2012-2013 Mustang Forums Fantasy Football League Sign-Up
09-05-2012, 09:35 AM
#71
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 62
I think the draft went ok for me. My phone died after the fourth round and I had no way to plug it in. Autopick seems to have done ok except for drafting kellen Winslow. Looking forward to things starting off tonight. 16 teams is really deep. I don't know how I managed to do ok last year.
09-05-2012, 11:34 AM
#72
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 2,217
Upper division looks really competitive. A lot of close projected scores, not that it means much.
Lower division has a bit more separation, probably because of new players. I think my team may do work in that one, but it is indeed early. I have Randy Moss though so...look out.
Lower division has a bit more separation, probably because of new players. I think my team may do work in that one, but it is indeed early. I have Randy Moss though so...look out.
12-04-2012, 01:09 PM
#78
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 2,217
This thread has been dead! I've been ridiculously busy. Since the season is so close to being over I'll just use and avoid making an all new thread.
So, I'm going through and verifying the playoff matchups right now. I know last year I did it a bit oddly and it involved a lot of math figuring out matchups. I know how it worked frustrated everyone and we decided to change it this season.
My thinking this season was:
- Upper Division: Top two teams from each division are guaranteed a 1-8 spot, depending on record, tiebreaker being total points for, followed by head to head (or we could reverse these two...). Then the final 4 wildcard spots go to teams from any division and are awarded by record, then points for, then head to head.
Last year I broke it up into conferences and we had a team that was 6-7 not get in and a team that was 4-9 did. That would be okay if divisions played two games against other divisional opponents, but since divisions don't really mean anything in terms of who you play, it's not fair to make record less important than who is in your division. Does this sound fair?
Lower Division: 4 division winners get 1-4 seeds, and wildcard spots go to anyone who didn't win their division following the same series of qualifications outlined above. This seems like a fairer way to handle this than last year, but I can do whatever the group wants!
Other than that, has everyone enjoyed the season? The upper league has been incredibly competitive. All the points for are really, really close.
So, I'm going through and verifying the playoff matchups right now. I know last year I did it a bit oddly and it involved a lot of math figuring out matchups. I know how it worked frustrated everyone and we decided to change it this season.
My thinking this season was:
- Upper Division: Top two teams from each division are guaranteed a 1-8 spot, depending on record, tiebreaker being total points for, followed by head to head (or we could reverse these two...). Then the final 4 wildcard spots go to teams from any division and are awarded by record, then points for, then head to head.
Last year I broke it up into conferences and we had a team that was 6-7 not get in and a team that was 4-9 did. That would be okay if divisions played two games against other divisional opponents, but since divisions don't really mean anything in terms of who you play, it's not fair to make record less important than who is in your division. Does this sound fair?
Lower Division: 4 division winners get 1-4 seeds, and wildcard spots go to anyone who didn't win their division following the same series of qualifications outlined above. This seems like a fairer way to handle this than last year, but I can do whatever the group wants!
Other than that, has everyone enjoyed the season? The upper league has been incredibly competitive. All the points for are really, really close.
Last edited by HT; 12-04-2012 at 01:42 PM.
12-04-2012, 01:20 PM
#79
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 2,217
Another option would be to throw out division winners altogether and just take the top 12, or 6 teams from each league. I don't really like this because then we may as well just put all the teams in a big pool.
If we do it with division winners, then it will only really affect the lower league where there is a 5-8 team that will make it over a 8-5 team because they won their division.
My vote goes to include division winners and then adjust the season next year so that you play divisional opponents twice like in the NFL. Please post up what you would like for the following:
- Question 1: All division winners get in to this years playoffs or just the best overall teams?
Last year it was broken down into conferences (North/South, East/West). The top 2 teams from each division (top team in the lower league) were in and then the wildcard went to the top two teams (top team in lower) from that "conference" based on the same tiebreak order. It didn't really work because of the fact that divisions and conference were meaningless in the scheduling of the regular season.
- Question 2: First tiebreaker is total points for followed by our head to head record (if the teams played)?
- Question 3: Alter the season next year so that you play divisional opponents twice and then non-divisional opponents once, at random, or leave it random as is?
If we do it with division winners, then it will only really affect the lower league where there is a 5-8 team that will make it over a 8-5 team because they won their division.
My vote goes to include division winners and then adjust the season next year so that you play divisional opponents twice like in the NFL. Please post up what you would like for the following:
- Question 1: All division winners get in to this years playoffs or just the best overall teams?
Last year it was broken down into conferences (North/South, East/West). The top 2 teams from each division (top team in the lower league) were in and then the wildcard went to the top two teams (top team in lower) from that "conference" based on the same tiebreak order. It didn't really work because of the fact that divisions and conference were meaningless in the scheduling of the regular season.
- Question 2: First tiebreaker is total points for followed by our head to head record (if the teams played)?
- Question 3: Alter the season next year so that you play divisional opponents twice and then non-divisional opponents once, at random, or leave it random as is?
Last edited by HT; 12-04-2012 at 02:14 PM.
12-04-2012, 01:32 PM
#80
1) I think division winners is more like the NFL. I like that, but seeing as we didn't play twice like you reference in question 3...divisions are not as relevant this season.
2) That seems like a fine tie breaker.
3)I think if division leaders get in that it's only fair that it's set up that you play them twice in a season. Otherwise I'd say (regarding question 1...for next year)the top records get in.
2) That seems like a fine tie breaker.
3)I think if division leaders get in that it's only fair that it's set up that you play them twice in a season. Otherwise I'd say (regarding question 1...for next year)the top records get in.