2 Fantasy Games per week instead of 1

[GobbleDog 816]

The idea is being kicked around in my league for next year... apparently CBSSportsline has that option. Perfect example why:

 

One team in my league is #2 in total points, but 0-4 in the standings because he has MOST points against.

Another team is last in total points, but 3-1 in the standings because he has FEWEST points against.

 

This happens every year. Some teams get the toughest/weakest schedule and regardless of how many points they actually score, their playoff destiny is already determined. Some say playing 2 games per week would reduce that luck factor. Obviously teams will still end up with a toughest/weakest schedule, but the team's actual points scored would be more relevant and balance things out.

 

Thoughts? Anyone in a league that plays 2 per week?

[PATSSOX 22]

I like it alot more than just one game a week. You get to play 26 games a season in regular 13 week season.(went 17-9 in both leagues last year and am 5-3 in both so far this year ) You start out 0-4 in just the normal fantasy league your in big trouble. You can start out 0-8 in 2 game per week league and still have a legit shot. You can make up ground quicker and twice the amount of games means twice the trash talk

 

I still play in 2 single game per week leagues and dont like it anywhere near the same. Once you go to 2 games a week you will not want to play in a 1 game per week league. I also run a college league on CBS of mostly guys at work and some other fantasy buddies and we play 2 games a week in that too.

 

So i highly highly recommend to do it.

[Citi Kid 0]

I like it alot more than just one game a week. You get to play 26 games a season in regular 13 week season.(went 17-9 in both leagues last year and am 5-3 in both so far this year ) You start out 0-4 in just the normal fantasy league your in big trouble. You can start out 0-8 in 2 game per week league and still have a legit shot. You can make up ground quicker and twice the amount of games means twice the trash talk

 

I still play in 2 single game per week leagues and dont like it anywhere near the same. Once you go to 2 games a week you will not want to play in a 1 game per week league. I also run a college league on CBS of mostly guys at work and some other fantasy buddies and we play 2 games a week in that too.

 

So i highly highly recommend to do it.

 

 

:overhead:I'm in another league that you play your opponent, as well as the league

average. Each week you are playing 2 games, one being against the average for

the week. It's my first year in it so I am not sure how it plays out, but the

claim is it fixes the problem you described exactly. Oh.....and I'm 0-8

[GobbleDog 816]

You start out 0-4 in just the normal fantasy league your in big trouble. You can start out 0-8 in 2 game per week league and still have a legit shot.

 

You're right, there are two 0-4 teams in my (12-team) league and their odds of making the playoffs in a 13 game season are nil. Heck, even the 1-3 teams will be lucky to get in, and the season just started.

 

 

I'm starting to like the idea of 2-game format.

[PATSSOX 22]

You're right, there are two 0-4 teams in my league and their odds of making the playoffs in a 13 game season are nil. Heck, even the 1-3 teams will be lucky to get in, and the season just started.

 

 

I'm starting to like the idea of 2-game format.

 

You usually will have more teams in the running for playoffs till end since you can make up 2 games a week.

[Jedi Sensei 17]

In one of my leagues last year we had a separate buy-in for a "power" format, where every team played every other team each week. Really the best way to gauge the strength of your team, I felt. All 10 owners participated, and some of those who missed out on the playoffs in the "standard" format ended up taking home money in the "power" league (no playoffs, just 16 weeks of games). I really liked the idea but no one wanted to pony-up again this year.

[Kam187 6]

Stupidest idea I have ever heard. League average? Really? You got to beat a fictional player? Tards

[Axe Elf 0]

I wonder how the Chiefs would have felt if they were 0-29-2 after Week 1...

[GobbleDog 816]

Stupidest idea I have ever heard. League average? Really? You got to beat a fictional player? Tards

I agree, point average is a pushing it. 2 opponents per week instead of 1. Not point average.

 

 

The main complaint in my league is some want 1 week = 1 win/loss like real football. The idea of a 26-game season bothers them.

[shorepatrol 1,737]

The idea is being kicked around in my league for next year... apparently CBSSportsline has that option. Perfect example why:

 

One team in my league is #2 in total points, but 0-4 in the standings because he has MOST points against.

Another team is last in total points, but 3-1 in the standings because he has FEWEST points against.

 

This happens every year. Some teams get the toughest/weakest schedule and regardless of how many points they actually score, their playoff destiny is already determined. Some say playing 2 games per week would reduce that luck factor. Obviously teams will still end up with a toughest/weakest schedule, but the team's actual points scored would be more relevant and balance things out.

 

Thoughts? Anyone in a league that plays 2 per week?

Stop playing in H2H leagues and play in points leagues. Simple

[beemo 0]

Stop playing in H2H leagues and play in points leagues. Simple

 

Yep. While it stinks to be on the losing end of those kinds of unfortunate head-to-head streaks, it's what makes each week exciting and unpredictable. Take that away, and you're playing with baseball stats pretty much and might as well award the trophy to whoever is leading the pack in points after a few games since it's likely to still be on top by the end.

[PATSSOX 22]

Stop playing in H2H leagues and play in points leagues. Simple

 

You obviously have not played in a 2 game per week league.

 

The main complaint in my league is some want 1 week = 1 win/loss like real football. The idea of a 26-game season bothers them.

 

Do what Did you tell them they are playing fantasy football and their team is not like real football? Scoring is no different than 1 week leagues except your totals will be twice a high in overall scoring because you play twice as many games.

 

You actually have the option in CBS to play 1, 2, 3, or 4 games per week. 3 or 4 games would be a little too much to keep up with.

[montana 89]

Interesting concept. I've played in a league that did this, but it was because we had an odd # of teams & didn't want a bye week.

[Peanut33 0]

We use CBS and have 15-team, 3 division setup with regular season lasting 13 weeks. During those 13 weeks, each team ends up with 5 doubleheaders staggered throughout the season so that the regular season is 18 games head-to-head. By having 18 games, each team can then play the 4 teams in their own division twice and all teams outside its division once. Works great. Even adding just the 5 extra games improves the problem you mentioned with just playing 1 game per week.

[Portis26 0]

H2H leagues are for fun, luck happens etc

 

Leagues based on total points is for the true players, no ifs, ands, or buts.. Pure 110% points your team achieved

 

So just eliminate H2H aspect and final top 4 go to playoffs

[kutulu 1,545]

We do a double header each week plus the top six scoring teams get an additional win while the bottom six take a loss for a third weekly game.

[O'ky 0]

I love this idea. It helps reduce some of the luck factor of H2H leagues (I've been that guy multiple times who's #2 or 3 in PF but haven't won a game, so frustrating). But it seems like it also maintains the FUN aspect of H2H leagues, because it's still H2H. The league mates who don't get so serious about it will still like it and want to play (I think), whereas if you went to just a points league, I know many people in my league wouldn't want to play anymore.

[Love My Lions 1]

I have been looking at this for my main league as well. I think it makes great sense. Two matchups each week makes sense and does take the luck out. I beat a guy with 160 points when I scored 173. The two highest scores of the week and he has the best team in our league.

[R8RMick 242]

Our league has been playing double headers for a few seasons now. We started it for a coulple reasons, 1) to reduce the whining about guys having losing records because they have the bad luck of going up against high scorers every week, and 2) we have unique strength of schedule system in our league where your schedule is based on total points from the previous year.

 

We are a 12 team, four division, two conference keeper league, with a 13 week season. We have four division winners, top two in each conference get Week 14 byes. We seed the teams by points, 1-5-9 in one division, 2-6-10 in the other division same conference, 3-7-11 in third division second conference, and 4-8-12 fourth division second conference.

 

Each team plays the opposing teams in their same divsion four times, the teams in the other division same conference three times, teams in the second conference one division two times, and second conference last division once, for a 4-3-2-1 format. In other words, teams from the 1-5-9 division play teams from the 4-8-12 division only once. It seems a little complicated, but is the fairest way we've found with our number of teams. When you play for money, you've got to be able to shut everyone up as far as fairness goes.

 

This is just something that works for us.

[Bomberman 0]

We have three double-header weeks. This allows teams to play each team in their division twice and each team in the other division once (in an attempt to make division rivals more important). I hand pick the weeks to avoid NFL bye weeks, so that some teams do not get double-hit with them.

 

We also use Victory Points as the first thing to decide playoffs. 3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss. 1 bonus point for a top 4 score of the week. 0.5 bonus points for a middle score of the week. 0 points for a bottom score of the week.

 

So for those weeks that a team scores the 2nd or 3rd highest score and plays the top score and loses, they still get something.

 

We went to this format last year as we were seeing teams that were top3-4 overall in points at the end of the season not making the playoffs. The sample pool is still small, but so far we have been happy.

[O'ky 0]

Hows this idea to eliminate even more of the luck factor:

 

12 team league, 6 make playoffs:

 

 

11 week regular season, play every team twice (using the two games per week). Top 2 teams get byes, week 12 is a 1 week playoff to determine top 4 teams. Then 2 weeks each round of playoffs (I like the two week format to eliminate luck).

 

Only thing is it cuts off 2 weeks of the regular season, which the non playoff teams could be upset about...

 

Thoughts?

[SameSongNDance 0]

Uh I don't think this was mentioned yet but I've played in a league (big money, $1,000 entry) where this idea was perfected in my eyes. It's still H2H but you also play against the accumulative average each week. It's pretty simple. If you put up the 2nd highest points that week and still manage to lose, odds are you are going to beat the league average resulting in you going 1-1 for the week. IMO, this was the best contingency for luck.

 

EDIT: Oh it was mentioned, my bad lol.

 

Stupidest idea I have ever heard. League average? Really? You got to beat a fictional player? Tards

 

This is what someone who just took the concept at surface value without actually understanding what it did would say .

[edjr 5,564]

it only works if you can use 2 separate lineups each week.

 

which CBS does not allow.

[Peanut33 0]

it only works if you can use 2 separate lineups each week.

 

which CBS does not allow.

 

Why do you say that? What's wrong with using the same lineup against two H2H opponents?

[edjr 5,564]

Why do you say that? What's wrong with using the same lineup against two H2H opponents?

 

Nothing wrong with it per se. Just a much greater chance of having a great or terrible week.

 

I'd rather start 2 separate if I had the squad to do such.

[VinegarStrokes 0]

Why not just make the last spot in the playoffs total points for?

[Forbess 0]

Why not just make the last spot in the playoffs total points for?

 

Opening up a can of worms to let that guy in over someone who might have a better record

[Bills04 46]

Fantasy Headquarters started doing this last year. Everyone has a head-to-head matchup scheduled each week, AND a second game against the overall point scoring average for the league that week. That removes the "good / bad luck" part of the equation / your matchup for a particular week.

 

Thing is: if you had a player with bad week (Big Ben in week 1), or someone go down with an injury (Hillis & strep in Week 3), you lose TWO games instead of one...

[RSersen 0]

The idea is being kicked around in my league for next year... apparently CBSSportsline has that option. Perfect example why:

 

One team in my league is #2 in total points, but 0-4 in the standings because he has MOST points against.

Another team is last in total points, but 3-1 in the standings because he has FEWEST points against.

 

This happens every year. Some teams get the toughest/weakest schedule and regardless of how many points they actually score, their playoff destiny is already determined. Some say playing 2 games per week would reduce that luck factor. Obviously teams will still end up with a toughest/weakest schedule, but the team's actual points scored would be more relevant and balance things out.

 

Thoughts? Anyone in a league that plays 2 per week?

 

Just reserve a couple wildcard spots for highest point totals. Say it's 12 teams with 3 four-team divisions, and 6 teams go to the playoffs. Each division winner gets a spot, and the team with the highest points-for in each division grabs a wildcard (if the division winner is the points-for leader, then it's the next guy in line).

 

Teams who are victims of brutal schedules get a way into the playoffs, and you keep the fun and trash-talking of H2H play. Not saying 2 games per week is bad (I'm actually interested to try a league that does this next year), but a compromise of points/H2H works just as well.

[jmsne 0]

We actually switched to two games a week this year as well, I really like it so far. (8-0) It does protect you somewhat, if you have a good week you should get at least 1 win.

[Peanut33 0]

Nothing wrong with it per se. Just a much greater chance of having a great or terrible week.

 

I'd rather start 2 separate if I had the squad to do such.

 

I was just thinking from the perspective if you had a big week but faced the top-scoring H2H opponent, at least by having a doubleheader, you'd likely come out 1-1 for the week instead of 0-1. Or on the other end where you had a terrible week but were fortunate enough to go H2H against the lowest scoring opponent in the league, then 1-1 is at least a better reflection (as far as the league standings are concerned) of your performance than 1-0. I just think the more doubleheader games you have, the more "accurate" your league standings will be in determining the division winners/playoff teams.

[Phurfur 70]

Why not go to a total points league? H2H leagues are for beginners.