least 3 protests, then it will be effective 24 hours after it is announced. If a trade receives at least 3 protests but the protests are not upheld in a full league vote, then the trade will be processed 48 hours after it is announced.
 
19culdeus
      ID: 587101120
      Sat, Sep 12, 2009, 08:06 		Of the best things about MFL one of the very, very best things is the gameday program.

http://www.myfantasyleague.com/fantasy-football-tools/fantasy-football-gameday.php

Hop on and chat during the games, and monitor every aspect of all games. Bonka for sure will be on there.
 
20judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Sat, Sep 12, 2009, 09:27 		Yeah but it only works on Windows...
 
21Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sat, Sep 12, 2009, 14:03 		There are programs to emulate windows on a mac and linux. The gameday program is pretty nice and beats the browser versions of live scoring.
 
22I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Sun, Sep 13, 2009, 12:59 		I noticed last minute that I was missing an IDP, so I added in Hobbs. I see that the change sticked, but it isn't showing in Live Scoring yet... just an FYI in case something funky happens.
 
23fugazi
      ID: 338181416
      Mon, Sep 14, 2009, 17:23 		I'm looking to trade for a WR. All of my running backs are on the block.
 
24Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Sep 15, 2009, 11:23 		Let me know if you see any scoring errors. so far, everything looks good to me, but I have not done an exhaustive reconciliation.
 
25Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Sep 15, 2009, 12:19 		Just to be clear, all non-rostered players are now subject to the weekly free-agent claiming process. Claims will be processed at noon on Wednesday. after a 3 hour moratorium period, unclaimed F/As can be picked up starting at 3pm on Wednesday. Dropped players will be locked from pickup for 24 hours, but then available first come first served.

Waiver priorities will be in reverse order of standings. For some reason, that didn't happen automatically, but I'll make sure it is properly set before Wednesday.

 
26Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Sep 15, 2009, 12:21 		Waiver priorities are now set properly. All I had to do was to turn off last week's custom order.
 
27Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Sep 17, 2009, 10:46 		Interesting. I saw a notice that Adrian Wilson had been credited with a forced fumble in statistical revisions, and set out to see whether MFL would automatically apply the revision.

What I found was this page (viewable only by the Commissioner, so reproduced here as a pdf): Statistics Changes For Week 1

Apparently, if I want to apply these, I have to click a button. I could also select to have these automatically applied each week. We have always had a standing rule that any stats changes could be processed as long as they were raised before the end of the related week. (I forget the exact timing.) We never had a controlled way to monitor this, so we always relied on managers to report their own statistical corrections.

Should I routinely process (or automate) the statistical corrections each week? I don't know if any of these for week 1 will have an impact on the game result or not.

Maybe I should manually apply them, so that we don't get any retroactive surprises after a game week has been "closed"?
 
28Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Sep 17, 2009, 12:16 		After reviewing the specific player corrections listed for week #1, not many of the players are on our rosters, and none would change a game outcome, although some team points would be slightly impacted.

 
29Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Thu, Sep 17, 2009, 13:40 		I would think just having them automatically applied would be best. The only issue I see is the first few weeks when the WW order is based off of the reverse standings where that order could be changed from a game outcome or just total points change. So if those changes are released and applied prior to the WW period ending, the order may need to be fixed.
 
30Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Sep 17, 2009, 15:12 		I would also tend to think that automatic is the way to go,... unless that would also allow scoring changes to be retroactively applied more than a week later. We have always "locked" in the game results once the next week's games begin - although we have occasionally allowed a late retroactive point adjustment which could impact playoff seeding.

Maybe to be safe I should simply keep it manual. Review on Wednesday morning to make sure there aren't any game-changing corrections in the queue, and wait until Friday to process. If a change needs to be made on Wednesday morning, I could manually adjust waiver priorities at that time, if needed.
 
31Nerfherders
      ID: 310111515
      Sat, Sep 19, 2009, 12:38 		I have a scoring question for the main league. Should all extra points and 2 point conversions count against the defense? I had a game last week that I lost by less than a half point because the Jets were given credit for a shutout. I always thought all extra points counted against defense but maybe I am wrong.

If they do not count, I think they should. If a team can get points for blocking an extra point, they should get negative credit for allowing one. And the defense is on the field for 2 point conversions. It just seems logical to me and something to think about for next year.
 
32Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sat, Sep 19, 2009, 14:09 		My stance has always been that the extra point related to a defensive TD should not count against the defense.

I know that not all sites treat this the same. Some treat all extra points as points against defense, regardless of the related TD. MFL appears to associate the XP with the touchdown, however, which is how I prefer it. And I don't see an option in the system to include vs exclude these points, which effectively renders the issue moot - since I would not consider administering this manually.
 
33Nerfherders
      ID: 310111515
      Sun, Sep 20, 2009, 01:53 		That's fine, I was mistaken for having thought they counted.
 
34holt
      ID: 308491916
      Sun, Sep 20, 2009, 13:00 		now if only the mfl server was up on sunday mornings, we'd be in business.
 
35holt
      ID: 308491916
      Sun, Sep 20, 2009, 13:01 		being unable to login and make changes to your lineup after inactive reports are released is as bad as it gets.
 
36Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Sep 20, 2009, 13:16 		Site has been working for me since about 20 minutes prior to kickoffs. Hadn't tried getting on before then.
 
37holt
      ID: 308491916
      Sun, Sep 20, 2009, 13:26 		maybe our AAA league is on a different server. our league didn't become available til after kickoff.
 
38Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Sep 20, 2009, 23:55 		Welker sits, Tuck gets hurt and I'm left with the outside shot of making up 40 points Monday night. Should be interesting...hoping for a high scoring affair. Lets go Addai!
 
39Toral
      ID: 4155487
      Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 10:43 		Point reconciliation question:

Our AA scoring credits neither Arizona Team D nor Antrel Rolle 6 points for his blocked punt for TD (leaving Arizona with 15 points, Rolle with 5). Looking closely at the Fanball scoring from last year referred into near the top of the Getting Started thread, it appears to me that team defenses are specifically awatded 6 pts for TDs on blocked kicks. Yet, looking at the RIFC scoring through your link, you appear to have Arizona at 15 as well, with no points awarded for the TD, and Rolle at 4 points.

What is the correct scoring?
 
40Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 13:01 		Actually, we do have Rolle scored for 10 points, including 6 for the TD, which is correct.

The TD should also count for the AZ defense. This was simply a coding oversight, which I just corrected. I presume the reported scoring will be retroactively adjusted later today.

(Note: the AZ defense was not active in our league this week, so it has no bearing on league results for week 2.)
 
41Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Sep 22, 2009, 15:27 		Yeah, I left it on the bench for the hot bagel from the Titans. Weeee
 
42Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 12:21 		When I revised the scoring formulas yesterday to include defensive TDs for blocked kicks, I then reran league points for the full year. Unfortunately, that seems to have excluded the scoring corrections that I had previously authorized for week 1. So I just reran those Week 1 scoring corrections again.

Just in case you're wondering why points changed slightly today.

 
43Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Sep 23, 2009, 13:25 		Nice grab on Wade. He was 2nd on my list and hoped he'd slip to me for the 2nd round of waivers. That guy could end up being a beast in this scoring format. Sadly my RB situation was too crappy to pass on Forsett.
 
44culdeus
      ID: 587101120
      Thu, Sep 24, 2009, 21:42 		Maybe I should manually apply them, so that we don't get any retroactive surprises after a game week has been "closed"?

Yeah. You'll have to do it every Thursday or never. The major impacts (well, major in quantity not quality) is on things like awarding half sacks to IDP those seem to come in very late when a player's agent appeals to the NFL. There are a few other changes that happen from time to time w.r.t. yards gained before a turnover for an offensive player. Maybe 7 out of 17 weeks will have no update at all.
 
45Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Sep 25, 2009, 09:02 		I'm processing the stat corrections for week 2

Points should be updated shortly.
 
46fugazi
      ID: 398533017
      Wed, Sep 30, 2009, 18:58 		I'm still looking to trade for a WR. If anybody is interested shoot me an offer.
 
47Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 02, 2009, 12:14
Week 3 stat corrections to be processed
 
48wiggs
      ID: 588351121
      Mon, Oct 05, 2009, 23:54 		NO WAY- I just lost my game on the Favre kneel down. What a terrible rule that is counting that as negative rushing yards
 
49Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Oct 06, 2009, 00:49 		I just looked and Schaub had 3 kneels for a total of -4 yards, so it wouldn't really matter.
 
50Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 08, 2009, 20:15 		stat corrections for week 4
 
51Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Thu, Oct 08, 2009, 20:25 		When is the trade deadline? Also, when do the waivers get reset based on inverse standings for the last time? Is it after week 5 or 6 games?
 
52Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 08, 2009, 20:39 		The last waiver priority reset will be after week 6.

The trade deadline is the Friday night following week #10. This year, that will be Friday, Nov 20, at 11:45pm ET.
 
53Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Thu, Oct 08, 2009, 20:44 		Thanks
 
54I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Mon, Oct 12, 2009, 16:45 		This season is looking like it might end up being a battle between brothers. It is early of course... but I can see us meeting in the playoffs.

Note to Guru... Are you planning on doing any of those position by position comparison's this year?
 
55Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 12, 2009, 22:50 		Perhaps - haven't done anything to adapt to the data from the new hosting site yet, however.
 
56Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Oct 14, 2009, 15:24 		Looking for a WR upgrade, can check out the trade bait on the league site if you haven't seen it.
 
57Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Thu, Oct 15, 2009, 03:31 		Those position comparisons are done right on the league site (MFL is really nice, I didn't know it was there until I just looked now). Go to reports -> league -> starter pts - position. It may be a bit different than what was done in the past but I think it looks mostly the same and serves the purpose.
 
58Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 15, 2009, 10:04 		Stat corrections for week 5
 
59Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 15, 2009, 10:24 		Now that we have five weeks to evaluate, I'll start posting the weekly table of points by position by team. The top chart shows the average points per slot by position. The bottom chart shows the total points by position over or under the average for that position. Thus, while the top chart shows per-player averages, the bottom chart multiplies the differences by the number of slots per position, which appears in the top table.

For example, IAC has been getting 9.8 pts on average for each WR. Since we start three WRs, and since the league average is 8.4 for a WR, he is realizing an extra 4.2 pts for his WR trio (9.8-8.4)*3 [subj to rounding]

For teams that start two tight ends, the WR data includes one TE for that week.

Let me know if anything looks out of whack. I'm using the same spreadsheet as last year, and I think I've put all the data in the right places. But, of course, the data feeds are coming from a different site.

 
60Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Thu, Oct 15, 2009, 14:31 		Yeah, when I looked at that on the league site last night I couldn't believe how bad my K was. I knew my DEF was a big reason my team hasn't done well, but my K position rots, even after trying 3 different kickers. Gotta love the luck and randomness of fantasy football.
 
61I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 11:49 		Will be interesting to see how my team fares this week w/o my "difference maker" (Peyton Manning) in my lineup. Expecting the game vs Smith32 to be a tough one.
 
62Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 15:16 		I just don't get it. Try to get Crosby off waivers, don't get him, he comes in and smokes me while Scobee has -1 because Garrard can't help himself from turning the ball over. I'm basically getting destroyed and I'll be lucky to score 90 right now. This season is getting really old really quick.

Usually things turn around after I complain about them, so here's hoping...
 
63I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 16:05 		Smith32's RB's are killing me, this matchup might be ugly.
 
64Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 16:22 		There we go, Scobee never missed the XP apparently, the kick was aborted and he redeemed himself with some points, Nicks comes up with a late TD....and now I see Morris hurt as I type this...doh.
 
65Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 13:23 		Reminder - this is the last week that the Waiver priorities reset during the regular season. Any claims made this week will push you to the back of the priority list.
 
66Frick
      ID: 4945458
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 13:50 		Sorry, to interrupt, but I had a rules question.

Is it legal to start 7 IDPs at the expense of an offensive player? I did it on accident, but Wolfer pointed out that the rules that we used only lists minimum and maximum's for each position.
 
67Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 15:29 		Legal lineup is starting 1 DL, 1 LB, 1 DB, 3 IDP. I don't think it's possible to set it up so the system will recognize that though since you can start a min of 1, max of 4 at any of those positions. There may be some setting on MFL to fix that, but I've never seen admin controls so I have no idea. Like I said though, I doubt it's possible, just has to be self governed.
 
68Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 15:34 		Actually, after thinking about it for a minute, it may be possible to set up on MFL if it allows you to create positions. Right now it's set, for example, to allow you to start 2-3 WR and 1-2 TE, meaning you could only start 2 WR and 1 TE or 3 WR and 2 TE if you gain/lose a lineup slot at another position (I think?). If it can be changed to 2 WR, 1 WR+TE, and 1 TE, it would fix the problem. The same could be applied to the IDPs to make it 1 DE+DT, 1 LB, 1 CB+DB, 3 DE+DT+LB+CB+DB.
 
69Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 16:24 		I emailed Culdeus and he said our MFL league is set up so that won't happen. I guess you're playing in that Fantrax league and either it's not set up correctly or their system just doesn't support it.
 
70Frick
      ID: 4945458
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 16:48 		But, what are the official RIFC rules? Should my roster be considered illegal?

Or is it legal through a technicality.
 
71Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 17:06 		I'd imagine it's illegal. The lineup is supposed to be 6 IDP max, so you'll just have to self govern that from now on. You should be able to work it out in your league though since you're being open about it if it was a mistake.
 
72Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Oct 19, 2009, 18:14 		Not legal.

Officially, one slot is a WR/TE flex. Six slots are designated for IDP.

MFL allows for the commissioner to control that. Don't know about Fantrax.

 
73Smith32
      ID: 25751421
      Thu, Oct 22, 2009, 20:56 		Re: [63] - Sorry IAC, you caught me a week too soon. The only
person getting killed by my RBs this week is me.
 
74Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Oct 26, 2009, 23:56 		Are we supposed to be able to grab players who are on bye after the Sunday games start? They're not locked until waivers like the others. Easy fix in the settings, not sure if it's meant to be that way or not.
 
75wiggs
      ID: 33916913
      Tue, Oct 27, 2009, 00:05 		2nd time i lost by .2 points this season. This is getting rough.
 
76fugazi
      ID: 57926270
      Tue, Oct 27, 2009, 02:28 		Looks like you lost on a Warner kneel too. Ouch!
 
77wiggs
      Leader
      ID: 04991311
      Tue, Oct 27, 2009, 10:30 		last time was on favre kneel downs. That sucks.
 
78Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 16:22 		Updated Points by Position through 7 weeks:
 
79Smith32
      ID: 25751421
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 18:28 		Can someone please explain to me how Bonka had 2 of his waiver
requests filled before I had 1 today? (Assuming they are listed in
chronological order)
 
80Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 19:21 		Can you post what your 1st and 2nd round priorities were? I'm guessing they weren't set correctly and all your round 1 guys were gone and it waited until the 2nd round to pick from that list.
 
81Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 19:27 		Forgot to mention, if you only had 1 round, then it's probably just not displayed correctly. Unless you had Snelling on your list.
 
82Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 19:28 		I like posting back to back to back....


Just noticed that IAC has 2 picks before sR as well. I think it's just a display issue.
 
83Smith32
      ID: 25751421
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 20:26 		I had Shonn Green as my Rd 1 claim, and Floyd and Crayton as
my Rd 2 claims. I guess I was thinking it worked like Fanball - if
your list A guy(s) was gone, then it went to list B. But MFL skips
you entirely if your Rd 1 guy(s) are gone instead of taking
someone from Rd 2. Anyone see the benefit to that logic? I
guess I should have put Green, Floyd and Crayton in my Rd 1
list, and also put Floyd and Crayton in my Rd
2 list as well.

Ultimately I'm not sure if the result of who I got would have
been different and I'm not half as bothered by this as it probably
seems. But since it is a new site for the RIFC this year, I want to
make sure we are all clear on how the process works.
 
84Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 20:57 		You need to put everyone in the 1st round and go from there. You can do a lot of things with your waiver lists if you can follow the logic involved with setting it up. Quick and simple example is mine this week looked like this:

Round 1
Add Greene, drop Evans
Add Snelling, drop Texans

Round 2
Add Snelling, drop Texans
Add Player X, drop Texans

That allowed me to either grab:
Greene and Snelling
Greene and X
Only Snelling

You can get into sort of complex stuff based on the player that gets dropped over multiple rounds of waivers.

But in the end, if you're going to have multiple rounds of waivers, you need to have X number of players in round 1 where X is your waiver slot. Just copy to each successive round and remove the top guy after that, if you want the most basic waiver setup.
 
85Smith32
      ID: 25751421
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 22:20 		Thanks Bonka. I believe I understand everything in [84].
However, I still don't understand:

(a) why if your Rd 1 queue is empty, it doesn't select from your
Rd 2 queue in Rd 1.

(b) why you go to the end of the line if no player is selected for
you in a given round.




 
86Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 22:35 		Those are questions you're better off sending to MFL and see what they say.
 
87holt
      ID: 308491916
      Wed, Oct 28, 2009, 23:48 		pretty simple, if it says rd 2, then it doesn't mean rd 1. Fanball didn't work like this because the claims were A, B, C, etc. They weren't designated with specific round numbers like MFL, iirc.
 
88Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 14:15 		It does seem like an exhausted queue should automatically move to the next "round queue", but it's simple enough to make this do what you want it to do as long as you realize that they strictly adhere to the round designation.
 
89Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 14:15 		Stat corrections for week 7
 
90Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 14:35 		Looks like a stat correction pushed wiggs over bmd in week 7. First time a game result has changed due to a stat correction.
 
91CJ
      Leader
      ID: 499271021
      Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 23:55 		Need some opinions on what defense to start this weekend.
I have IND going against SF
or
NYG @ PHI Can SF score on IND and will McNa cough it up all afternoon....LOL
 
92holt
      ID: 308491916
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 13:34 		Haha - just pick one. It sucks to pick the wrong one and it can be nice to be able to blame someone else, but the Football Fantasy Gods frown on such things, apparently. They do smile upon a good strong gut-decision over a decision that involved heavy research and lots of statistics and charts, apparently.
 
93SwinganaMiss
      ID: 40239148
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 16:34 		Hi Guru,

Wondering when you will process the trade? Is there a waiting period?
 
94Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 17:23 		Sorry - I wasn't even aware there was a trade. Did anyone get an alert about it? Or is the alert not sent until after the trade is approved? I checked my email archives, and never received any notification.

I'll go ahead and approve this one - but I'm wondering how the alert process should work. It's odd that I wouldn't have received any notice.
 
95Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 17:28 		Looks like I needed to set up a "trade poll" option to allow managers to vote on a trade. Presumably, that would trigger an email alert.
 
96SwinganaMiss
      ID: 40239148
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 17:32 		I thought when I approved it there was some reference to sending a notification to the commissioner. Not 100% sure on that though.

Thx for approving.
 
97judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 21:47 		re {94} I'm not getting alerts either (AAA#1). I've asked managers to post agreed upon trades in
our thread...so I can see them without having to search everyday to see if there is one.
 
98Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Fri, Oct 30, 2009, 22:50 		Go to for owners-->franchise setup-->contact info-->check the send e-mail for Trade Proposals/Results box.
 
99I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Mon, Nov 02, 2009, 19:47 		5 to go... and looking for 35 points... Looking for my 1st & 2nd round picks to prove there draft position this week. (My pep talk to my boyz) ;)
 
100beastiemiked
      ID: 35621411
      Tue, Nov 03, 2009, 00:18 		I'm fully expecting to lose another one on score corrections this week.
 
101Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Nov 03, 2009, 04:06 		Actually bmd, you should be gaining .7 points from Donald Lee. I've seen people say that Lee made a 7 yard reception but it was credited to Jennings. Sadly, that change won't be enough for my loss to become a win, unless there's some other correction out there on top of it.
 
102Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Nov 05, 2009, 11:18 		Stat corrections for week 8
 
103Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Nov 10, 2009, 15:14 		Would appreciate it if people didn't start players on bye. There was one game this week that the outcome would have changed if this didn't happen (2 players on bye), which could ultimately affect someone missing/making the playoffs and/or seeding. There might be an explanation as to why this happened, but I'd really prefer to not see it happen if it's avoidable.
 
104I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Tue, Nov 10, 2009, 16:18 		I'm not sure the reasoning, but if the manger felt that he is guaranteed a playoff spot, then maybe it was smarter to keep his "best playoff" team intact? (just a hypothesis)
 
105Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Nov 10, 2009, 16:28 		No, there was 1 player on the bench that could have been subbed in and won the game himself. Not sure how or why this happened, but I'm just posting to remind people they're supposed to at least keep active and competitive throughout the season. Don't want to see incomplete/subpar lineups playing a role in determining what teams get bumped out of the playoffs.
 
106Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Nov 12, 2009, 09:51 		Stat corrections for week 9
 
107 wiggs
      Leader
      ID: 04991311
      Mon, Nov 16, 2009, 14:15 		Looks like LaSean McCoy will be taking carries the rest of the season. I would be interested in taking offers for :

McCoy, Kevin Smith, Cadillac Williams or Derek Ward- in exchange for a WR. Anyone interested please email me or send an offer.
 
108Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Nov 17, 2009, 09:10 		Reminder: trade deadline is this Friday (Nov 20) at 11:45 pm.
 
109Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Nov 17, 2009, 12:03 		Updated Points by Position through 10 weeks:
 
110Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Nov 19, 2009, 10:41 		Stat corrections for week 10
 
111Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Nov 24, 2009, 10:58 		This is a good time to reiterate our rules for the Playoffs, including limitation on roster moves. You may want to begin positioning your teams for this:
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 head-to-head first, then total points
Bracket is fixed (no reseeding after each round)

Players at the primary skill positions (QB, RB, WR) and team defenses may not be added for any reason during the playoffs. Free agents at these positions will be locked out after the final regular season game. You may drop a player at one of these positions, but once dropped, that player cannot be added later.

Players at the other positions (TE, PK, IDP) may be added or dropped according to normal regular season guidelines, subject to playoff claiming priorities, if applicable.

Following the final regular season game, priorities will be reset based on playoff seed, with the top seed getting the top priority. Thereafter, throughout the playoffs, priorities will again adjust only when a claim is awarded.

If a playoff game ends in a tie score, the team with the better seed shall advance.

Team which are not still active in the Championship playoffs may not make any transactions - adds or drops - even if they are still competing in the Consolation bracket.
 
112Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Nov 27, 2009, 21:41 		Stat corrections for week 11
 
113Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 16:11 		If the regular season ended today, these would be the playoff teams:

1 IAC 19-5
2 Bonka 16-8
3 Fugazi 15-9
4 Wiggs 14-10
5 Smith32 14-10
6 Shortbus 13-11 (134.2 avg)
7 Swinganamiss 138.8 avg (11-13)
8 Youngroman 133.0 avg (13-11)

Other teams knocking at the door:
Guru (130.6 avg, 11-13)
bmd (129.3 avg, 11-13)
Bags (129.3 avg, 8-16)
Culdeus (127.1 avg, 12-12)

Swinganamiss looks like he's got a pretty solid hold on the #7 slot. The race for the #8 slot could be tight, though. A big week by any of a handful of teams could vault them into that spot.

 
114Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 16:20 		Just wondering what the conditions are to be invited again the following year?

Also, just to be clear, QB/WR/RB all lock after week 13 games?
 
115Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 16:20 		Forgot to add DEF to that list as well.
 
116Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 16:55 		A proposal I have for next season is to lower the scoring of defenses. Defensive scoring in this format is higher than in most other formats I believe and I'm not sure why that is. Individual defense team outputs vary greatly from year to year and also aren't taken in drafts until the middle to late rounds, and thus I think a lesser emphasis should be put on them.
 
117I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 17:06 		RE 116: We did a "re-balancing" of the scoring of the Team Defense a couple season's ago. Since then, although the scoring is "high" I do not find it to be a major issue because their isn't a HUGE differential of points... generally speaking.

From the 1st place D, to the 18th place D there is less than 6ppg variance. If you were to run the same conditions with QB's, you'd find it's over 9ppg.
 
118Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 17:14 		I'd rather just scrap team defense all together. It's so volatile and seems pretty out dated now, especially in an IDP league. I think kickers are almost equally stupid, but at least there isn't as big a difference between #1 and #14 like there is with DEF and they also don't randomly have 30-40+ point games.
 
119Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 17:35 		IAC [117] is correct.

[116] The absolute of level of team Defense points is irrelevant, since every team must start one and only one team defense. The only thing that matters is the range within the category.

I'm willing to consider dropping team defense next year. We'll put it to a vote at that time.

 
120Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 17:43 		I don't think it's completely irrelevant. As Bonka noted, team defenses have the capability of putting up huge point totals on any given week in this format and a lot of games are decided based on how the team defense performs. If they were lowered, the defensive point output will have a lesser effect on the overall team score.
 
121wiggs
      ID: 33916913
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 18:05 		The team defense has saved my butt a couple times. I took Saints D with my last pick thinking that I was getting Reggie Bush return yards- They have been huge for me.
 
122Mötley Crüe
      ID: 45927710
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 19:30 		I like Team Defense as a roster requirement. This is the only format I've seen that uses both TM DEF and IDP and I think it's cool. It's a little redundant, I guess, but RIFC veterans are so used to it now that it's not an undue burden to evaluate. If I win the AA league, I'll vote to retain the Team Defense in RIFC.

As for the scoring, I was considering some adjustments myself a while back. For example, allowing between 400 and 499 yards nets a team a fantasy point. I don't think a team that gives up 400+ yards should get a point, and it should probably lose points. I'm not sure why blocking a PAT is worth the same as blocking a FG, either. But for the most part, these are small quibbles. I'm for TM DEF all the way. Yes it's hard to guess which team will be good on defense. It's not impossible, though. Research helps. There are ways to make more educated guesses. I love the strategic decision-making process that goes into drafting the TM DEF position. It almost never works out well for people who draft them early, but people keep doing it in hopes that they'll buck the trend. All for 6 fantasy points per week. That might not be the best strategy.
 
123judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Tue, Dec 01, 2009, 23:13 		I also like the DST. It forces you to look for match ups (I blew last week's -- started Balt when
Ben was out, but the Chargers did awesome vs KC -- what was I thinking -- SD starts this
week...) I agree with DaBomb and Wiggs that it can save your butt in a few games esp when all
your IOP's refuse to cross the goal line for a few weeks...

The high point DST plays are also BIG plays in the game itself (INT, TD's, FF, FR) that can change
the course of the actual game you are watching. It's exciting, although I do admit that it is
tough to watch the score get lower and lower as the other team moves the ball and/or scores...

Also, you probably won't have too many of your IDP's on your DST team so that makes it fun too.
 
124Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Fri, Dec 04, 2009, 12:24 		Stat corrections for week 12
 
125I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Sun, Dec 06, 2009, 11:47 		With M.Turner/D.Jackson out this week, I'm starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel with only 3 of my first 8 rounds of picks in my starting lineup. Good thing week 13 is meaningless for me, here's hoping my boyz come back healthy for week 14.
 
126loki
      SuperDude
      ID: 4211201420
      Sun, Dec 06, 2009, 21:54 		Guru-Please take a look at the RIFC AAA 1 thread's posts 606-610 concerning Robert Meacham's fumble recovery for a TD. What are your thoughts?
 
127Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Dec 06, 2009, 23:20 		Ugh, EJ Henderson looks like he'll be done for a while. Was about to drop him for Brady Quinn for another QB since Freeman stunk it up today, all I had to do was hit accept. Hopefully that doesn't come back to bite me.

As far as that Meachem TD, it might get updated over night to be automatically scored. I know Guru is definitely interested as he has Meachem and could possibly grab the 8th spot via PF :D
 
128loki
      SuperDude
      ID: 4211201420
      Sun, Dec 06, 2009, 23:47 		Re: Meacham-Can he receive points for the forced fumble and fumble recovery?
 
129Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Mon, Dec 07, 2009, 00:03 		All he would get is the TD. He's only eligible for WR scoring.
 
130Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Dec 07, 2009, 08:55 		Bonka is correct. He should get points for the TD, but not the FR or FF, as those are only awarded to IDPs.

It looks like MFL.com is not awarding him the TD points, however, so I'll have to make a manual adjustment.
 
131Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Mon, Dec 07, 2009, 10:09 		If my arithmetic is correct, it looks like the final playoff spot is going to be settled by the GB defense tonight.

I currently have 1731.92 points (incl. a 6-point adjustment for the extra Meachem TD). All my players are done.

Youngroman has 1729.36 and the GB defense. If they get 3 or more, he takes the final spot. If not, I get it.

I like his chances - unless there are other scoring adjustments as well.
 
132youngroman
      Donor
      ID: 02934823
      Mon, Dec 07, 2009, 14:07 		re Meachem - last night the live-scoring points were there. today they are missing. the 1st thing I did when Meachem scored the TD was to look if it counts per our rules and I must admit that it should count.

re GB defense - I hope they score more than 3, but I also hope they score more than 26 because then I may not need to face IAC in the 1st round.

to myself - i wanted to do the calc all day but could not find the time to do it. I thought that the difference would be bigger and that I am forcing myself to stay up at 2am tonight and watch this damn game to see if I am in. now with only 3 points to go I am thinking of sleeping it out. I don't need to work tomorrow so I am still undecided. what a great season for me! I hope I can say this again in about 10 hours.
 
133Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Mon, Dec 07, 2009, 15:18 		Question: In the case of a three-way (or more) tie by record, is the first tie-breaker, head-to-head, the combined record against the tied teams, or some other elimination system?

I understand the second tie-breaker is points, for 1-6 slots.

It looks like I missed the auto-bid by 1 win, but just wanted to make sure.
 
134Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 01:54 		Looks like the playoff seeding is as follows, as far as I can tell:

1. IAC
2. Bonka
3. Fugazi
4. Short Bus
5. wiggs
6. youngroman
7. SwinganaMiss
8. Smith32
 
135youngroman
      Donor
      ID: 02934823
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 07:11 		I see myself at #8:

1. IAC
2. Bonka
3. Fugazi
4. Short Bus
5. wiggs
6. Smith32
7. SwinganaMiss
8. youngroman

I have the same record as wiggs and Smith32 but since we are 3 teams with the same record, the 2 team tie-breaker does not apply and both scored more points. which puts me at #8. if a 3-team tiebreaker would apply I would be #5. ouch!
 
136Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 10:42 		Youngroman's playoff seedings are correct.

Head-to-head only applies for 2-way ties.
 
137Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 11:15 		I set up the Championship and Consolation brackets.

In the Championship bracket, there is no reseeding. The bracket plays out as laid out, with winners advancing.

In the Consolation bracket, the loser with the best score in week 14 will advance to the next round. There will be reseeding if this would result in the same two teams meeting for the second consecutive week. I don't know why the system is trying to impose a week 17 game for the Consolation bracket, but the Consolation finals will be in week 16.

I have reprioritized the waiver priorities in the order of playoff bracket seeding.

A few reminders about roster additions during the playoffs:
1. Teams in the Consolation bracket MAY NOT add players for the duration of the playoffs.
2. Teams eliminated from the Championship bracket may no longer add players for the duration of the playoffs.
3. Teams still alive in the Championship bracket may not add players at the following positions: QB, RB, WR, Team defense. Players at those positions may be dropped, but then are lost for the duration.

The system will not automatically impose these restrictions. I will monitor them manually, and any illegal roster addition will be reversed.

Good luck, everyone!
 
138Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 14:58 		Guru, there's an option in the league bylaws: Calculate Fantasy Results From: Week 1 through Week 17. I'd assume if you can change that to 1 through 16 it wouldn't try forcing week 17 games. At this point it's probably just something to keep in mind for next season if we return to MFL (which I surely hope we do).
 
139Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 14:58 		RE: tiebreaker

My recollection had been that head-to-head only applied when two teams were tied. If more than two teams were tied, then points were used. This does not matter in the determination of playoff teams in our league, but it does have an impact on the seeding. Apparently, it does have a bearing on determining the playoff teams in at least one of the QLs.

I cannot find any discussion of this in our prior threads, although I need to search more thoroughly. It appears that our stated rules say only the following:
Teams with equivalent W/L records are seeded based on head-to-head first, then total points.


Unless I can find a stated change in that rule, or a clarification, then perhaps HTH should be used for ties of more than two teams.
Can anyone shed any light?
 
140Electroman
      ID: 565182111
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:12 		I found this from a July 2004 post about league criteria:

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)
 
141Electroman
      ID: 565182111
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:13 		Sorry doesn't mention tie breaker though, just noticed that.
 
142Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:15 		I assumed by reading the rules that it was head to head regardless of how many teams were tied. I thought if the head to heads were the same it moved to total points. This doesn't matter to me since it will only change 2 seedings here, but definitely does matter to some other people as it determines whether they make the playoffs or not in a different league. That said, these are basically your leagues and it's ultimately up to you. I'd probably suggest going by what the rules state and use head to head then total points and then make sure it's clear for multiple team ties for next season if you'd prefer it was based off of total points in that scenario.
 
143Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:27 		Agreed that if we cannot find any definitive clarification or change, then the rules do provide for HTH regardless of the number of tied teams.

I have a feeling that Fanball would only use HTH if 2 teams were tied. But that wouldn't have necessarily forced our hand in the past.

The only prior season discussion that I've found so far is from 2007, in posts 153 and 157 of this thread. I simply stated that HTH only applied to 2-way ties, but gave no supporting rationale - and I don't seem to have been challenged on that.
 
144Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:32 		Here is my tentative decision:

Unless someone can find evidence that we have definitively discussed and resolved this issue in the past (beyond that cited above) , then the stated rules should apply, and HTH should be used as the first tiebreaker, regardless of the number of teams tied.

Since it will have a bearing on the ability of teams to claim players at noon tomorrow, I'm going to make a final decision by 9am tomorrow morning. If anyone has any input to provide, they must speak up before then. Until then, commissioners should probably proceed on the assumption that multiple-team HTH is operative.
 
145Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:40 		And based on that, our seeding would be revised as follows:

5. Youngroman
6. Smith32
7. wiggs
8. Swinganamiss

In the HTH games involving YR, Smith32, and Wiggs,
YR was 3-0
Smith32 was 2-2
wiggs was 1-3

Wiggs gets the #7 seed based on more points than Swinganamiss
 
146wiggs
      ID: 33916913
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 15:53 		From electromans post in 140 is says equivalent records are seeded by total points.

Doesnt that in itself tell you what happens if there is a tie?
 
147judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:00 		{140} The quote applies to seedings. we are working with standings in this
instance.
So it is different.
 
149youngroman
      Donor
      ID: 02934823
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:06 		I looked at the Fanball Rules 2008 and they state:
1. Overall Winning Percentage
2. Head-to-HEAD Games Played (2 teams only)
3. Most Points For, Season To Date
4. Virtual Coin Toss

I guess this is because they only supported 2-way ties.

I am happy with either #5 or #8 as long as I can still win this damn thing. honestly, based on points, I deserve the #8 spot, but I am taking #5 too. looking at the potential opponents, playing against IAC looks to be more favorable for my team. he has lots of ailing bodies going into this week.
 
150Electroman
      ID: 565182111
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:12 		Is that going to be the ruling going forward in RIFC, or are you going to revisit this before next season?
 
151Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:23 		[146] - the post in [140] is from 2004. That same section of the rules has since been amended to read:

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 head-to-head first, then total points
Bracket is fixed (no reseeding after each round)


So the 2004 "guidance" is no longer relevant.
 
152Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:27 		I suspect that I made the 2-team determination in the past based on Fanball's inability to apply HTH to more than 2 teams, and I didn't want to be stuck manually figuring out a 6-team HTH tiebreaker!

But MFL can apply HTH to more than 2-team ties. And I'm pretty sure that was the original intent of our rules.

[150] In any event, whatever I decide this year will be the precedent going forward unless and until it is definitively changed (like next preseason.) I'll plan to raise the issue next year - and hopefully someone will remember if I don't.
 
153judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:30 		For AAA#1, any ruling will determine IN or OUT for playoffs... We have 3 tied in W/L for 6th place and
the 2 who would be out do not have enough TPF to get either 7th or 8th place.

The MFL computer used our standings criteria to rank them; ie., H2H first then TPF.
From {151} Teams with equivalent W/L records are seeded based on head-to-head first, then total
points
 
154Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 16:41 		Guess I screwed up in the seeding somehow. Think I looked at the wrong team's head to head history. And eek, have to play the 2nd highest scoring team as the #2 seed. I think I'll vote for that pick your opponent thing next time it comes up :D
 
155SwinganaMiss
      ID: 40239148
      Tue, Dec 08, 2009, 18:01 		Based on this:
1. Overall Winning Percentage
2. Head-to-HEAD Games Played (2 teams only)
3. Most Points For, Season To Date
4. Virtual Coin Toss

My interpretation was that since there were more than two teams tied, points would determine tiebreaker for these 3. That would give Wiggs seed #5. I wasn't too sure after that whether you'd go back to H2H since there were only two teams left in the tiebreak.
If H2H, then yr=6, Swing=7, and Smith=8.
If points, then Smith=6, Swing=7, yr=8.

Anyway, I second yr's statement. I'm fine w/ whatever resolution.

I don't recall how you pick teams for next year, but this decision could also impact that.
 
156davepyro
      Leader
      ID: 017412622
      Wed, Dec 09, 2009, 01:17 		I am one of the managers in AAA#1 that is out under the HTH tiebreaker. What I do not understand is why seeds #7 and #8 are based on Total Points For, and yet the tiebreaker for seed #6 is based on Head To Head matchups? That seems inconsistent. This tiebreaker makes beating certain managers during the year more important than scoring total points. So "schedule luck" is far more important than putting together the best team from week to week by scoring more total points. Seems inconsistent to me. Please see my email in the AAA#1 message thread concerning "schedule luck". It is message #480 dated November 10.
I will go along with whatever decision is rendered, as I trust Guru's judgement and his historical league knowledge and why certain things are how they are. After all it is just football.
 
157davepyro
      Leader
      ID: 017412622
      Wed, Dec 09, 2009, 01:30 		Also, I want to let you know that I am in the Pacific Time Zone and must leave for work at 6:38am. I will be unable to delete my waiver requests in the morning. I have submitted my waiver draft list to MFL, but someone must change the draft (or delete my request) if I am excluded from the playoffs. Hopefully, someone can do that.
 
158holt
      ID: 308491916
      Wed, Dec 09, 2009, 02:12 		If you're trying to determine which team had the best season, what better stat to look at than points scored? I can't take head-to-head records in fantasy football seriously at all. Just my opinion. I have no stake in the outcome, but who knows? maybe next year it will affect me.
 
159Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Dec 09, 2009, 08:53 		I’m going to officially rule that head-to-head tiebreaker does apply to more than 2-way ties, based on the following rationales:

1. It is consistent with our written rules, and I think this was the original intent of the written rule as well, as there is no mention of such a limitation.

2. If we actually applied the 2-way only HTH tiebreaker in the past, it was presumably for administrative expedience. That is not necessary with the MFL.com software.

3. Our schedules are balanced (all teams face each other twice).


Playoff seedings and waiver priorities will be adjusted to conform with this interpretation.

I am sympathetic to the concept that total points might be the better discriminator. One could make that same point for the entire standings - that we should simply base all standings on points, and do away with W/L matchups entirely. Why should a one point loss fully balance a 40 point win?

But that is the nature of fantasy football. It's not always "fair". Most leagues based their standings solely on W/L records. We decided to allow for the last two playoff spots to be based on points, just to provide a means to catch some teams who might have had bad luck in matchups but who still showed good season-long prowess.

In any event, it's difficult to get to the end of the regular season and then have to decide on interpretation. I'm sorry that we ended up in this position, and especially sorry that one team gets left out of the playoffs based on the decision. But I've made the decision based on my sense of the intent of the stated rule. If we want to change the rule, we can consider that next year.
 
160youngroman
      Donor
      ID: 02934823
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 14:52 		some time during halftime so I need to write this:
I don't like the official scorer of the Vikings game.

1) Palmer throws to Caldwell. he "catches" it. a second later he gets a hit by Winfield and loses the ball. it is ruled an incompletion.

a) tackle
b) defended pass
c) nothing

2) Palmer throws a long ball. Winfield tries to intercept but can't hold onto it.

a) defended pass
b) nothing

Winfield is a warrior and in his first game back he is already the best man on the field. of course he got credit for nothing on both plays. otherwise I would not complain.

and now a personal message to Mr. Percy Harvin and his coaches:

Percy can play with migraines. he did it earlier in the season and could have done it today. he might have not beed able to learn the gameplan during the week, but do you really need to learn it to return kickoffs or run the usual routes? you see on the field that Favre has only 1 real target to throw to and that is Sidney Rice. Percy is missing.

this are the damn fantasy playoffs!!!
 
161judy
      ID: 5321213
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 15:28 		Yeah but Harvin's had them since Weds so they must be pretty bad.
I lost him in AAA...but I do have Rice...

Maybe the stats will get corrected...
 
162youngroman
      Donor
      ID: 02934823
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 15:59 		I hope that stats will be corrected. I may need every point this week. Leber just did the same as Winfield in case 1) and got credited with the defended pass. I guess the scorer is awake now.

looking at RIFC scoring it looks like IAC will lose really bad. why can't my team be the #8 seed?

Thanks to Reggie Bush I am still in the hunt to win this week. 6 more players to go and only 45pts behind.

and finally:
Dear Vince Young,
simply throw the ball to Nate Washington and do not feed Chris Johnson too much. he does not want to share the rushing load with LenDale White, who sat on my bench all year. Thanks!
 
163Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 16:09 		I'm really glad Wayne has gone missing the past few weeks. Him and Addai picked a good week to not score any TDs, basically a big screw you to Clark from me right now. At least SJax is playing.

Monday night should be exciting at least, my game with Wiggs should be decided then with Warner going against Crabtree, Davis, Arizona D.
 
164I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 17:26 		RE 162: Not so sure about that... my two philly players rank 24th and 29th overall on the season... so I'm still in this one IMHO.
 
165Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 17:36 		In the Consolation bracket, it looks like I failed to switch my team D this week from Seattle (@ Houston) to Tennessee (hosting StL). Careless mistake!

But then again, it is only the Consolation bracket.
 
166judy
      ID: 5321213
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 18:02 		Yo Vince, while you're at it, stop tossing the rock to Britt!

Tough matchup for me tonight I have Jints Def going against McNabb and D Jack and the
Bills DST got 21! If it goes as I hope, the Jints D will be in the single digits, but that means
that Don and D Jack need to shine.
 
167Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 19:13 		Seriously, Crayton with a garbage TD with 2 seconds left. Give me a break.
 
168youngroman
      Donor
      ID: 02934823
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 19:28 		I needed that garbage TD for Romo. I also hoped that Cartwright and his kick returns would score more than Julius Jones. turns out that he did not field kick returns. I hate those Redskins coaches. if you only give him 1 carry all game, let him field those damn kicks.

a bad week to play against Chris Johnson (36.6pts) and Brandon Marshall (32pts). I now need a similar performance by Larry Fitzgerald to have a chance. Mario Manningham just got demoted to #3 receiver and playing in freezing rain won't help his matchup either. so I better get 40+ points out of Larry.

I say: congratulations letterj! you got the maximum out of your offensive stars this week, I only got the maximum out of my defensive stars.
 
169Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Dec 13, 2009, 21:16 		Figured Nicks would have a good game if I didn't start him over Crabtree. Good old fantasy football.
 
170Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 08:29 		Consolation bracket has been adjusted. Top scoring loser of the first round was Yokel. Since I played him in round 1, he must move to the other side of the bracket to face a different team in round 2.

The published bracket looks odd, but the matchups for each round are correct. Bmd faces Yokel in week 2 (15), and Guru faces sR.
 
171Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 22:36 		This could be the end of my run. Smith32's team just scares me with those RBs.
 
172Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Dec 20, 2009, 16:13 		Think my team is done at this point. Studs just didn't do enough.
 
174Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Sun, Dec 20, 2009, 19:15 		Yup, stick a fork in me. I'd like to thank Cutler for being a steaming pile of poop this season.
 
175Smith32
      ID: 25751421
      Mon, Dec 21, 2009, 20:40 		Wow - check out Bags' lineup. 213 pts (including a goose-egg
from Leonard Little). He also had 93 pts on the bench, with
nothing from Westbrook and Slaton. That's pretty insane.
 
176Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Wed, Dec 23, 2009, 15:44 		Bonka - Once you are eliminated from the Championship bracket, you are no longer allowed to make add/drops. I reversed your pickup of Harper this afternoon. You are free to reclaim Scott once he clears the lockout period.
 
177I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Wed, Dec 23, 2009, 15:45 		Reminder from post 137:

2. Teams eliminated from the Championship bracket may no longer add players for the duration of the playoffs.
 
178I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Wed, Dec 23, 2009, 15:45 		hehe, Guru was already on top of thing.
 
179Bonka
      Sustainer
      ID: 019742310
      Wed, Dec 23, 2009, 16:03 		Meh, just wanted to get someone who's going to play for the 3rd place game, not like anybody put in waiver requests :/
 
180Smith32
      ID: 25751421
      Wed, Dec 23, 2009, 22:12 		Add / drop whomever you want - I'm sticking with the guys who
got me here.

Good luck, I_A_C. It is an honor to face off against you for the title.
I know your team is banged up, but you've been hanging tough.
May the best team win.

Happy holidays everyone.

Smith32
 
181I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Thu, Dec 24, 2009, 01:54 		Smith32: If I lose to your team, I certainly won't feel bad at all. Yours was one of the teams that I originally thought was a real contender, and I know from previous years that your a very good/consistent manager.

Lets have some fun watching games this weekend! I'll be in Foxborough for the Pats game with my wife and a couple friends.
 
182 judy
      Leader
      ID: 7771722
      Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 11:44 		PLAYOFF LEAGUE

I set up a playoff league for RIFC folks through MFL in which each player gets used once
throughout. I've set it up with 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 PK and 1 DST. As far as I can tell, we
can have as many teams as we want. I set the scoring to match the RIFC set up.

Do we want any IDP's? I was thinking of 1 DL, 1 LB and 1 DB??? Chime in with thoughts. It
might make it too "messy".

If you want an invitation, my email is listed.
 
183I_AM_CANADIAN
      ID: 3626821
      Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 22:20 		Congrats to Smith32 on winning the RIFC! Your LBs really were exceptional this week, and mine just didn't show up. Too bad, I'm going to be going into next year yet again w/o an RIFC Championship win.
 
184Letter_J
      ID: 182717
      Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 11:03 		To Smith32, Big Congrats.

To Guru, thank you again for hosting one of the most competitive leagues around.

And to all the other RIFC, thank you for yet another competitive and enjoyable season of fantasy football.