Packer Rats FF League

[gureski]

Or, too we could just run several seperate leagues and just have several different champs. That wouldn't be so bad. You could have a rookie league, a starter league, & a veteran league, all maybe 10-12 players hopefully, for each league. It could be done.

This is pretty much the theme of the tiered league only you link it all together and have a set way of earning promotions/demotions and everyone's ultimate goal is to reach the top league and win it all. You have seperate drafts for each league within the overall league but it's still all one big league with everyone working towards the same goals and tied together.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Truly Mad, you and I are on the same page. I don't want to exclude anyone. I really do want to accomodate anyone that wants to play in this game. You know me, I'm all for making the Packer Rats family closer, solidifying the readership. Fantasy football is a great way to do that (even allows for members who have issues with each other to "take it to the court", so to speak).

But there has to be some kind of a limit. 48 teams is crazy, but I do think you're right--we have to figure out a way to make it happen. I honestly don't want to break it down into beginner, intermediate and advanced because beginners learn a lot from those with experience and, sadly, from losing (best way to learn is to jump in feet first, even if you have a chance of failure).

I am up for alternate solutions, including guerski's suggestion, in order to accomodate the masses. But, as Tenn suggested, the more people we have in this thing, the more watered down the experience will be for everyone. I'll do some research and figure it out.

I think the ultimate goal should be to have one Packer Rats champion though.

Thanks for your patience.

tyler

[MadtownPacker]

Cool and youre right, there should only be 1 PR Champion.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Or, too we could just run several seperate leagues and just have several different champs. That wouldn't be so bad. You could have a rookie league, a starter league, & a veteran league, all maybe 10-12 players hopefully, for each league. It could be done.

This is pretty much the theme of the tiered league only you link it all together and have a set way of earning promotions/demotions and everyone's ultimate goal is to reach the top league and win it all. You have seperate drafts for each league within the overall league but it's still all one big league with everyone working towards the same goals and tied together.

That's similar to what I was suggesting with the 4 conferences. There'd be four different drafts. Seemingly 4 different leagues. The playoffs would feature the top conference winners and then the top two would face off in the Sewer Bowl.

The only difference is that there's no demotion or promotion. All franchises owners--new or experienced--would duke it out on the same level.

tyler

[SkinBasket]

But, as Tenn suggested, the more people we have in this thing, the more watered down the experience will be for everyone. I'll do some research and figure it out.

Jack,

Keeping in mind that I haven't participated in one of these before, isn't there some truth in what guerski pointed out? That having rosters a little "watered down" is what makes the league interesting? Having not done this before, the "watered down" option seems more appealing to me, just because it seems more exciting that it would matter more when your "average" players have a good day vs having a roster full of the best players having average days, making the selection and management of your team all the more important. Then again, maybe it makes the game a pain in the ass. Just wondering what you guys on the "don't dilute the talent" float think of the "dilute the talent" argument. Thoughts?

[jack's smirking revenge]

But, as Tenn suggested, the more people we have in this thing, the more watered down the experience will be for everyone. I'll do some research and figure it out.

Jack,

Keeping in mind that I haven't participated in one of these before, isn't there some truth in what guerski pointed out? That having rosters a little "watered down" is what makes the league interesting? Having not done this before, the "watered down" option seems more appealing to me, just because it seems more exciting that it would matter more when your "average" players have a good day vs having a roster full of the best players having average days, making the selection and management of your team all the more important. Then again, maybe it makes the game a pain in the ass. Just wondering what you guys on the "don't dilute the talent" float think of the "dilute the talent" argument. Thoughts?

Well, it actually makes the game more of a pain in the ass. If you have to choose between starting Noah Herron or Najeh Davenport as your backup RB, instead of Chester Taylor or Cedric Benson, it makes the game a lot less fun. There's nothing that hurts more as a fantasy football player to have a player that you start score zero points because he doesn't get any playing time. It does happen sometimes. Players get injured; game-day decisions affect the starting roster. But when the talent pool on draft day is so shallow that you have to draft a 3rd-string RB to start, or a 4th-string WR and hope that he catches a pass, then you're going to have a terrible experience.

tyler

[jack's smirking revenge]

Ok. With gureski's suggestions, I think a solution has been found. Here's what I propose (very similar to yesterday)...

Packer Rats Fantasy Football League

Management:
1 Commish/Conference Manager
4 Division Managers
- A Division Manager would be an existing franchise owner with experience in fantasy football. The Division Managers would end up being the Advisory Council for the league and would manage the draft for each division and would work with the Commish to regulate activities within each respective conference.
1 Advisory Council (1 Commish/Division Manager + 3 Division Managers + 1 Honorable Voter)

League Composition:
2 Conferences
4 Divisions per Conference
10 franchises per division (40 franchises)

Season:
Draft: Week or two prior to the regular season. Each Division participates in its own draft.
Regular Season: Weeks 1-13
Divisional Playoffs: Week 14-15 (Division Winner Crowned)
Conference Championship: Week 16 (Conference Champion Crowned)
Sewer Bowl: Week 17 (One Packer Rats Sewer Bowl Champion)

Thoughts? I'd need 4 people to step up to be Division Managers--basically, you'd run your own 10-person league within the Packer Rats FFL structure, with my assistance, of course.

tyler

[Little Whiskey]

l'm glad you guys kissed and made up. Now STOP holding hands!!


let me see if i can get this started again.


Jack you elitest!!!!

[jack's smirking revenge]

l'm glad you guys kissed and made up. Now STOP holding hands!!


let me see if i can get this started again.


Jack you elitest!!!!

Whisk you redneck!!!



tyler

[Little Whiskey]

Whisk you redneck!!!



tyler

ya, SO!!!

[Guiness]

I already thought 24 teams was a little much. Think of the logistics if we want to have a live draft. It's already a reach to pick a time when 24ppl can make it. 48? No way. Jack's suggestion of 10team divisions is a good one.

I wonder about the logistics of running the league JSR suggested, however. Does whatever provider we're looking at allow you to form a new league in week 14? There will be some player cross-over (obviously) - do they allow the same player to be on two teams? Depending on the answers to these questions, we may need to keep score 'by hand' for the playoffs.

Re: Watered down
Gureski is right - a bit watered down is best. You have to dig for players, not everyone will start two #1 WR's.

[jack's smirking revenge]

I already thought 24 teams was a little much. Think of the logistics if we want to have a live draft. It's already a reach to pick a time when 24ppl can make it. 48? No way. Jack's suggestion of 10team divisions is a good one.

I wonder about the logistics of running the league JSR suggested, however. Does whatever provider we're looking at allow you to form a new league in week 14? There will be some player cross-over (obviously) - do they allow the same player to be on two teams? Depending on the answers to these questions, we may need to keep score 'by hand' for the playoffs.

Re: Watered down
Gureski is right - a bit watered down is best. You have to dig for players, not everyone will start two #1 WR's.

Guiness, that's exactly what I was thinking. For the playoffs, we may just have to track everything by hand and report the progress on the Packer Rats site. You're right, there will be player crossover. Then again, I may contact Yahoo and see if starting up a playoff league in week 14 would work. I think it is possible, at least somewhere, but the default is that we'd create a second season which we have to track by hand late in the year.

Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. It'd get people coming back to Packer Rats on a regular basis to check playoff progress. I'll troubleshoot that one and see what I can figure out.

tyler

EDIT: Yahoo could handle divisional playoffs for weeks 14-15. The scope of the problem is that we'd have to track weeks 16-17 by hand on the Packer Rats site.

[gureski]

"Well, it actually makes the game more of a pain in the ass. If you have to choose between starting Noah Herron or Najeh Davenport as your backup RB, instead of Chester Taylor or Cedric Benson, it makes the game a lot less fun. There's nothing that hurts more as a fantasy football player to have a player that you start score zero points because he doesn't get any playing time. It does happen sometimes. Players get injured; game-day decisions affect the starting roster. But when the talent pool on draft day is so shallow that you have to draft a 3rd-string RB to start, or a 4th-string WR and hope that he catches a pass, then you're going to have a terrible experience.

tyler"

end quote

I'd like to answer this by stating that it's no fun when you get beat by luck. In a small league where there is ample talent for everyone then all one has to do in order to succeed is pick up a FF magazine or a generic list. There is little thought involved. All moves are obvious. It takes zero brains to look at a generic list and pick name players off that list and then insert them into your line up. It comes down to who is luckiest. Furthermore, if you just play with the 'name' players then the owners who are lucky enough to pick early are going to win more times then not because they're the owners who will have access to the Tomlinson's and Manning's and Alexander's and ect.... Studs like the one's I mention here are head and shoulders above the rest of the players at their positions and therefore.....if you get one...and there is no built in mechanism for others to compete with you regarding talent....then it's not fun because it's hard to compete with those owners.

On the other hand, if you have a larger league then it takes more thought and research and skill in order to assemble your team. You can't just ride the top picks to success because if one gets injured there is nothing obvious sitting around to help you recover. If you get the 1st pick then you have to wait 22 picks or longer before you get to go again. That thins out the talent and evens things up. There is less room for error in larger leagues. You pay for mistakes in a large league where-as in a small league you can more easily cover your mistakes because there is always something decent sitting there for you to pick up. In larger leagues, You need to figure out other names and players to ride in order to win. There is more strategy in a larger league and that's great because that's what makes FF fun. If you're just starting out and getting the hang of things then smaller leagues are fine but after you get a taste of what the games are all about and how it works....you will crave more of a challenge.

You can have Chester Taylor instead of Noah Herron in a larger league. You just have to be able to research ahead of time and grab the player before others get him. That's why it's more fun. It's more of a challenge and it's more rewarding. When you grab a guy that nobody expects anything out of ...like Joey Galloway... before it's obvious that he is going to have the kind of season he had last year....then that's a rewarding feeling. It's equally rewarding then to watch the guy who DIDN'T pick up Galloway when he had the chance try to fill his spot with junk because he missed out. In the end, I'm just saying that the only two reasons you could end up with a Noah Herron starting for you is because you either didn't plan well enough when building your team OR you were hit with an unusual amount of injuries at the same position. And even if you have injuries...you usually have the right to trade meaning you don't have to accept a garbage player like Herron starting for you. It's a choice.

Enough of my soap-box though.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Good points gureski. I was one of those people that picked up Galloway (and Gado, when the getting was good) last year. I made pretty deep in my team's playoffs, but was a victim of the other thing you mentioned: injuries. Deuce McCallister was one of my high draft picks last year and when he went out, I was hurting bad.

I think the thing we should keep in mind is that we are obviously going to have varying levels of fantasy football experience in this league. We want to accomodate all. After this year, if this is successful, this league will be a madhouse with fantasy football addicts. Thus, we do need to keep the divisions small so that each person has a shot at the "big names we all recognize". True, there is far more strategy, luck and fulfillment by hunting down those players like Galloway last year or Drew Bennett the previous year that fly under the radar.

Thanks for the thoughts gureski.

tyler

[Little Whiskey]

ELITEST!