 |
 |
Not to be heartless, but... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Basher
Tape Junkie
62 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 11/13/2003 7:46:23 PM |
 |
 |
Not to be heartless, but...
|
|
|
|
| Oh well, those are the breaks. If you choose your team following a particular strategy not amenable with ties, then you know it going in and should accept the possibility. Hey, virtually everything is left to fate in this game anyway - you try to get as many points as YOU can 'cause you can't do anything about your opponent. So, as I say, if you follow a strategy, be prepared to win or lose. "Fairness" has nothing to do with it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
sPliTiN sKuLLs
Football Freak
3322 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/14/2003 5:06:24 AM |
|
|
that ignores a valid and important strategy
|
|
|
|
what sense is there in nullifying a standard strategy in fantasy football, just to break ties? i agree with the premise that the knowledge of the tie-breaker definition should influence the construction of your team, but i totally disagree that this by itself justifies the removal of a universally accepted fantasy strategy.
i think that the solution should be along the lines of what is used in the OCFL and Aces High, where the first tie-breaker is total defensive points by starters (instead of a team defense, 3 individual defensive players are started). this doesn't nullify the "stacking" or "handcuff" strategy, it is a fun reflection of the importance of defense, and it also can affect how owners evaluate defensive players before the draft.
since we don't have IDP in our league, what about adding Head Coach to the rosters? You would start one coach per week, and if that coach's NFL team wins, then you get 1 fantasy point to your team. In case of a tie, the first tie-breaker would be coach's points (1 or 0). The second tie-breaker could be bench points. the Coach idea was going to be brought up in the off-season anyways, and this could be part of the ties solution, too.
i also think the "total yards by starters" is a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
