Week 17
12/29/05
Last Week's Question
In last week’s column,
I discussed a retroactive scoring adjustment that involved the Colt
defense in Week 15. San Diego’s Drayton Florence intercepted
a pass by Peyton Manning, but subsequently fumbled the ball, which
was recovered the Colts, who obviously still had their offensive
players on the field. Initially, my league-hosting service, which
happens to be RTSports.com for the league in question, credited
the Colt defense with a fumble (which is worth 3 points in my league).
A day or two after the game, however, RTSports ruled that since
the Colt defense was not on the field at the time of the fumble,
it should not be awarded any points for the turnover. The result
was that an owner in my league who had won our championship by the
score of 105 to 103 suddenly found himself proclaimed the loser
(103-102).
In my article, I didn’t mention that pretty much the exact
same thing happened with the Bear defense because that defense wasn’t
involved in our championship. But it was an important development
for one reader, Brian, who wrote:
I lost a
game this past weekend by .3 (109.6 to 109.3). I lost because
the Bear Defense was credited with a fumble recovery that was
analogous to the Colts example you discussed. In the Bears’
game, Rex Grossman was intercepted by the Falcon defense. The
Falcon defender then fumbled, and Justin Gage (a wideout for Chicago)
recovered for the Bears.
Initially, this recovery was credited to the Bear defense—giving
my opponent 1 additional point.
The software we use in our league has not recognized any
scoring changes for either the Colts fumble recovery or the
Bears recovery. I was wondering where I could find scoring corrections
for the NFL that may not be recognized by our league software.
I can't believe our league has not recognized the Colts
scenario that you describe in your article.
Your thoughts?
Well Brian, my thoughts are that leagues have to play by whatever
rules they agree upon in advance. If your league rules specify that
you will be bound by the software you use, then that would appear
to be the end of the matter. Unless your software service corrects
the score, you probably have no choice but to swallow the bitter
pill of your (arguably unfair) defeat. If you have no such rule
in place, then you can presumably make your case based on how such
plays were scored in other leagues. To the best of my knowledge,
the single most authoritative and respected provider of statistical
information concerning the NFL is Stats Inc. I haven’t looked
into the way that Stats Inc. categorized the turnovers in the games
involving the Colts and the Bears, but if I were you, I would request
that my league commissioner consider overturning the score in the
game if Stats Inc. does not credit the turnover in question to the
Bear defense. Your opponent will presumably be opposed to such a
review, so your best bet might well be to ask the commissioner to
put the matter to a vote within your league. A reader named
Mike wrote in to explain how the scoring in his league is a matter
of constant scrutiny within the league—but a matter that
operates according to a fairly stable timeline:
To answer your question about how to handle retroactive
scoring corrections, our pool is not unlike how you post scoring
on your Fantasy Football Today website. That is, after the week's
games are completed, I email everyone in the pool a "Preliminary
Scoring Summary", and it is always subject to quality control
by the other Commissioners. They cross-check my numbers and call
me to correct little mistakes, such as the most often missed items
including two-point conversions, rushing TD's by wide receivers,
or passing TD's by running backs. Any other members of the pool
who notices a mistake, usually with respect to their own franchise,
may also call or email with corrections. By the time I am ready
to post a roster for our weekly meetings on Thursday night, I
assume that quality control has performed its duty. The scoring
totals are final for the previous week, and weekly winnings are
distributed. It's that simple.
As long as Mike has final say on which scoring adjustments to accept
and which to reject, that method does sound simple. The problem
that Brian might have with this solution, however, is that his opponent
would presumably be unwilling to accept the “correction”
that he would like to propose to his commissioner. Of course, the
most beneficial thing about the model Mike’s league employs
is that it would appear to keep owners in constant dialogue with
each other about the ways in which games are scored. It also keeps
the players in control of their league, something that Reggie argues
against:
In our league, the commissioner used
to email the final rosters out to everybody every week. Beneath
the roster, he included the rules for the league—including
our provisions for handling tiebreakers and disputed scores. He
stopped doing that when we moved to a league-hosting service because
all of the rules are posted on the website for anyone to see any
time they feel like looking.
I saw where you wrote that maybe it would be a good idea to send
out those rules to all participants in a league on a weekly basis
in the playoffs, and I guess there’s no harm in that. But
I don’t see how it would make any difference. Anything that
people send me over and over just ends up getting ignored anyway,
so it’s not like everybody’s going to reread the rules
just because they’re in the playoffs.
My take on your buddy’s problem is this: Tough luck, but
them’s the breaks. If you belong to a league-hosting service,
I think there’s an implicit agreement to abide by the rulings
of that service. Even if everybody in a league disagrees with
the way that service scores things, I say they have to live with
it because otherwise what is the point of having a service to
do your scoring for you?
In my opinion, the Colt defense shouldn’t have gotten credit
for that fumble, so your hosting service got it right. But if
your service had credited the Indy D with the fumble, then that’s
what you would have to live with because that’s what you’re
paying for.
Reggie seems to be speaking on behalf of whoever it was that beat
Brian. Considering Reggie’s strong feelings on this subject,
I suppose he might just be the guy who beat Brian. I can certainly
see the merit in what Reggie has to say, but I’m not ready
to swallow the notion that anything my hosting service does is something
I have to live with. If my hosting service has a some kind of bug
and accidentally adds 100 points to the score of any player whose
last name begins with ‘W,’ am I supposed to shrug that
off simply because I had as fair a shot at Kurt Warner as anyone
else?
I think hosting services are just that: services. In my opinion,
they should serve the needs of the leagues they host, not dictate
to the leagues. Therefore, if my league votes 12-0 to disregard
the “correction” concerning the Bears and Colts, then
I think we can award our trophy to the person with the high score
that we recognize—regardless of what the website says his
score was.
In fairness to Reggie, though, I can certainly see the benefits
of abiding blindly by the rulings of hosting services. Votes can
be pretty tricky affairs in fantasy leagues, as people cannot always
be relied upon to vote for what they think is right. They can vote
for their friends or against their enemies without even fully understanding
the implications of their votes. For that reason, I can understand
how Reggie, even though he didn’t exactly say so, seems to
be advocating the presumed impartiality of league-hosting services.
Additional Models for Playing Fantasy
Football into the Postseason
As I mentioned last week, I was unable to access some late messages
that reached me concerning ways to set up fantasy leagues for
the NFL playoffs. I surveyed a number of different approaches
to postseason fantasy football in a previous columns, but if your
fancy wasn’t tickled by any of those models, perhaps you’ll
be able to use one of the following. The first comes from Norman:
Scoring rules for week 17 and playoff pools
Team consists of:
1 quarterback
2 running backs
3 wide receivers
1 tight end
1 offensive team
1 defensive/ special team
1 kicker
QBS
1 point for every 25 yards passing
1 point for every 10 yards rushing /receiving
5 points for every touchdown
RB/WR/TE
1 point for every 10 yards rushing/ receiving
1 point for every reception
5 points for every touchdown
OFFENSE
5 points for a win
2 points for a 2 pt conversion
3 points for a tie
5 points if team scores more than 35 points
DEFENSE/SPECIAL TEAMS
5 points for every touchdown
1 point for every interception
1 point for every sack
10 points if opposing team scores 0-2 points
5 points if opposing team sores 3-6 points
5 points for a safety
KICKERS
1 point for every extra point
3 points for a field goal 0-45 yards
6 points for a field goal 46-50 yards
9 points for a field goal 51+ yards
For week 17 pool, add sunday night score for tie-breaker [ex.
17-0 dallas]. Week 17 pool costs $10 [winner take all]. Line
ups for week 17 pool must be emailed or called in to me no later
than 10 p.m. friday night.
Playoff pool costs $20. Payout is 50% first place 30% second
place 20% third place combined scores of all 3 weeks of playoffs
line ups for playoff pool are due no later than friday night
at 10 p.m.
This approach is convenient because there is no trditional draft,
and each franchise picks a new team each week (using anybody
available)—so teams have duplicate players. Use the score
of the last playoff game [last game before superbowl] to break
a tie. I’ve been running this league for 7 years now and
never have had a tie at the end.
Another reader, Kent, offers a much less complicated (but nevertheless
interesting) model:
I know this is a week late but what I do in the postseason is
let in as many people as I can. Where I work I get about 50-60
people in what I call the Fantasy Playoffs. I give everyone a
sheet, and they get to pick two QB'S, two RB'S, two WR'S, two
PK'S and two team defenses. Then we score it much like my fantasy
league I run, and the guy with the most points at the end of the
Super Bowl wins all the money. As the playoffs go, you lose players
along the way, and you are leaving two teams completely off your
roster as we only pick ten spots. I have run it for two years,
and it is very popular. I get people from outside our place of
work by the dozens.
Our own Matthew Schiff observed in last week’s column that
your last man standing/survivor pools should have been coming
to an end in Week 16. If you choose to continue these pools into
Week 17, you are introducing an element of weirdness into the
competition because teams that have already locked up their playoff
spots (e.g. the Indianapolis Colts) are unlikely to play their
starters for very long. Of course, you’ve heard me say before
that weird rules aren’t necessarily bad so long as everyone
in your competition is playing by the same weird set. With that
in mind, I’ll be providing this week’s LMS picks in
Matt’s stead. But before I get into the picks, I want to
thank Matt for his consistent, popular, and useful contributions
to this column over the years. We all look forward to the advice
that he will have for us in 2006.
#3 San Francisco over Houston
The Texans already have a great runner in Domanick Davis, so the
simple fact of the matter is they don’t need Reggie Bush
nearly as badly as other teams around the league. Nevertheless,
they might be able to trade the top pick in the 2004 draft for
some much needed help along their offensive line. For that reason,
I think the Texans will find a way to lose to the 49ers. The 49ers,
for their part, can’t guarantee themselves the top pick
in the draft by losing—as it is possible at the moment for
as many as 5 NFL teams to finish with 3-13 records.
#2 San Diego over Denver
In past years, Mike Shanahan has protected key players once his
team has locked up its spot in the playoffs (as the Broncos have).
Marty Schottenheimer, on the other hand, remarked to the press
this week that the only thing for any team in the NFL to do—whether
it is playing a meaningless game or not—is to play to win.
He told reporters that the only way Philip Rivers will play in
relief of Drew Brees in Week 17 is if Brees gets injured, so I
expect the Charger starters to have their way with the Bronco
second-teamers in San Diego.
#1 Buffalo over New York Jets
There are many picks this week that I like better than this one
(including San Diego over the Broncos and Pittsburgh over the
Lions), but since it’s Week 17, I have to assume that most
LMS participants will already have used such teams as the Chargers
and Steelers. For that reason, I’ll suggest that players
violate the cardinal rules of survivor pools by taking the visiting
team in a divisional matchup. As we approach the end of the season,
the Bill defense is learning how to play without NT Pat Williams
(who left for the Vikings in the offseason) and LB Takeo Spikes
(who was lost to injury). The Bills played well at the end of
2004 and are doing the same thing again in 2005. The Jets are
worried about the future of oft-injured QB Chad Pennington and
keep having to face rumors of the departure of head coach Herm
Edwards to Kansas City. New York’s players had their last
hurrah in the final Monday Night Football game; their mental bags
are already packed, and the Bills should be able to steal this
meaningless contest.
That will do it for this year’s Q&A. I want to thank
all my readers—particularly those who take the trouble to
write in with responses to the questions I pose in this forum.
Even though I can’t print all of the responses I receive,
it’s a real pleasure to get to look at the game of fantasy
football from so many different perspectives. I look forward to
hearing from some of you next season. But for now, good luck to
those still alive in their LMS pools and their fantasy leagues.
And here’s to a productive and rewarding 2006!
For responses to this week's fantasy
question or to share your LMS picks, please email
me no later than 10 a.m. EST on Wednesdays during the football
season.
Readers who want to have their fantasy questions answered live,
on the air, by Mike Davis are invited to tune into FFEXradio
on Friday afternoons at 5:00 p.m. EST. Archived
programs are also available. |
