Fantasy Geek Balls League - Season Chatter

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

Just now, bostonlager said:

Everyone cool with $50?

ESPN, $50 works for me

again I’m not for it but if you guys want to vote on allocating small amounts for weekly high scores, go for it. 
 

I prefer 300-200-100 or 350–150-100

[Bier Meister 1,658]

1 minute ago, bostonlager said:

Everyone cool with $50?

absolutely.. possibly more.  i thought i saw people propose $150-200

 

we can discuss/vote on distribution.

[RogerDodger 797]

I dont care about $ I'll have plenty of credit in the EdEx bank from winning at golf. 

[bostonlager 2,664]

33 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

absolutely.. possibly more.  i thought i saw people propose $150-200

 

we can discuss/vote on distribution.

I’ll go as high as you guys want. Ed was the one throwing $200 around. 

 

[Gladiators 1,964]

I’m in again and am fine with whatever the majority decides for entry fee.

[Alias Detective 1,389]

Yep

[edjr 6,578]

Really not fair me to do it again. I should give you guys a chance. 

[edjr 6,578]

1 hour ago, WhiteWonder said:

ESPN, $50 works for me

again I’m not for it but if you guys want to vote on allocating small amounts for weekly high scores, go for it. 
 

I prefer 300-200-100 or 350–150-100

I am always down for weekly prizes.  I am in a 1k league and we pay $200 a week for high team and $75 for high player. 

[edjr 6,578]

1 hour ago, RogerDodger said:

I dont care about $ I'll have plenty of credit in the EdEx bank from winning at golf. 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

I'm in.

[RogerDodger 797]

9 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

I'm in.

Good. We need players that basically just donate their money.  

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

35 minutes ago, edjr said:

I am always down for weekly prizes.  I am in a 1k league and we pay $200 a week for high team and $75 for high player. 

High player is even worse 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

29 minutes ago, RogerDodger said:

Good. We need players that basically just donate their money.  

Likewise, we need trans gender team owners like you.

[seafoam1 2,803]

1 hour ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Likewise, we need trans gender team owners like you.

Ukraine is getting its ass kicked. 

[edjr 6,578]

7 hours ago, WhiteWonder said:

High player is even worse 

depends on the league scoring. If QBs are high players every week, agreed, it is dumb

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

3 hours ago, edjr said:

depends on the league scoring. If QBs are high players every week, agreed, it is dumb

I think it’s dumb because who cares if you have the highest scoring player in a given week? Your team could otherwise be awful. 

at least highest scoring team for the week is rewarding the best team/owner that week. 
 

I don’t like either, I’d rather have more $ in the podium payouts for end of season but I’m much more open to weekly high team. 

[edjr 6,578]

3 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

I think it’s dumb because who cares if you have the highest scoring player in a given week? Your team could otherwise be awful. 

at least highest scoring team for the week is rewarding the best team/owner that week. 
 

I don’t like either, I’d rather have more $ in the podium payouts for end of season but I’m much more open to weekly high team. 

You sound like Posty Downer more and more each day. 

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

7 minutes ago, edjr said:

You sound like Posty Downer more and more each day. 

I vote the league be free

[bostonlager 2,664]

New roster idea that I suggested last year. 
 

QB

RB

WR

WR

TE

Flex

Flex 

K
 

Def

[Bier Meister 1,658]

Just now, bostonlager said:

New roster idea that I suggested last year. 
 

QB

RB

WR

WR

TE

Flex

Flex 

K
 

Def

i would vote for this

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

I'm not sure why I find so many of these suggestions to be gross. Guess I just prefer classic fantasy football. For example, adding flex players at the expense of a RB spot just makes the game more simple with less skill involved, imho. Similar to superflex where a warm bodied QB off waivers will almost always be your best option, it's easier to find a quick fill in for a flex spot than have to plan to fill that 2nd RB spot.

All the little ancillary payouts like weekly high score, weekly high player, season high scorer just take away from the prize pool for 1st, 2nd and 3rd. If you want weekly awards, stick to DFS 

But above all else, when I threw this league together last minute last year, I wanted everyone to enjoy it. I was genuinely upset with myself for not knowing there would be weird tie breaker issues with Yahoo when divisions were involved. 

So this is what I am seeing so far. 

Changes that are definitely happening

• Moving league to ESPN
• No divisions. Top 6 teams make the playoffs. Tie breaker is total points
• League fee increased to $50 bringing the prize pot to $600

 

Changes you guys can put to a vote

• Payout for weekly high score OR season high score (if enough people want to pay out weekly or season high score, go ahead... but please not both. It stands to reason that the season long points leader will have won a few weekly high scores. Let's not double dip)
• Starting lineups (if you want to add another flex at the expense of a RB)

Changes I will #edjr over

• Paying a prize for weekly high player (its often random and means absolutely nothing. At least weekly high score shows who put together the best team that week) 

[bostonlager 2,664]

I vote extra flex and ditch an RB spot. No NFL teams start 2 RBs anymore why should we?

 

vote No on weekly payouts 

[bostonlager 2,664]

Super flex and start 2 RBs came from the same dumb mold. There aren’t 24 workhorse running’s is in the league anymore. 

[Bier Meister 1,658]

20 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

 

Changes that are definitely happening

• Moving league to ESPN: INDIFFERENT
• No divisions. Top 6 teams make the playoffs. Tie breaker is total points: INDIFFERENT
• League fee increased to $50 bringing the prize pot to $600: SURE.  MY CEILING WOULD BE $75-100

 

Changes you guys can put to a vote

• Payout for weekly high score OR season high score (if enough people want to pay out weekly or season high score, go ahead... but please not both. It stands to reason that the season long points leader will have won a few weekly high scores. Let's not double dip): BOTH
• Starting lineups (if you want to add another flex at the expense of a RB): YES

Changes I will #edjr over

• Paying a prize for weekly high player (its often random and means absolutely nothing. At least weekly high score shows who put together the best team that week) : AGAINST

 

[bostonlager 2,664]

I threw $50 out there. $75 -$100 I like better 

[Bier Meister 1,658]

5 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

I threw $50 out there. $75 -$100 I like better 

especially to help cover a prize for weekly high, and end of season high score.

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

21 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

Super flex and start 2 RBs came from the same dumb mold. There aren’t 24 workhorse running’s is in the league anymore. 

Nah, start 2 RB was a long time FF standard.  Superflex is one of those things that came about based on commissioners trying to find loopholes, knowing lots of owners would try to fill that flex spot with a typical RB or WR without realizing an average QB will usually score more (depending on scoring system of course)

 

Shouldn't matter. There have not been 24 "workhorse" RB's in the league for a while now. Just because each owner can't theoretically have 2 workhorse backs isn't a great reason to eliminate a position in favor of another flex. This is kind of what I mean when I say its a cop out / requires less skill. 

Just my 2 cents. Like I said if majority enjoys the league more with whatever changes, then go for it. 

[bostonlager 2,664]

1 minute ago, WhiteWonder said:

Shouldn't matter. There have not been 24 "workhorse" RB's in the league for a while now. Just because each owner can't theoretically have 2 workhorse backs isn't a great reason to eliminate a position in favor of another flex. This is kind of what I mean when I say its a cop out / requires less skill. 

Just my 2 cents. Like I said if majority enjoys the league more with whatever changes, then go for it. 

1 RB or 18 roster spots. I need one or the other. 

[bostonlager 2,664]

@Alias Detective

you need to clean out your inbox 

[edjr 6,578]

On 12/26/2022 at 10:28 AM, bostonlager said:

ed came up with the idea for this league

lost interest in the last days before the draft

rejoined at the last minute

quit a half dozen times during the season

is now playing for a championship 

   

[Bier Meister 1,658]

4 hours ago, WhiteWonder said:

Nah, start 2 RB was a long time FF standard.  Superflex is one of those things that came about based on commissioners trying to find loopholes, knowing lots of owners would try to fill that flex spot with a typical RB or WR without realizing an average QB will usually score more (depending on scoring system of course)

Never liked superflex (2qb)

Quote

 

Shouldn't matter. There have not been 24 "workhorse" RB's in the league for a while now. Just because each owner can't theoretically have 2 workhorse backs isn't a great reason to eliminate a position in favor of another flex. This is kind of what I mean when I say its a cop out / requires less skill. 

Just my 2 cents. Like I said if majority enjoys the league more with whatever changes, then go for it. 

It is exactly why leagues should adjust and why i do not think it is a cop out.

 we have been making adjustments over time for rbs and te to balance or level scoring.  i would rather adapt to the times than hold on to archaic rules for the sake of tradition (or we would all be in td only leagues)

[edjr 6,578]

I want to ditch H2H as there is way too much luck.  Sure I ended up winning anyway, but only because my division sucked. Should never be 2nd highest scoring team in a week and lose. Focking DUMB  (happened to me twice)

[RogerDodger 797]

I came in here to vote, but, reading those WW dissertations might take awhile.  

[RogerDodger 797]

4 hours ago, edjr said:

I want to ditch H2H as there is way too much luck.  Sure I ended up winning anyway, but only because my division sucked. Should never be 2nd highest scoring team in a week and lose. Focking DUMB  (happened to me twice)

If you get rid of H2H you get rid of playoffs.

[RogerDodger 797]

ESPN - No

Weekly Payouts - No

Flex - Yes

Superflex - No

More roster spots - No

Getting rid of divisions - Yes

Getting rid of H2H - No

I'm open to a percentage of the payout to highest total score at the end of the year.

[bostonlager 2,664]

@shorepatrol - your inbox is full. 

[Twinsdad 53]

Count me in

 

Pretty much agree with Bier on most of these.

Changes that are definitely happening

• Moving league to ESPN: INDIFFERENT
• No divisions. Top 6 teams make the playoffs. Tie breaker is total points: INDIFFERENT
• League fee increased to $50 bringing the prize pot to $600: SURE.  MY CEILING WOULD BE $75-100

 

Changes you guys can put to a vote

• Payout for weekly high score OR season high score (if enough people want to pay out weekly or season high score, go ahead... but please not both. It stands to reason that the season long points leader will have won a few weekly high scores. Let's not double dip):  Indifferent on the high score payout, but if others want it, I would say one or the other, not both
• Starting lineups (if you want to add another flex at the expense of a RB): YES, but not superflex

Changes I will #edjr over

• Paying a prize for weekly high player (its often random and means absolutely nothing. At least weekly high score shows who put together the best team that week) : AGAINST

 

 

[Pimpadeaux 2,404]

10 hours ago, bostonlager said:

I vote extra flex and ditch an RB spot. No NFL teams start 2 RBs anymore why should we?

 

vote No on weekly payouts 

I cast my votes in this direction as well.

[edjr 6,578]

13 hours ago, RogerDodger said:

If you get rid of H2H you get rid of playoffs.

? 

[bostonlager 2,664]

Another suggestion is to make the draft order known well before the draft so we can study based on position. I don’t care for having to take all positions into account and then getting your number an hour before the draft stops.