Would you hate a scoring system like this?

[burdsheet 0]

I've been tinkering w/ my league's scoring system to come up w/ a way that makes players hit a certain yardage level before points are awarded and then as a "bonus" as they get higher and higher in yardage, the points are earned a little easier.

 

Here's the breakdown for QBs. Keep in mind that as the yardage accumulates, the points are earned at shorter intervals.

0-74yrds = 0pts

75-124yrds = 1pt

125-174yrds = 1additional point

175-199yrds = 1 additoinal point

200-224yrds = 1 additonal point

225-249yrds = 1 add'l point

(continues at 1 point for every 25yrds)

 

So under this scoring system, a QB has to atleast throw 4 or 5 passes before he gets 1 point, but as he gets up in yardage, he's rewarded by getting additional points at shorter intervals.

 

Here's the RB breakdown:

0-29yrds = 0 points

30-49yrds = 1pt

50-69yrds = 1 add'l point

70-79yrds = 1 addl point

80-89yrds = 1 add'l point

(continues at 1 point for every 10yrds)

 

I'd really appreciate any feedback regarding this. I know it's goes against the normal scoring system that others use, but i was trying to come up w/ a way to reward great performers without picking arbitrary places to give out bonus points.

[pimptastic69 0]

You must be a fan of pitcher's duels.

[burdsheet 0]

You must be a fan of pitcher's duels.

 

I don't think expecting a QB to throw for atleast 75 yards before earning a point is a "pitcher's duel". Too many leagues hand out points for nothing performances .... should we award points for players putting on their jerseys correctly? How about a point for every swig of Gatorade?

[Dan 59]

Pitcher's duel? You're kidding, right?

 

We use a system that's got some of your elements, but we stepped way off the scale of standard pointing to do it. I'll give you our yardage numbers:

 

QB:

 

0-150 = 0 points

150+ = 1 point per yard

 

RB:

0-25 = 0 points

26+ = 1 point per yard

 

WR:

 

0-25 = 0 points

26+ = 1 point per yard

 

In non-specialy categories, 1 pt per yard is accrued. So QBs running helps, RBs receiving or passing really helps, WRs on end-arounds or passes get all their yards. The system won't allow an overall minimum, but we're working on that. :-/

 

Before anyone gets all over the QB thing, you should understand that we ding for sacks, too.

[pimptastic69 0]

I don't think expecting a QB to throw for atleast 75 yards before earning a point is a "pitcher's duel". Too many leagues hand out points for nothing performances .... should we award points for players putting on their jerseys correctly? How about a point for every swig of Gatorade?

 

Unless your qb is Akili Smith, all you're doing is delaying points until the second quarter.

 

Pitcher's duel = low scoring game. Some people like it, and some people like 12-10 slugfests.

 

[The Big Deal 0]

i don't get its purpose. someone has a crappy game and you get penalized even more. if LJ rushes for 30 yards or Mcnabb throws for 70, isn't that enough of a penalty?

[burdsheet 0]

i don't get its purpose. someone has a crappy game and you get penalized even more. if LJ rushes for 30 yards or Mcnabb throws for 70, isn't that enough of a penalty?

 

Well, the reason why I put in a minimum yardage for points is less of a penalty and more because passing for 70 yrds, I don't think the QB has done enough to warrant earning a point. I might have to look into making the minimum yardage lower for QBs, but I want to maintain a ratio of 2.5/1 between QB & RB yardage. If I change QB, then I have to change RB.

 

The part I'm not sure the owners will like is how the yardage brackets decrease at the higher totals. For QBs, the first point is after 75yrds, the second point only requires passing for 50 yards more, then shortly after additional points are awarded after every 25 yards. If you're league was set up like this, would you think it's unfair? I'm hoping they're ok with it, but as every commish knows .... someone will be pist.

 

But i do appreciate the feedback ... eventhough it's a little different than what people normally do, it's not so off the wall that people will totally hate it. I posted it here becuse i wanted to know if there was a flaw that i overlooked or if people thought it was unfair.

[Big_Pete 0]

Well, the reason why I put in a minimum yardage for points is less of a penalty and more because passing for 70 yrds, I don't think the QB has done enough to warrant earning a point. I might have to look into making the minimum yardage lower for QBs, but I want to maintain a ratio of 2.5/1 between QB & RB yardage. If I change QB, then I have to change RB.

 

The part I'm not sure the owners will like is how the yardage brackets decrease at the higher totals. For QBs, the first point is after 75yrds, the second point only requires passing for 50 yards more, then shortly after additional points are awarded after every 25 yards. If you're league was set up like this, would you think it's unfair? I'm hoping they're ok with it, but as every commish knows .... someone will be pist.

 

But i do appreciate the feedback ... eventhough it's a little different than what people normally do, it's not so off the wall that people will totally hate it. I posted it here becuse i wanted to know if there was a flaw that i overlooked or if people thought it was unfair.

[rant]

what you are forgetting with this scoring system is that this is FANTASY FOOTBALL, not real life football.

Fantasy Football is all about stats, not about being of any particular value in the real football world.

If Peyton Manning passes 5 times and hits 70 yards on the nose, and then someone rolls into his knee and he leaves the game, he should get credit for those 5 completions for 70 yards. Your fantasy team won't score any more points for that QB position, so that's penalty enough!

If you have a RB that you are starting cause the primary back is dinged up and "doubtful", but said primary back plays anyways, and your guy only gets 5 carries for 25 yards (a 5ypc average), he should get credit for those 5 carries and 25 yards. And again, your team won't score any more points for that particular RB slot. That's punishment enough.

See, you are trying to "Michael Vick" the game of Fantasy Football.

Yeah, IRL Vick is a pile of sh1t for a QB, but hey, he runs and passes enough to get decent fantasy points. Whether he helps or hurts his team IRL isn't the point. The point is to draft players based on what stats you expect out of them, and to get points off of their stats, PERIOD!

Besides, I can't possibly imagine people actually drafting a QB who wont throw for 70+ yards, or a RB who wont run for more than 25 yards unless an injury happens, and then that owner has much more worries on his hand than to bother with your whiney, b1tchy points system. So you might as well give him the points for the stats his players put up!

[/rant]

[Phurfur 70]

I would not join a league like this. I like to look at stats and know what points are awarded. Your way I would need a conversion chart.

[The Big Deal 0]

Well, the reason why I put in a minimum yardage for points is less of a penalty and more because passing for 70 yrds, I don't think the QB has done enough to warrant earning a point. I might have to look into making the minimum yardage lower for QBs, but I want to maintain a ratio of 2.5/1 between QB & RB yardage. If I change QB, then I have to change RB.

 

The part I'm not sure the owners will like is how the yardage brackets decrease at the higher totals. For QBs, the first point is after 75yrds, the second point only requires passing for 50 yards more, then shortly after additional points are awarded after every 25 yards. If you're league was set up like this, would you think it's unfair? I'm hoping they're ok with it, but as every commish knows .... someone will be pist.

 

But i do appreciate the feedback ... eventhough it's a little different than what people normally do, it's not so off the wall that people will totally hate it. I posted it here becuse i wanted to know if there was a flaw that i overlooked or if people thought it was unfair.

 

i still don't see the point and i don't think other people will either.

[Dan 59]

I'm amazed at some of the reaction in this thread.

 

Are you kidding me? Too complicated? No, no. I think it's too outside the box, and disrupts your sense of the norm. It's a different scoring system, with a different intent. So be it.

 

BIG PETE -

 

You rant about this being FANTASY FOOTBALL. Then everybody is allowed to have a fantasy. Yours obviously is to keep it apart from the "real NFL" and locked into your supposition of the way stats should be. Some people fantasize about a league where good quarterbacks IRL actually score out that way in their fantasy league.

 

This scoring is okay. I like parts of it. There are things I would adjust, but I certainly wouldn't feel the need to cow-tow to the masses. There are plenty of leagues out there for those who want simply to stick the "normal" scoring system, where they don't need a "conversion scale." Honestly, people. You talk like my 14-year-old.

 

Once you're in the system, it's just a matter of knowing the system.

 

Last part of my rant, and then I'll let you stew and call me names. One of my other hobbies, apart from fantasy football, is strategy games. Some of the games have rule books that are 30-60 pages long. Not bragging; indicating. My wife is smarter than I am by a long shot, and could never get into them. To each his own (or hers.)

 

Sorry to rant, but the biggest argument that I've seen in this thread is that "this is different."

[carmo911 2]

I don;t mind the point system. Is this a head to head type league or rotiserrie type, because i think that there would there be more ties during the course of the season. maybe somehow incorporate a decimal to try to avoid the ties.

[Big_Pete 0]

I'm amazed at some of the reaction in this thread.

 

Are you kidding me? Too complicated? No, no. I think it's too outside the box, and disrupts your sense of the norm. It's a different scoring system, with a different intent. So be it.

 

BIG PETE -

 

You rant about this being FANTASY FOOTBALL. Then everybody is allowed to have a fantasy. Yours obviously is to keep it apart from the "real NFL" and locked into your supposition of the way stats should be. Some people fantasize about a league where good quarterbacks IRL actually score out that way in their fantasy league.

 

This scoring is okay. I like parts of it. There are things I would adjust, but I certainly wouldn't feel the need to cow-tow to the masses. There are plenty of leagues out there for those who want simply to stick the "normal" scoring system, where they don't need a "conversion scale." Honestly, people. You talk like my 14-year-old.

 

Once you're in the system, it's just a matter of knowing the system.

 

Last part of my rant, and then I'll let you stew and call me names. One of my other hobbies, apart from fantasy football, is strategy games. Some of the games have rule books that are 30-60 pages long. Not bragging; indicating. My wife is smarter than I am by a long shot, and could never get into them. To each his own (or hers.)

 

Sorry to rant, but the biggest argument that I've seen in this thread is that "this is different."

It's not cause "This is Different" that I would have a problem with it.

What everyone is failing to answer is what if a player gets hurt before he reaches the 1st milestone? Shouldn't you still get points for that? And if you reward points for injured players, where does that start blending in with the "well, he was SUPPOSE to start, but then the primary person started instead"? How do you address those situations?

Nobody would need a conversion chart, all they'd need to do is know that "ok, my QB got X amount of yards, here is what he scored". nothing hard about that, it's just that those tier type of scoring systems are always flawed, and that's why you find some form of "standard scoring" in 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% of all leagues. It's not that anyone is afraid to change the scoring, it's that other formats of scoring make absolutly no sense.

Fantasy football is a game about stats, period. Just like I said before. It's a stats game, not a "how important is this guy to his team in real life" game.

[The Big Deal 0]

I'm amazed at some of the reaction in this thread.

 

Are you kidding me? Too complicated? No, no. I think it's too outside the box, and disrupts your sense of the norm. It's a different scoring system, with a different intent. So be it.

 

BIG PETE -

 

You rant about this being FANTASY FOOTBALL. Then everybody is allowed to have a fantasy. Yours obviously is to keep it apart from the "real NFL" and locked into your supposition of the way stats should be. Some people fantasize about a league where good quarterbacks IRL actually score out that way in their fantasy league.

 

This scoring is okay. I like parts of it. There are things I would adjust, but I certainly wouldn't feel the need to cow-tow to the masses. There are plenty of leagues out there for those who want simply to stick the "normal" scoring system, where they don't need a "conversion scale." Honestly, people. You talk like my 14-year-old.

 

Once you're in the system, it's just a matter of knowing the system.

 

Last part of my rant, and then I'll let you stew and call me names. One of my other hobbies, apart from fantasy football, is strategy games. Some of the games have rule books that are 30-60 pages long. Not bragging; indicating. My wife is smarter than I am by a long shot, and could never get into them. To each his own (or hers.)

 

Sorry to rant, but the biggest argument that I've seen in this thread is that "this is different."

 

 

i'm not sure why i'm so invested in this thread, but you really haven't read these postings very carefully if you think the biggest argument you've seen is "this is different".

[golden bear 0]

I actually agree with the scoring system to a point. I play in one league that sort of uses a similar system. The theory is that in the commisioner's opinion 60 yards rushing should not equal a touchdown. In that league bonus points begin to accrue at 50 yards and 1 point for each 10 yards afterward. Thus at 100 yards you get 6 points which in the commissioner's mind is the equivalent of scoring a TD.

I play in both types of leagues -- you just need to know the scoring system - but I don't think one is better than the other.

[Dan 59]

It's not cause "This is Different" that I would have a problem with it.

What everyone is failing to answer is what if a player gets hurt before he reaches the 1st milestone? Shouldn't you still get points for that? And if you reward points for injured players, where does that start blending in with the "well, he was SUPPOSE to start, but then the primary person started instead"? How do you address those situations?

Nobody would need a conversion chart, all they'd need to do is know that "ok, my QB got X amount of yards, here is what he scored". nothing hard about that, it's just that those tier type of scoring systems are always flawed, and that's why you find some form of "standard scoring" in 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% of all leagues. It's not that anyone is afraid to change the scoring, it's that other formats of scoring make absolutly no sense.

Fantasy football is a game about stats, period. Just like I said before. It's a stats game, not a "how important is this guy to his team in real life" game.

 

I get this. I'm sorry. I missed the injury argument in there. That said, I wouldn't dismiss the scoring system. I have no problem with a scoring system that has a floor by position. I hear what you're saying, and we've gotten around that in different ways. Completions give us points, and off-position yards start immediately. Beyond that, we also point more consistently after the floor is reached. Different than what's presented, but I get the concept. Given that, a lot of people play in leagues where points are only given at bonus points, 100 yards or whatever. How, exactly, is that different?

 

Standard scoring is for simplicity of ranking in magazines. There are different type scoring systems out there, and if you examine your website, there is capability to do more than what you do, unless one uses a Yahoo or such. Then you're stuck with standardized scoring.

 

I agree that it's a stats game, but I disagree with whether or not it's about how the player performs in real life. Fantasy Football is not a board game, with a specific set of rules. It is a concept that bears its fruit in leagues in many different fashions, and with different purposes. You agree with this, I'll bet.

 

There are re-draft leagues, keeper leagues, dynasty leagues. All three of these are very different in nature, and shape the draft and the way the season plays itself out, the way trades are made, etc. Interestingly enough, dynasty leagues were started to better simulate the NFL, and because re-drafts were not as enticing. FFers wanted the year-round experience. Auction leagues exist to add a different element to the way a team is built. IDPs were added to some leagues to give more control to the owner. Some leagues have salary caps, and some have ones that are so intricate that reading the NFL guidelines may be a lighter read than their rulebooks.

 

The truest irony is that while you speak of standardized scoring and other systems "not making sense", I would argue that this is a misnomor. The current standard scoring is itself a mutation of original scoring, which was designed to make the final score look like the final score of a football game. That has largely been replaced by the century mark games due to augmentations in scoring.

 

All I'm saying is that there is no "right way to do it". Yes, it's about stats, but it's not just that. People build their league so that they can manage . . . how they choose.

[pimptastic69 0]

The simple solution is to input the proposed scoring system into a spread sheet, take last year's top 3 or 4 players from each position and see what they would have scored. If you really want to get crazy, do the top 15. Present it to your league mates and see what they think.

[Big_Pete 0]

The simple solution is to input the proposed scoring system into a spread sheet, take last year's top 3 or 4 players from each position and see what they would have scored. If you really want to get crazy, do the top 15. Present it to your league mates and see what they think.

I would do 15-20 to really drive home the purpose for the change.

If I was in that league, I'd immediatly leave. Just because there is absolutly no reason to change the scoring format. Dan, you make a well though out argument for that scoring system, and ultimatly you are correct in the sense that each owner should be able to manage how they see fit, and if you have a bunch of owners that want that system, so be it, no harm, no foul.

I still just don't see the reasoning behind it, and I definatly don't see why someone would feel like they'd need to change from normal formats to this one.

Plus, I think that it's too difficult to determine "real world value" at certain positions such as the QB position. A QB is only as good as his supporting cast. I think Tom Brady is an average at best talent, but he "wins" games.... wow, what a loose term huh? I haven't seen him win a game in a LONG time. I've seen him not screw up plenty of games, but I haven't really seen him win one that much. Yet, he gets all the praise. Wins = team accomplishments.

I'd definatly make injured players get their just points, maybe say, if an injury happens before the 1st point is given, if they have a minimum of say 25yds for QB and 10yds for RB/WR/TE, they get a full point. But I'd also want to get points for say Maroney being "doubtful" for whatever injury the coach makes up to throw off the competition, so you start his backup, and maroney starts, and the backup only gets 30 yards.... I'd demand that I get something for those 30 yards instead of a big goose egg. Maybe that can fall under the same rules as the injured player

Either way, good luck to you with that scoring system, and good luck to burdsheet.

The only ones I've even seen come close to that were where points for RB/WR/TE were in increments of 10yds and QB's 15yds. But even in those, you got points pretty much immediatly, instead of probably no points for the first half of the focking game

[VaTerp 0]

To answer the question, "Would you hate a scoring system like this", I would say YES. But thats just me. I like points. My league awards points for a number of categories that others dont. But it really is to each his own.

 

As others have said, it really doesnt matter what the scoring system is, its each owners responsibility to prepare and draft based on the league rules.

 

But I would not play in a league like this. Like I said, I like points and its funny to me when people complain that "I dont think a player should get a point for doing this or that." IMO if you have to complain about a player getting 1 friggin point then thats a sign that your league doesnt have enough scoring overall. But again, that just me.

[Dan 59]

Thanks for responding, Big Pete. I understand your reasoning, and I even play in standard scoring leagues.

 

The other (and I've not really done it justice) is a lot different and we have fun with it. I think any league, whatever your system, is ultimately determined by the quality of the owners that you have in it, anyway.

 

To answer the question, "Would you hate a scoring system like this", I would say YES. But thats just me. I like points. My league awards points for a number of categories that others dont. But it really is to each his own.

 

As others have said, it really doesnt matter what the scoring system is, its each owners responsibility to prepare and draft based on the league rules.

 

But I would not play in a league like this. Like I said, I like points and its funny to me when people complain that "I dont think a player should get a point for doing this or that." IMO if you have to complain about a player getting 1 friggin point then thats a sign that your league doesnt have enough scoring overall. But again, that just me.

 

 

You like points??? We have points. Seriously, but you find ours warped too, because the scoring is measured in the hundreds. But hey, we have points!!!!

[Big_Pete 0]

I do tend to agree with VaTerp though. I tend to lean more towards more points = more fun.

Not in the sense that you are scoring hundreds of points a week, but the whole .1pt=1yd rush/rec.

It's alot more fun to be down by .1 pt on the last drive knowing that your player might get you the 2 yards needed to win instead of the 25 yards needed to win

but that's just my personal preference. I think awarding all yardage/td's/receptions etc... make for more competition and more fun, cause you don't have to rely on a back getting 25 more yards for a win if you only need him to get 2 (which who knows if he'll get it anyways, but it'll definatly keep you on the edge of your seat in anticipation, cause it's a reachable goal)

[VaTerp 0]

Thanks for responding, Big Pete. I understand your reasoning, and I even play in standard scoring leagues.

 

The other (and I've not really done it justice) is a lot different and we have fun with it. I think any league, whatever your system, is ultimately determined by the quality of the owners that you have in it, anyway.

 

You like points??? We have points. Seriously, but you find ours warped too, because the scoring is measured in the hundreds. But hey, we have points!!!!

 

[49ers_suck 0]

didn't really read all the posts. so i might have misunderstood. pete you are saying you should get points for a player being injured before he makes the yardage to get points? i'm confused. if a guy gets hurt during a game or you start a "questionable" guy and he doesn't play, you are shite out of luck. that's part of the game. at least in the leagues i play in. sorry if i misunderstood. i'm sure you'll set me straight if i did.

[Dan 59]

I do tend to agree with VaTerp though. I tend to lean more towards more points = more fun.

Not in the sense that you are scoring hundreds of points a week, but the whole .1pt=1yd rush/rec.

It's alot more fun to be down by .1 pt on the last drive knowing that your player might get you the 2 yards needed to win instead of the 25 yards needed to win

but that's just my personal preference. I think awarding all yardage/td's/receptions etc... make for more competition and more fun, cause you don't have to rely on a back getting 25 more yards for a win if you only need him to get 2 (which who knows if he'll get it anyways, but it'll definatly keep you on the edge of your seat in anticipation, cause it's a reachable goal)

 

Our own system actually does that. It simply looks inflated because we don't do decimal scoring. Our scores are high because the scoring system operates on point per yard. We also award for receptions, completions, and ding - heavily - for turnovers. Then again, the defense is rewarded with those as well. And the defense can give points back in a hurry. We like that flavor of reality . . . that way an Atlanta team that just got trounced 32-7 doesn't end giving you positive points because DeAngelo Hall took one to the house.

 

Do you remember the Gus Frerotte head butt where he knocked himself unconscious? That took place in our first year of existence, 10 years ago. The owner who had him was ticked, as Frerotte obviously eliminated the possibility of more points after that TD, but had he thrown the TD instead of running it in, the completion would have been worth 2 more points than running it in from 3 yards out. He lost by one point.

 

 

 

VA Terp - I was just being tongue-in-cheek because of the points comment. Lame, I know. I guess you had to be there.

[ratbastard1 0]

a version of milestone scoring.

[mgs316 14]

Someone just doesn't like Michael Vick passing for 140/1td and running for 70 and having the same type of week Bulger had for going 300/1td.

 

It's the Michael Vick rule, just admit it.

 

Where's Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton when you need them?!?!?!?!?

[Dan 59]

Someone just doesn't like Michael Vick passing for 140/1td and running for 70 and having the same type of week Bulger had for going 300/1td.

 

It's the Michael Vick rule, just admit it.

 

Where's Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton when you need them?!?!?!?!?

 

 

That might be true, except that some leagues using off-beat scoring have been around longer than Vick.

 

But then, 6 pts for passing TD could be perceived as a prejudice against Vick.

 

Hey . . . you might be right. Cochran could work with this, I think . . .

[gocolts 300]

Yes

[Dan 59]

Yes

 

I bow to your insightful, well thought out analysis.