Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Rule changes for 2020?

2

Comments

  • #32
    Guffy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,026 ✭✭✭Guffy


    eagle eye wrote: »
    If it's too one sided it could be collusion. The veto allows you to make sure there is no collusion.

    That's not collusion though is it? A one sided trade no matter how one sided i mean. It may be a bad trade but that's different to collusion


  • #33
    BarryC21
    Registered Users Posts: 111 ✭✭BarryC21


    1. Would love to see waivers reset to reverse standing order every week.

    2. I’d be in favour of PPR (or at least 0.5PPR) if it’ll broaden the player base. If that means sticking with standard and reducing number of bench players I’d be grand with that.

    3. Don’t really mind about the head to head or points scored but if I had to pick I’d go points scored.

    4. I’d keep the trades the way they are.


  • #34
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,477 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Guffy wrote:
    That's not collusion though is it? A one sided trade no matter how one sided i mean. It may be a bad trade but that's different to collusion
    And every player in the league has the right to look at it and veto it if it looks like it might be collusion.


  • #35
    AirDemon
    Registered Users Posts: 210 ✭✭AirDemon


    eagle eye wrote: »
    And every player in the league has the right to look at it and veto it if it looks like it might be collusion.


    That's not what you are saying though, you've said you veto if it's too one sided. But that's totally down to the person viewing the trade.


    It just means that you have decided that this must be collusion because you know better than the people making the trade. And fair enough, you may know better than the people making the trade but just because I make a stupid trade doesn't mean you should have the ability to veto it.


    Vetoes are for collusion, so cheating, but a one sided trade isn't cheating.


  • #36
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,477 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    AirDemon wrote:
    Vetoes are for collusion, so cheating, but a one sided trade isn't cheating.
    How am I supposed to know which it is?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users Posts: 36,078 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    eagle eye wrote: »
    How am I supposed to know which it is?

    You don’t. Post your concern, let the commish investigate, and they can reverse if necessary. You shouldn’t have the right to veto anonymously just because you don’t like a trade. That just ain’t cricket.


  • #38
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users Posts: 36,078 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Some great suggestions here. Plenty to collate into a survey ahead of next season.


  • #39
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,477 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    LuckyLloyd wrote:
    You don’t. Post your concern, let the commish investigate, and they can reverse if necessary. You shouldn’t have the right to veto anonymously just because you don’t like a trade. That just ain’t cricket.
    It's not cricket it's American fantasy football.
    As a player you should have the right to veto. It prevents collusion.


  • #40
    Blured
    Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭Blured


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It's not cricket it's American fantasy football.
    As a player you should have the right to veto. It prevents collusion.

    It also allows people to veto a trade they don't like, i.e. if they think it helps a rival


  • #41
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,144 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    How many trades have been vetoed? In all my years on here (11/12?) I don’t ever remember a trade being vetoed


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users Posts: 36,078 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Dodge wrote: »
    How many trades have been vetoed? In all my years on here (11/12?) I don’t ever remember a trade being vetoed

    Even more reason to process them straight through so.


  • #43
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,477 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    LuckyLloyd wrote:
    Even more reason to process them straight through so.
    No, leave well enough alone is the smart approach.


  • #44
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,207 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    All for trades going straight through with the commish able to retroactively veto it. I think even obvious collusion trades could sneak through with the current system from players not paying a lot of attention during the week. Don't see the downside of a retroactive change based on suspicion and a lot of upside for players looking to trade.

    Happy to move to some element of ppr also.


  • #45
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,144 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Even more reason to process them straight through so.

    Not really. The argument was being made that trades were being stopped by people who ‘didn’t like them’. That isn’t the case

    I don’t really feel too strongly on this either way to be honest. The current system isn’t a problem for me


  • #46
    Beefy78
    Registered Users Posts: 8,163 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    You don’t. Post your concern, let the commish investigate, and they can reverse if necessary. You shouldn’t have the right to veto anonymously just because you don’t like a trade. That just ain’t cricket.

    He can't veto the trade. He can cast a vote if he has concerns. If so many people feel the same way that there's enough votes to veto then that suggests that the trade was pretty egregious. It happens almost never and I completely get the viewpoint that some people have that a trade should never be vetoed but a trade window is there to keep people honest.

    Fwiw I've never seen trades vetoed on Boards but some people are naturally way less invested in their team than others are and don't care so much about throwing away their players to get a backup running back at their favourite team or to help their friend who is doing much better than they are. Having a mechanism to detract from that is a good thing IMO.

    The veto window should be 24 hours though. I'd like to see waiver claims processed on Wednesdays instead of Thursdays like basically every other fantasy league in the world.

    I'm naturally in favour of PPR or half point PPR in fantasy. I just think it's a much more fun game. That said I kinda like that this league uses standard scoring - combined with 16 team leagues it makes it a really tough environment.

    I don't feel too strongly about FAAB bidding vs waivers. Both have their advantages. If we use waivers I like that we don't reset them. I think it adds some strategy to waiver claims.

    On waivers my main issue, and I don't think this is even something that can be fixed, is around the post season. For the playoffs only teams still in the main competition should be able to make claims IMO or they should at least be given top priority. I'm in the Championship Game in Div 5 this weekend (humble brag) but I'm 11th in waiver priority. I've no issue at all with people in consolation brackets playing properly but the main bracket should get priority.

    Overall this is a great set-up here but I don't think we should be afraid to tweak things if they can make it better.


  • #47
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    OK, So what do we want to vote on?

    1. Remove Veto period for a trade
    2. Change to PPR Scoring
    3. Change Tie Breaking Scenario to Points for
    4. Change Waiver order to reset every week

    Anything else?

    People have mentioned changing from NFL.com or removing the flex but I didn't see much support or discussion on those suggestions so I'm not inclined to include them.

    Each option needs to have only 2 possible outcomes, 3 or more leads to too many arguments about the results.


  • #48
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,477 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    How about getting rid of the flex position and leaving it at 2 WR and 2 RB? There are sixteen players in each league. There are weeks when between injuries and bye weeks it's hard to put out a full team.


  • #49
    BarryC21
    Registered Users Posts: 111 ✭✭BarryC21


    Yeah I'd like a vote on this as well as the other 4.


  • #50
    genericgoon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,671 ✭✭✭genericgoon


    Personally, would prefer to simply reduce waiting time for trades but see that's probably too minor a proposition. Also no item for waivers (moving to FAAB, reset every week or status quo?)


  • #51
    BaronVon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭BaronVon


    1. Move to FAAB for waivers. Did this in my home league, and it's the single greatest thing we have done. Adds an extra dimension to strategy , and help reduces lads sticking in waiver claims for the sake of it.

    2. Not too bothered, but the Points For tie breaker is probably fairer. The aim is to score points. When you have a 3 or 4 way tie, you need NASA to explain who wins that tie breaker, and why!

    3. Not a great fan of PPR, tried it in 1 league this year, but we're gonna change back. You get some ridicously high scores......

    Other than that, I'd be happy enough


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    genericgoon wrote: »
    Personally, would prefer to simply reduce waiting time for trades but see that's probably too minor a proposition. Also no item for waivers (moving to FAAB, reset every week or status quo?)

    Apologies, I missed the waivers question. I'm not sure it's a good idea to change the poll at this stage given a significant number of people have voted already.
    BaronVon wrote: »
    1. Move to FAAB for waivers. Did this in my home league, and it's the single greatest thing we have done. Adds an extra dimension to strategy , and help reduces lads sticking in waiver claims for the sake of it.

    2. Not too bothered, but the Points For tie breaker is probably fairer. The aim is to score points. When you have a 3 or 4 way tie, you need NASA to explain who wins that tie breaker, and why!

    3. Not a great fan of PPR, tried it in 1 league this year, but we're gonna change back. You get some ridicously high scores......

    Other than that, I'd be happy enough

    Could you vote via the surveymonkey link in the other thread?


  • #53
    rogeyspoint
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭rogeyspoint


    Just to get some clarity on draft order. Last year in a league with 16 teams and 4 division. I was confused with my draft order at each round, i.e. 1st Round - 16th place, 2nd round - 1st place, 3rd round - 16th place, 4th round - 1st place and so on, it stayed in the same format? Was this the way the draft was supposed to be, was it fair? Thanks.


  • #54
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    Yes, it's called a snake draft, your position in round one is inverted in round 2. So if your pick first in round 1 you will be last in round 2. If you pick 5th in round 1 you will be 12th in round 2.

    it's so that the same person doesn't have the first pick in every round and to balance out the advantages of getting a high draft pick. If you end up picking first it will be 30 picks before you pick again.


  • #55
    rogeyspoint
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭rogeyspoint


    Thanks Adrian. Is it supposed to follow that format for rd 1, 2, 3, 4 and son one. Anyways, didn't realise that it was snake draft last year as the previous year, my league draft order to my recollection was random draft order? Thanks


  • #56
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    The first round order is random generated, from then on if pick 1st in round 1 you will pick 16th in round 2, 1st in round 3,16th in round 4 and so on!


  • #57
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    I'm going to close this off at 5pm tomorrow.


  • #58
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    Results:

    Responses: 53 (Duplicates were removed)

    Question 1:

    What rules should be used for breaking Ties?

    Leave as Head to Head - 40.38%
    Change to Points Scored - 59.62%

    Question 2:

    Trade Waiting Period

    Leave as Currently Setup - 52.83%
    Automatically Process the Trade - 47.17%

    Question 3:

    Move from Standard Scoring to PPR

    Keep current Scoring - 46.15%
    Change to PPR (1 point per reception) - 53.85%

    Question 4:

    Remove the Flex Position?

    Keep current setup - 69.81%
    Remove the Flex option - 30.19%


  • #59
    In Exile
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭In Exile


    adrian522 wrote: »
    Results:

    Responses: 53 (Duplicates were removed)

    Question 1:

    What rules should be used for breaking Ties?

    Leave as Head to Head - 40.38%
    Change to Points Scored - 59.62%

    Question 2:

    Trade Waiting Period

    Leave as Currently Setup - 52.83%
    Automatically Process the Trade - 47.17%

    Question 3:

    Move from Standard Scoring to PPR

    Keep current Scoring - 46.15%
    Change to PPR (1 point per reception) - 53.85%

    Question 4:

    Remove the Flex Position?

    Keep current setup - 69.81%
    Remove the Flex option - 30.19%


    Thanks for all the hard work Adrian. Disappointing to see we're moving to ppr. I thought what we had was something very unique but can see the upside too.


  • #60
    massdebater
    Registered Users Posts: 2,251 ✭✭✭massdebater


    Very surprised to see the trade wait period to be kept the same. 48+ hour wait time will likely reduce trading again. Thanks for organising all the responses! :)


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Hoki
    Registered Users Posts: 2,515 ✭✭✭Hoki


    massdebater wrote: »
    Very surprised to see the trade wait period to be kept the same. 48+ hour wait time will likely reduce trading again. Thanks for organising all the responses! :)

    Yea, that one is a shocker imo. There's no benefit to that long of a delay. If it was even reduced to 24 hrs it wouldn't be as bad - oh well, democracy rules!


Advertisement