FANTASY FOOTBALL 2010 **Draft Times in OP**

Syferus

LTTP's final standings for posterity:



It was a very competitive league with all but three people having play-off hopes going into the last week and everyone stayed active!

Spongey1975

Whoever it is who is doing the rankings, if they want a reference to which poster has which team, go to post 595, they should all be there.

Peyton Manning

Spongey1975 wrote: »

Whoever it is who is doing the rankings, if they want a reference to which poster has which team, go to post 595, they should all be there.

I'll do up a rankings table later on if that's cool with everybody.

Have we decided on promotion/relegation yet or how am I to work that into the ranking?

Eire-Dearg

15/16th down, 17th/18th (or 1st and 2nd in Division 1) up, and same again for Division 1 and 2?

Or if you're taking inactive teams into account, take them down a few places, or perhaps subtract 3 or 4 wins from their stats, or else replace them directly with new players next year.

Spongey1975

I would imagine 4 up 4 down is the fairest. I think what was mentioned before was the 4 playoff contenders in the 1st and 2nd which will be the 4 group winners. As for individual rankings of those 4 will have to wait until the playoffs are complete.

What was undecided was whether it would be the 4 lowest ranked teams or the bottom placed teams in each group is to be relegated. However any inactive teams are automatically relegated (not sure if some people wanted them to the bottom of the pile altogether). I've mentioned the 3 inactives in Div 1 above, not sure about Prem or Div 2.

UnitedIrishman

If there is the possiblity of joining up with that league next season, I wouldn't mind taking the place of one of the inactive teams in Div 2 or that.

Peyton Manning

Okay this is what I've got so far. The top 6 in the Prem League are those that have reached the playoffs, in order of overall ranking. The rest are then ordered by their overall ranking, with the bottom four (13, 14, 15 and 16) relegated. Div 1 is ordered as the 4 playoff teams getting promotion, with the bottom four in overall ranking getting relegated and the same for Div 2. This seems the best way to do it, but its open for debate. Also there were a couple of teams who I couldnt put to an owner. I could've taken a few guesses (i.e. Im pretty sure the missing Prem League team is Oatsey) but just to be safe, let me know here and I'll update it. This is just the first draft, obviously the rankings will change once it's determined what happens in each set of playoffs.

Edit: This is also before action has been taken on any inactive teams, we need to discuss how that'll work first.

eagle eye

Why is there 4 being relegated? It should only be 2 as far as I'm aware.

Peyton Manning

eagle eye wrote: »

Why is there 4 being relegated? It should only be 2 as far as I'm aware.

I thought it was 4 as that is what has been mentioned the past few pages. Could be 2 either, I really don't know but I just went with 4.

eagle eye

Tom_Brady wrote: »

I thought it was 4 as that is what has been mentioned the past few pages. Could be 2 either, I really don't know but I just went with 4.

Well it was 2 last year and I never heard anybody saying we should change that.

Mr. Guappa

Tom_Brady wrote: »

I thought it was 4 as that is what has been mentioned the past few pages. Could be 2 either, I really don't know but I just went with 4.

I thought it was 4 too, I think it was discussed at some stage.

As for the inactives - I would just remove them from the list altogether.. If they reapply next year then they just join the back of the queue.

Icepickle

Fair play & thanks for compiling the rankings Tom_Brady.
Until a decision regarding the treatment of inactive teams is made could I suggest an additional column showing the date of their last league activity.

As I've said before, my view is that they should be put right to the bottom of the whole rankings list so that commited, season long players take priority when the league places are to be filled.

If you sign up for it you should do so with the intention of playing all year.
I know it's only a fantasy game & that the real world has far more priorities, time demands & changes in circumstances but if you can't commit to it then don't sign up in the first place.

Division 2 inactive details are;

Unknown Musketeers - unknown13 - Never Active
Ravs Savages - Ravage 1616 - Jul 15
Leinster Lions - bigDOAF - Sep 11 (League Banned)
Plexes Pistols - timbotim - Sep 19
LA Gold - JohnnyF - Oct 19

eagle eye

Mr. Guappa wrote: »

I thought it was 4 too, I think it was discussed at some stage.

As for the inactives - I would just remove them from the list altogether.. If they reapply next year then they just join the back of the queue.

Thats not good enough. Go and find where it was discussed if you think it was.

The Prem League had no inactives.

LightningBolt

eagle eye wrote: »

Thats not good enough. Go and find where it was discussed if you think it was.

The Prem League had no inactives.

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055885142&page=121 use this if you view 2o posts a page

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055885142&page=46 use this if it's 50 I think

Should be DPT's post on on for a couple of pages. May be an earlier example.

I'm easy to be honest, I'm ranked third so would go up to Premier if 4 teams, but stay in Div.1 if it's only 2 teams. If this is put to vote I'll abstain as I'm biased. Once I'm in a competitive 16 team league next year I don't really care.

Spongey1975

I know it was 2 up 2 down in last years league when there was 12 teams. I think it only fair that it be increased given the change to 16 teams. Now 4 may be too much but i'd say a fair compromise will be 3 up 3 down. How those 3 going up is decided can be playoff winners & 2 highest ranked teams or any other combination anyone else wants to offer.

eagle eye

There is no reason to change it. We only made it a 16 team league to try and fit everybody in.

It should stay at 2 up 2 down. If anybody doesn't come back next year then the next best in Division 1 gets that place and so on.

eagle eye

LightningBolt wrote: »

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055885142&page=121 use this if you view 2o posts a page

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055885142&page=46 use this if it's 50 I think

Should be DPT's post on on for a couple of pages. May be an earlier example.

I'm easy to be honest, I'm ranked third so would go up to Premier if 4 teams, but stay in Div.1 if it's only 2 teams. If this is put to vote I'll abstain as I'm biased. Once I'm in a competitive 16 team league next year I don't really care.

You are talking about a conversation on the 6th of December. I'm talking about before the season began. No change was made so it stays the same.

eagle eye

I was just thinking about the Prem League. I think Tallaght should continue to run it in the future.

I have his email address and can organise to post anything here regarding it for next season.

Dohnny Jepp

I think it should be 4 up 4 down. For a 16 man league with 4 divisions it's fairer.

Also when we take into account we have 3 leagues, I think the higher "turnover" of promotions/relegations is fairer.

Dohnny Jepp

eagle eye wrote: »

I was just thinking about the Prem League. I think Tallaght should continue to run it in the future.

I have his email address and can organise to post anything here regarding it for next season.

If TO decides after awhile that he wants to come back here, then I think he should run it cause he's a top bloke. However, if he doesnt come back I think it should be run by someone active int he boards community. If we decide on 4 up 4down, I think lightning could manage the prem division if he wanted to do it. I say lightning cause he has done the div 1 league for a couple of years.

eagle eye

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

If TO decides after awhile that he wants to come back here, then I think he should run it cause he's a top bloke. However, if he doesnt come back I think it should be run by someone active int he boards community. If we decide on 4 up 4down, I think lightning could manage the prem division if he wanted to do it. I say lightning cause he has done the div 1 league for a couple of years.

There will be no change to 2 up 2 down.

We have had complaints anytime anything was changed this year. So we'll stick to 2 up 2 down.

LightningBolt

eagle eye wrote: »

There will be no change to 2 up 2 down.

We have had complaints anytime anything was changed this year. So we'll stick to 2 up 2 down.

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69106213&postcount=1647

Not pre season but by T.O mid November. I haven't the time to go through looking at any more posts as I've already said I don't really care about what "division" I'm playing.

What we can see is that next season we need to lay out rules in the opening post detailing what will and won't happen.

For the record next season I'd like to see 3-4 teams in a 16 team league move up and down something along the lines of what Guappa/Spongey suggested beforehand.

Anyway, goodnight to you all.

Peyton Manning

Was it definitely 2 last year?

I dont think it was. I got promoted and I didn't get to the Playoff Final so it may have been 3.

manafana

dont forgot boards div 3, im not the mod for it, but will tyr post up a table.

Dohnny Jepp

eagle eye wrote: »

There will be no change to 2 up 2 down.

We have had complaints anytime anything was changed this year. So we'll stick to 2 up 2 down.

You get the final say on this because?

manafana

edit

Mr. Guappa

Tom_Brady wrote: »

Was it definitely 2 last year?

I dont think it was. I got promoted and I didn't get to the Playoff Final so it may have been 3.

It was 2 last year, but when we expanded to a 16-team league 4 more came up from Division 1. Given that it's now a 16-team league I think that 4 is a better number as it gives those lower in the table something to aim for during the final weeks. If only 2 are getting releagated then those in mid-table may lose interest during the final couple of weeks. However this is pretty irrelevant now that the regular season has finished, but I was under the impression that it was 4-up 4-down. I've gone through the first 750 posts in this thread and I can't find it discussed anywhere up to that point (which is around the time we drafted).

eagle eye

It was definitely 2 up 2 down last year and it was still that way when this season started.

Peyton Manning

eagle eye wrote: »

It was definitely 2 up 2 down last year and it was still that way when this season started.

I know you're only doing this because this was the same argument that happened the rule changes in a couple of the leagues this year.

You actually have no interest in how many get promoted and relegated and it shouldn't even bother you, you're just doing it to be difficult.

I don't care if it's 2 or 4 by the way, it doesn't bother me at all. I'm not lobbying for one or the other. My opinion is 4 is would be better given the number of teams, but thats all.

eagle eye

Tom_Brady wrote: »

I know you're only doing this because this was the same argument that happened the rule changes in a couple of the leagues this year.

You actually have no interest in how many get promoted and relegated and it shouldn't even bother you, you're just doing it to be difficult.

I don't care if it's 2 or 4 by the way, it doesn't bother me at all. I'm not lobbying for one or the other. My opinion is 4 is would be better given the number of teams, but thats all.

Its awfully unfair to relegate 4 teams.

Peyton Manning

eagle eye wrote: »

Its awfully unfair to relegate 4 teams.

I can see an argument for both sides but like I said, I'm not lobbying for either. It's just your militant stance on 2 seems like you're just doing it because thats what a few others including myself did for the on-site rule change incidents. Or maybe Im just reading too much into it, but that's what it seems like to me.

Mr. Guappa

Tom_Brady wrote: »

I can see an argument for both sides but like I said, I'm not lobbying for either. It's just your militant stance on 2 seems like you're just doing it because thats what a few others including myself did for the on-site rule change incidents. Or maybe Im just reading too much into it, but that's what it seems like to me.

That's what it seems like to me also.

eagle eye

Tom_Brady wrote: »

I can see an argument for both sides but like I said, I'm not lobbying for either. It's just your militant stance on 2 seems like you're just doing it because thats what a few others including myself did for the on-site rule change incidents. Or maybe Im just reading too much into it, but that's what it seems like to me.

I don't see any good reason to increase it to 4.

You have to earn the right to get up to that division and 4 teams is too much to be promoted. I'd be more in favour of 1 than 2 actually but 2 is what was agreed upon, it means that both teams that make the final get up and the two teams with the worst record go down.

There are three teams on 5-8 and if 4 go down then one of them goes down. Its just ludicrous that a team on 5-8 would get relegated.

Peyton Manning

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't see any good reason to increase it to 4.

You have to earn the right to get up to that division and 4 teams is too much to be promoted. I'd be more in favour of 1 than 2 actually but 2 is what was agreed upon, it means that both teams that make the final get up and the two teams with the worst record go down.

There are three teams on 5-8 and if 4 go down then one of them goes down. Its just ludicrous that a team on 5-8 would get relegated.

You think 4/16 (25%) is too much, and that you have to earn the right, yet you argued that 4/8 (50%) should go to the playoffs in the PPR League. Do you not have earn the right to go to the playoffs too?

Eire-Dearg

eagle eye wrote: »

You have to earn the right to get up to that division and 4 teams is too much to be promoted.

And you voted for the four teams getting play-off spots in an eight-team league.

Surely earning a play-off spot is on par with earning promotion (they're near enough the same thing in this Division situation).

<edit>

eagle eye

Eire-Dearg wrote: »

And you voted for the four teams getting play-off spots in an eight-team league.

Surely earning a play-off spot is on par with earning promotion (they're near enough the same thing in this Division situation).

You really do baffle the brain.

No its not anything like being relegated.

The reason I voted for four teams making the playoffs is because a team with a worse record could end up in the final without any playoffs. That is still a possibility.

Dohnny Jepp

Like others here, I was under the impression it was 4 up 4 down. . .

Eire-Dearg

eagle eye wrote: »

No its not anything like being relegated.

The reason I voted for four teams making the playoffs is because a team with a worse record could end up in the final without any playoffs. That is still a possibility.

I don't know the situation in that league but things like that happen. Someone could easily have had a huge scoring season, beaten the eventual finalists and still not get into the play-offs because of what happened on any given Sunday. (damn you, Cecil!)

Regardless, I'm not a part of any Division at the moment and if I end up in D2 next season and it's a competitive league with little or no inactives, I'll be happy and at the end of the day, it's only a bit of fun and a competitive distraction for a few months. If the dice doesn't role your way, so be it. If I happen to get relegated, be it in the bottom 2 or the bottom 4, whatever you choose to go with eagle, I won't care, cos all i'll want is another entertaining league season the year after.

eagle eye

<edit>
There is normally natural wastage and others might get into the Prem League as a result of that.

We can promote the next in line should somebody pull out. Two teams is enough to be relegated. We only increased it to 16 this year to fit in as many regulars as we could that were interested.

Dodge

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

Like others here, I was under the impression it was 4 up 4 down. . .

Think that might've been because of the 4 divisions. I'm farly certain it was never really discussed.

Doesn't really matter IMO, abd I think the rankikngs done by Tom Brady a couple of pages ago are fine.

If anything the more chages between the leagues the better so people aren't getting hung up on Prem, one, two etc (which was basically decided by who asked first remember)

Spongey1975

If it wasnt discussed or agreed before the start of the season then i think it should stay as 2 up 2 down for this season simply to keep it in line with a lot of peoples opinions to not change things mid season. However i think it should be changed for next season onwards. We have a lot of players now, in excess of 50 and that i think will grow. I would say that most of them would like the opportunity to play in a competitive premier league and their chances of that are limited in a 2 up 2 down scenario.

Icepickle

eagle eye wrote: »

There will be no change to 2 up 2 down.

We have had complaints anytime anything was changed this year. So we'll stick to 2 up 2 down.

Sorry we didn't realise that this was your game. Please don't take your ball back or we won't be able to play anymore.

Dodge

We're not sticking to 2 up 2 down either as the league went from 12 to 16...

I'd agree with Spongey, there should be as much movement as possible so as many as possible can play competitively

eagle eye

Well its up to the Prem League members to decide.

After all there are some of us who are in this league for 3 or 4 years.

Edit to add: If we are going to relegate 4 then we should relegate 6 because there are three of them on the same record and its would be very unfair to relegate one person with that record and leave two still in the division.

Dodge

The rankings are there from 1-16. Nothing unfair about it.

eagle eye

*Attention all Prem League members*

I have put up a question regarding relegation. Please reply on the NFL site as to how many you think should be relegated. I've give the following choices.

Remain as last year and relegate 2.

Change it to 4

Change it to 6 as three teams finished on 5-8 so relegate them all.

_____________________________________________________________

Also how do we decide which 5-8 team gets relegated. Personally I think it should go by head to head record. Divisional record. And then common opponents. Just like the NFL.

Frisbee

eagle eye wrote: »

its would be very unfair to relegate one person with that record and leave two still in the division.

No it wouldn't. One of them will have better stats than the other two. Simples.

Dohnny Jepp

eagle eye wrote: »

Well its up to the Prem League members to decide.

After all there are some of us who are in this league for 3 or 4 years.

Edit to add: If we are going to relegate 4 then we should relegate 6 because there are three of them on the same record and its would be very unfair to relegate one person with that record and leave two still in the division.

It is in its **** up to the prem league to decide. It's up to all members involved through all leagues decide.

Peyton Manning

eagle eye wrote: »

Also how do we decide which 5-8 team gets relegated. Personally I think it should go by head to head record. Divisional record. And then common opponents. Just like the NFL.

Whichever one is lowest in the overall 1-16 rankings.

Dodge

eagle eye wrote: »

Just like the NFL.

We're not the NFL. We lads playing an online fantasy league for nothing.

Only way of doig this fairly is to include members from all the leagues, and have the discussion here.

And as we're doing that you're the only one I've seen thats had a problem with using the NFL.com rankings, and that has a major problem with 4 up/4 down