Is it time?

[fugoondo 3]

Most fantasy leagues have gone to the 16 week season, to obviously not impact the Leagues Championship game with NFL teams that have clinched a playoff berth holding out their starters. But the NFL has scheduled division games week 17, to try to hopefully force an important divisional game. Doesnt this open up week 17 for fantasy purposes?

 

Just throwing it out there. Is it time to bring back the full 17 week fantasy schedule?

[fugoondo 3]

Most fantasy leagues have gone to the 16 week season, to obviously not impact the Leagues Championship game with NFL teams that have clinched a playoff berth holding out their starters. But the NFL has scheduled division games week 17, to try to hopefully force an important divisional game. Doesnt this open up week 17 for fantasy purposes?

 

Just throwing it out there. Is it time to bring back the full 17 week fantasy schedule?

 

Guess not! LOL

[ralphster 274]

I've been in a couple leagues that go all season and had some of my best players sitting all or part of the last few weeks. Not worth the chance imo.

[Portis26 0]

If you don't include week 17 then your league is weak. Play the whole season or don't play. So u don't have all your studs week 17... That's life. You gotta adjust on fly, play for week 17.

 

Pansy league not including week 17

Basically leagues that end at week 16 is for amateurs , people who just do it to stay close with friends, reason to grab some brews - not for hardcore players

[edjr 5,547]

If you don't include week 17 then your league is weak smart.

 

[Portis26 0]

yuck! R u that guy who leaves game with 5 min left in 4th or the 7th inning to beat traffic? I'm trying to compare not playing week 17 to something we can all relate too. The last minutes can stink - most of time it does- but when it doesn't stink, suck, not fun to stay and watch - it usually is something we all talk about for a while. Memories happen .., so stick it out for week 17 and when something good happens.. It's more memorable then stuff that normally happens.

 

Like Lee Suggs gaining 100+ yards on last game of season vs Miami (in miami no less) which helped me win a championship. I still have a #44 Browns Lee Suggs jersey and wear it with Pride lol

 

So I'm just saying - good things happen in week 17 - u just gotta go find them!

[jerryskids 5,172]

yuck! R u that guy who leaves game with 5 min left in 4th or the 7th inning to beat traffic? I'm trying to compare not playing week 17 to something we can all relate too. The last minutes can stink - most of time it does- but when it doesn't stink, suck, not fun to stay and watch - it usually is something we all talk about for a while. Memories happen .., so stick it out for week 17 and when something good happens.. It's more memorable then stuff that normally happens.

 

Like Lee Suggs gaining 100+ yards on last game of season vs Miami (in miami no less) which helped me win a championship. I still have a #44 Browns Lee Suggs jersey and wear it with Pride lol

 

So I'm just saying - good things happen in week 17 - u just gotta go find them!

I mostly disagree. My main league is a deep keeper; we used to not do playoffs (just regular season champ) and played week 17, which was fine because it was just another game against a random opponent.

 

With playoffs it is different though -- you work all season (or in a keeper, multiple seasons) to get yourself in a position where you are a top team and playing for the championship. Then half your team might sit or play sparingly? The luck of getting the right scrub off of waivers isn't a good way to crown a champ. And in our format, it is worse because you can't just drop guys you might keep the following year.

 

That being said, to the OP -- I hadn't realized that the league is consciously scheduling more division games for the last week, so it seems like something to monitor for this year and consider for future years. Because all things being equal, 17 weeks is more fun than 16 weeks.

[Larry David 20]

If you don't include week 17 then your league is weak. Play the whole season or don't play. So u don't have all your studs week 17... That's life. You gotta adjust on fly, play for week 17.

 

Pansy league not including week 17

Basically leagues that end at week 16 is for amateurs , people who just do it to stay close with friends, reason to grab some brews - not for hardcore players

Why not start your season in week 3 of the preseason? So your starters will only play two series, who cares? If you don't know how to draft practice squad players, you suck at fantasy football anyway.

[rholio 339]

Week 17 = Pro Bowl

[fugoondo 3]

"That being said, to the OP -- I hadn't realized that the league is consciously scheduling more division games for the last week, so it seems like something to monitor for this year and consider for future years. Because all things being equal, 17 weeks is more fun than 16 weeks. "

 

 

 

Yupppppp.....u are catching what im throwing down. Exactly my point

[ralphster 274]

Pansy league not including week 17

Basically leagues that end at week 16 is for amateurs , people who just do it to stay close with friends, reason to grab some brews - not for hardcore players

 

I'm near as hardcore as they come imo and I hate week 17 leagues. People that got you there ride the pine and the waiver wire becomes a morass of jumping at blanks. Little skill is required to maintain waiver priority to nab the hotness for a 1 week start at the end. Week 16 championship is good and week 15 is better in my experience. You seem to enjoy the week 17 leagues though, and that's great for you. To each their own right?

 

EDIT: I don't think the week 16 division games will alter any of the top teams resting starters Fun, but I do think you'll see more action from bubble teams. Overall it will be good for the game and inconsistent for fantasy.

[GreenTD 56]

Scheduling divisional games in week 17 was a great idea for the NFL in regards to playoff implications & keeping it interesting for fans.

 

With that said, none of the league's I'm in have any plans to implant a week 17 championship. Fielding half a roster worth of waiver wire additions & bench players is not a true indication of a championship team, IMO.

 

If your league enjoys a week 17 championship, kudos to you. We all have our reasons for enjoying either playoff situation & to each their own.

[chroniciguana 13]

Why is this an issue? If your league wants to go 17 weeks, then go 17 weeks. If not, don't. We do.

[Houston Texans 10]

I mostly disagree. My main league is a deep keeper; we used to not do playoffs (just regular season champ) and played week 17, which was fine because it was just another game against a random opponent.

 

With playoffs it is different though -- you work all season (or in a keeper, multiple seasons) to get yourself in a position where you are a top team and playing for the championship. Then half your team might sit or play sparingly? The luck of getting the right scrub off of waivers isn't a good way to crown a champ. And in our format, it is worse because you can't just drop guys you might keep the following year.

 

That being said, to the OP -- I hadn't realized that the league is consciously scheduling more division games for the last week, so it seems like something to monitor for this year and consider for future years. Because all things being equal, 17 weeks is more fun than 16 weeks.

I understand the argument for not playing week 17, but this (the bolded) is hyperbole, no?

 

There's usually not more than a team or two who have nothing to gain and "rest" players in any given week 17, so to suggest that "half your team" might sit or play sparingly has to be exaggeration.

[Cara 0]

If your league plays week 17 Championship games, you should find a league that doesn't. If changes your entire draft strategy. Peyton Manning has played in how many week 17 games? Usually only a partial game, or less. Same for many players. How can you call it a "league" or name someone the "champion" if you aren't facing their squad at full strength? You can't. This debate seems to come up yearly and each year someone has posted the stats of the "studs" who only played a quarter, half or just under half the game. If your normal QB averages 25 points per game, but only has 10 in the final game because the team isn't concerned with winning, you have a conundrum. For the teams that do play their players in week 17, how many of their Superstars actually "play" the entire game? Many teams use this as a showcase for their younger talent, like the Giants did with Reuben Randle last year. Same for the Packers the year before when Flynn lit up Detroit. He had a career game, but unless the Rodgers owner cleared out a roster spot for him, his owner had to use another, likely much lesser, QB. Beating a team at full strength is what makes you the fantasy champion. Beating a team with more than one player who has little to play for, or will be used sparingly, is nonsense. Where is the fun in that? I want to beat the top team with their top roster.

[The Moz 69]

My first league ever played a week 17 title game -- I joined a real league a few years after.

[ROCKFORD 134]

i prefer 8 team leagues.

[Houston Texans 10]

If your league plays week 17 Championship games, you should find a league that doesn't. If changes your entire draft strategy.

Why? If you like playing week 17, and know that going into your draft, you draft accordingly. How is it different than drafting in a PPR vs non-PPR league? Or drafting for a 2-QB league vs a 1 QB league? Or a league where you start 3 RBs vs a league where you start 1? If you know that there is a week 17 game, you draft (or work the WW) accordingly.

 

Peyton Manning has played in how many week 17 games? Usually only a partial game, or less.

This seems to be the favorite argument for those who are opposed to week 17 games. Too bad it isn't true. Manning has played in 14 week 17s (discounting 2011, when he didn't play all year). He has played a full game in 8 of them. So he doesn't "usually" play less in week 17. That being said, that is too high of a number for me, so if I owned Manning in a week 17 league, I'd make sure to draft/trade for/pick up a reliable QB for week 17.

 

Same for many players.

Also, untrue. Over the past 5 seasons, 20/25 top-5 QBs played a full game in week 17. I'm not going to take the time to look up game 17 play-by-play for the top players at each position, but in ANY given week (save, perhaps for week 1, when there are fewer injuries), I'd imagine that 20% of the players in the NFL are going to be limited or out because of injury.

 

This debate seems to come up yearly and each year someone has posted the stats of the "studs" who only played a quarter, half or just under half the game.

Exactly. People focus on their personal situation, not the reality. And the reality is that the "resting" of players in week 17 is largely untrue.

 

All that being said, if your league doesn't want to play in week 17, that's fine, but it doesn't make it any better a league than one that does play in week 17.

[ralphster 274]

Exactly. People focus on their personal situation, not the reality. And the reality is that the "resting" of players in week 17 is largely untrue.

 

Baloney Texas! 8 of 14 games for Manning - so 6 times he played less than a full game, scoring less than he normally would. With a championship on the line I'd prefer not to chance it. That's just my opinion though.

[giraldi02 470]

For me...the situation has changed due to the recent scheduling changes in the NFL. With divisional games now at the end of the year, all the previous stats go out the window and the sample size must be reduced accordingly.

 

Does this mean that I would play in a week 17 championship league? Probably not...but its not as bad as it used to be.

 

How many teams had everything locked up and no incentive the past couple years?

[Houston Texans 10]

Baloney Texas! 8 of 14 games for Manning - so 6 times he played less than a full game, scoring less than he normally would. With a championship on the line I'd prefer not to chance it. That's just my opinion though.

Baloney? Maybe you should read my entire post. I clearly said I would want a reliable backup if I had Manning in a week 17 league.

 

Also, you're taking 1 player and projecting his history onto the entire NFL. Read the rest of my post: 80% of the top-5 QBs play in week 17. Crunch the numbers if you want, I'll bet you find that once the season is underway, that's not all that different from the numbers of players at any of the FF positions that miss time due to injury/suspension, etc.

[Larry David 20]

Baloney? Maybe you should read my entire post. I clearly said I would want a reliable backup if I had Manning in a week 17 league.

 

Also, you're taking 1 player and projecting his history onto the entire NFL. Read the rest of my post: 80% of the top-5 QBs play in week 17. Crunch the numbers if you want, I'll bet you find that once the season is underway, that's not all that different from the numbers of players at any of the FF positions that miss time due to injury/suspension, etc.

I'm sick of people equating players not playing in week 17 to injuries. If a team is locked into a playoff seed by week 17, there's a very good chance its star players will play very little if at all. You know that in advance. You never know when a player is going to get hurt. You can't account for that, but you can account for the week 17 scenario by having your championship game in week 16.

[Houston Texans 10]

I'm sick of people equating players not playing in week 17 to injuries. If a team is locked into a playoff seed by week 17, there's a very good chance its star players will play very little if at all. You know that in advance. You never know when a player is going to get hurt. You can't account for that, but you can account for the week 17 scenario by having your championship game in week 16.

And I'm sick of people making claims like "there's a very good chance its star players will play very little if at all," without ANY real evidence to support that claim.

 

I've already posted that over the past 5 years, 80% of the top-5 QBs have played a full game in week 17. Pick any given week in the NFL (save perhaps, week 1), and I'll bet you will find a similar percentage of players (20%) who don't play because of injuries.

 

If you want to say things like "there's a very good chance," provide some data that shows that there is a shred of truth to your claim.

[dehaven123 31]

Most fantasy leagues have gone to the 16 week season, to obviously not impact the Leagues Championship game with NFL teams that have clinched a playoff berth holding out their starters. But the NFL has scheduled division games week 17, to try to hopefully force an important divisional game. Doesnt this open up week 17 for fantasy purposes?

 

Just throwing it out there. Is it time to bring back the full 17 week fantasy schedule?

 

gotta think it's gonna make wk17 way more relevant than b4, right?

cant just dismiss it.

to answer ur question, i say yes, once we have a couple yr sample size, it's worth looking at.

total puts leagues may want to go ahead and vote on it now. head to head should wait for a sample size.