NMA Fantasy Football

[TwinkieGorilla]

i think it's about time to ask the question: are we doing it again this year? and if so, who's in? and if so, let's actually say...if you ARE in...you don't cheese out like Stag and end up not actually competing.

please discuss.

 

[Brother None]

We had a lot of people joining and cheesing out, not just Stag.

It'll help if we make things easier, as in no IDPs, but I dunno man. I'm in, but I think our hopes might lie with just making a pick 'em league.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Let's do it up. But is there a better service we can use? I'm not all that up on the different ones, but can;t we get realtime stats without shelling out 10 bucks?

Also scale back IDPs. I like having them, but things like sacks and strips and shit were overvalued IMO. A sack is just a tackle, it's not worth half a TD IMO.

Still can't believe I lost it all by a nose to funnyelbows because Deangelo ripped of a 4TD game.

 

[Brother None]

The live tracking of stats is free on Yahoo! now.

Counting a sack as a tackle is weird, dude.

 

[Sander]

i think it's about time to ask the question: are we doing it again this year? and if so, who's in? and if so, let's actually say...if you ARE in...you don't cheese out like Stag and end up not actually competing.

Or like me. Partly due to the fact that Fantasy Football is slightly overwhelming for a complete newbie like me, partly due to the fact that I'm a lazy fucker.

I'll do my best to compete (and fail) this year, though. I know a lot more about football (like, actually what positions do what, roughly) now, at least.

And Yahoo!'s interface was pretty shitty as well. If there's a good alternative that requires just money to set up a league and nothing more, I'd be willing to shell out some monies for that.

 

[SimpleMinded]

Agreed, that pay bs was obnoxious last year and really killed some of the excitement for me.

I'd definitely like to do it again, hopefully we can get everyone on board.

I played on ESPN in another league last year and it seemed pretty good.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

sander, playing FF is a reallllly good way to learn about the sport, too. it sort of "forces" (in a good way) you to pay attention to games you otherwise wouldn't have been.

 

[Brother None]

sander, playing FF is a reallllly good way to learn about the sport, too.

It's how I was introduced to the sport.

Agreed, that pay bs was obnoxious last year and really killed some of the excitement for me.

I played on ESPN in another league last year and it seemed pretty good.

The pay BS is gone. In fact, after ESPN made their livetracker free, Yahoo! followed and did the same.

I've been over ESPN and wasn't impressed. Honestly, the differences aren't usually worth switching if you're used to one system. And I'm already in a Yahoo! league, and would really prefer not to have two sites to follow.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

The live tracking of stats is free on Yahoo! now.

Cool.

Counting a sack as a tackle is weird, dude.

I'm not saying count them the same, but I think sacks are an overhyped stat oftentimes. It's often an indication of an in

it sort of "forces" (in a good way) you to pay attention to games you otherwise wouldn't have been.

That's true, but FF itself focuses a lot on stat whores, who are oftentimes pussies and chokers and not the best football players. Like the sacks above, one dimensional players like Dwight Freeney get all kinds of credit for their sacks when they are actually shitty, ends. Little dude couldn't hold the edge to save his life, but his team goes up by 3 TDs, forcing the opposition to go balls out pass, and his outside rush skill (the only skill he has) comes into play. Racking up 4th quarter sacks against a desperate, gambling underdog does not a good end make. That's all he has. One trick pony, overhyped garbage stat accumulator.
Richard Seymour, Ty Warren, Vince Wilfork can't do that, they're too busy occupying two defenders to get a sack.
In that regards FF isn't about the best players, it's about the players the accumulate the most gaudy stats, which isn't of itself indicative of good football.

Sacks are overrated and overhyped because of their dramatic nature. It wasn't even a stat until the 80s when fags like Mark Gastineau started racking them up.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

oh, go tuck your goddamn shirt in.


i didn't say it was about the best players...i said it's a good way to get n00bs into the game. you start paying attention to the minutia, getting aquainted with individual players, began to understand how to point out and compare strengths and weaknesses in other players...and, as i've found even for myself...FF had me watching quite a few games i wouldn't have otherwise watched last year. and that's not to say that i was ONLY watching and hoping for the guy on my team. i mean, hell...i had Romo as my starting QB for the first half of last year...so i'd watch all the Cowboy games cheering for Romo but laughing as he failed and cheering for whichever team was playing against them...since i hate the Boys almost as much as the Vikes.

 

[Brother None]

Yeah, it's great for pushing you to watch games, though I still tend to select my games primarily by "good teams/teams I like" and less "teams I have players on". I misses a lots of 'Hawks games last year despite them being my fav team, partially because I had no Hawks on any roster, partially because they sucked ass.

Richard Seymour, Ty Warren, Vince Wilfork can't do that, they're too busy occupying two defenders to get a sack.
In that regards FF isn't about the best players, it's about the players the accumulate the most gaudy stats, which isn't of itself indicative of good football.

Yah. Goddamn stats. Who cares about shit like rushing yards, passing yards, touchdowns and turnovers and shit? Meaningless! Let's dump the whole stats system and instead give the keys to judging how good players are to highly biased Bostonites.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

*ahem*

Bostonians.


*chuckle*

 

[Violator]

wtf is this fantasy football? How do you play it? And how one can participate in?

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

I'm not talking about all stats, I was talking about sacks in particular and the way in which they can skew the actual contribution that one player makes over another.

Please, one of you, give me the case for why Freeney is better than Seymour.

If you were not playing fantasy football, but actual football, who would you rather have (in their primes)

Richard Seymour or Mark Gastineau?
Otis Anderson or Eric Dickerson?
Phil Simms or Warren Moon?
Belitnikof or Ochocinco?
Marcus Allen or LaDanian?

What's Dickerson's legacy? Gastineau?

One is a group of overvalued, overhyped, overpaid stat hounds who never won a toilet bowl, the other a group of hardnosed, clutch football players who's complete value doesn't show up on paper.
The proverbial intangibles.

There's a reason it's called fantasy.

And I'm not from Boston or Massachusetts. I'm from Connecticut (we're much classier), I can't stand Massholes, or the way the drive. Even the ones in my family.

But what do I know, I'm biased against losers and paper tigers.

 

[Brother None]

Please, one of you, give me the case for why Freeney is better than Seymour.

Why'd I do that? I don't think Freeney is better than Seymour.

And yes, yes, we've heard it all before. Do we HAVE to go through this boring meaningless "hur hur hur stats aren't everything" drudgery the moment someone mentions fantasy football? Fuck me sideways with a pole, but stats, whether you prefer pure stats or broken down by FO or others, are the only measurable we have. That's why they work in fantasy, that's why they work when discussing players too.
Intangibles are nice, but they're also bullshit. I've seen San Francisco 49ers fans rail against FO for predicting they'll suck the coming year, because "it's all stats" and "you can't measure heart". Bullshit. You're right, you can't measure heart, but that should logically lead you to the conclusion that trying to build a competence argument on it is bullshit. Unless you just want to go "hurf hurf hurf" a lot and let your obvious bias against the Chargers and Colts blind you (impressed you haven't namedropped Manning yet, by the way).

And holy shit, dude, I can understand if you hold it over a QBs head if he never won anything, but this "I don't see no rings on they fingers"-shit really doesn't cut it for any other position. You expect a friggin' wide receiver to carry his team on his back to the Superbowl? You kiddin' me? Heck, even with QBs it's meaningless if you don't consider the facts. Is McNair's historic drive meaningless because he fell one yard short? Is Moon's 1993 Playoff performance meaningless because of the Comeback? Think maybe the defense had a bit to do with that, too? Or maybe the fact that Givens failed to catch a pass that otherwise didn't have too much wrong with it?

Remember Cortez Kennedy? One of the best defensive tackles ever to play the game. He was defensive player of the year, garnering 14 sacks while consistently being double teamed. He was also playing on a 2-14 team that year. Does he have no legacy because he couldn't carry a series of shitty teams to the Superbowl? I hope you're joking.

I've heard this whole "Superbowl is the only meaningful measurable!" bullshit from New England before. It's true in a sense, as long as we're measuring teams. Trying to use it to measure individuals is obviously nonsense, but hey, it's convenient to you guys now that you're on the right side of the track.

You best not be sellin' me no bullshit about Eric Dickerson or Warren Moon not being damned awesome NFL players, though.

PS: funny thing is, I like hardnosed, quiet and clutch football players more than I like whiny stat-padders, too. Only I don't construct bullshit arguments around that dislike.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

wtf is this fantasy football? How do you play it?

tell him, wiki

read that. if you're not interested in reading it all, i doubt you'll be interested in actually participating. football's an insanely complex sport full of ever-changing rules, team-quality and player capability (not to mention chock full of injury after injury). you've got to not only be interested in the game, it's players, but play a good game of strategy as well.

it's good shit, loads of fun, and great way to give yrself some bonus excitement during the greatest season of the year (football season, duh!).

And how one can participate in?

well, i started this thread to see who was going to be interested this year. last year we had a few problems with a couple people acting like they might be interested, realizing how much more time-consuming and complex it is to keep in the competition, and subsequently stopped competing making it much less fun for everybody else. about 12 players seems to be the universally agreed upon perfect number, but 10 will work as will any evenly divisible number above 10.

it would appear we're well on our way, hopefully more people get interested. a few weeks from now would be when we'd draft (i'm guessing Kharn will want an autodraft...live drafts are a pain to organize and he and i are already doing it with a different league). anyway, somebody sets up a league (again, likely Kharn if he kept his info from last year) they send out email invites or posts the registration stuff in this thread. people join. people arrange their teams after the draft (this involves trading with your opponents or from the free agent pool) and then...you just watch the games and have fun. whoever's team collectively has the most points at the end of the weekend (or Tues. morning rather) is that weeks winner.

it's actually pretty easy to catch on...if'n yr willing.

 

[Brother None]

Yeah, I'll just activate the league from last year for this year. That'll transfer all the rules, then we can tweak, and I can invite all the old-timers.

We'll see.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Fuck me sideways with a pole, but stats, whether you prefer pure stats or broken down by FO or others, are the only measurable we have. That's why they work in fantasy, that's why they work when discussing players too.

Of course they are the best metric for a fantasy game. I'm just saying for someone who wants to get into and appreciate the sport, fantasy football may not give them a complete appreciation for what the game is all about.

And I never said it's so cut and dried that stats and heart are mutually exclusive. I'm pointing out that some guys are terrible FF players, but awesome actual players (Phil Simms et al) and some guys would make awesome FF players but are gutless.

The reality is the sport runs the gamut, and I call it like I see it, stats or no, SBs or no, heart or no.
Some guys have it all - Reggie White, Jerry Rice, Elway
Some guys have the stats and the heart to carry a team, but not the SBs - Marino, Barry Sanders.
Some guys are pretty good and have the rings, but were just in the right place with the right weapons around them to elevate them - Aikman, Bradshaw.
Some guys have the stats but are douchebag cancers - TO, Jeff George
Some guys play their whole career on shitty teams and never win anything but admiration from everyone - Butkus
Some guys suck but are in the right system at the right time to get a ring- Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer.
I call it like I see it. It's not all black and white.

let your obvious bias against the Chargers and Colts blind you (impressed you haven't namedropped Manning yet, by the way).

I didn't becasue my sound arguments take precedence over my so-called bias. But since you brought them both up, how many other teams have had so many 12+ win seasons with so little to show for it over the course of this decade? Hmmmm? Chokers?

Is Moon's 1993 Playoff performance meaningless because of the Comeback?

Giving up a 35-3 lead to a backup QB? All time meltdowns. Where was Moon in the 2nd half, Witness Protection?
And we're talking about the Bills defense here. Name one DB from that team and if you can let's all try not to laugh huh? Run and shoot - don't blame Givens, he had like 3 other nasty pro-bowl caliber receivers.

Remember Cortez Kennedy? One of the best defensive tackles ever to play the game.

He was a beast, not taking anything away from him or anyone else. Can we just call this the Marino Syndrome and move on? I'm not burying guys like that, see above.

but hey, it's convenient to you guys now that you're on the right side of the track.

We haven't won a Super Bowl in going on 4 years now...

You best not be sellin' me no bullshit about Eric Dickerson or Warren Moon not being damned awesome NFL players, though.

Dickerson was a punk, he's the posterchild for empty stats. The only legacy he left on the NFL was the Jherry Curl oil is his old helmet.
Moon was an awesome CFL player.

Yeah, I'll just activate the league from last year for this year. That'll transfer all the rules, then we can tweak, and I can invite all the old-timers.

Sounds good.
How do we seed the draft?

[/quote]

 

[Brother None]

Of course they are the best metric for a fantasy game. I'm just saying for someone who wants to get into and appreciate the sport, fantasy football may not give them a complete appreciation for what the game is all about.

Pah.

Well true enough, but I wish people wouldn't whine about it so much. A noob fantasy football player might think RBs do it all on their own, a second-year man will notice the O-line, a third-year man will notice offensive formations, coaching, and the little guys who make it happen, such as excellent blocking tight ends.

It's not like you can keep watching this game and not start noticing these things.

But since you brought them both up, how many other teams have had so many 12+ win seasons with so little to show for it over the course of this decade? Hmmmm? Chokers?

Dunno. How many teams have had 16 win seasons with so little to show for it? Hmmmm? Chokers?

Giving up a 35-3 lead to a backup QB? All time meltdowns. Where was Moon in the 2nd half, Witness Protection?
And we're talking about the Bills defense here. Name one DB from that team and if you can let's all try not to laugh huh? Run and shoot - don't blame Givens, he had like 3 other nasty pro-bowl caliber receivers.

Are you f'in kidding me? During the regular season, this "Bills defense here" had one shutout (against the Colts, ok), and in 6 games they held the opponent to 10 points or less. Heck, the only other team that even put 30 points up against them was San Francisco. Hell, that year, they had a cornerback and a safety in the pro bowl (hell, one of them intercepted Moon on that last pass), and you're chuckling about their secondary? Not to mention a lil' dude called Bruce Smith.

Oh yes, "all time meltdown" indeed. But you're going to blame that on Moon? Are you joking? Your vision might be skewed by Dallas ripping them apart in the Superbowl, but prior to that tear-up, Moon had the best run picking apart the secondary.

So, let's recap. He puts his team up 32 points, in the course scoring more against the opposition than any other offense had to that point, and we...blame him for the loss? Sorry, no matter how I twist and turn that, it doesn't make sense. What, he didn't throw for 5 touchdowns instead of "just" 4? HOW DARE HE?!

He was a beast, not taking anything away from him or anyone else. Can we just call this the Marino Syndrome and move on? I'm not burying guys like that, see above.

Hey, y'know Deacon Jones was only in the playoffs, like, twice? What a choker! "Changed the face of defenses for all time" my ass, dude ain't got the rings, I'm not interested!

Considering how incredibly highly subjective your little list is, isn't it better to just dump it wholesale?

We haven't won a Super Bowl in going on 4 years now...

Oh, poor things!

Dickerson was a punk, he's the posterchild for empty stats. The only legacy he left on the NFL was the Jherry Curl oil is his old helmet.
Moon was an awesome CFL player.

"I say so, so it's the truth!"

Sounds good.
How do we seed the draft?

Dunno. Randomize?

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

Dunno. How many teams have had 16 win seasons with so little to show for it? Hmmmm? Chokers?

Losing by three on the flukiest SB play ever isn't choking. Besides, that's what, a .750 SB win percentage this decade. 10 consecutive playoff victories (a record), and a 14-3 (.824) playoff record. You've never seen that before, and you'll never see it again in your lifetime. And the best part is, they ain't done yet.
Don't even pretend like that holds water.

Care to cite Manning's playoff record? How's a guy with all those MVPs and 100 QB ratings in the regular season have a sub .500 playoff record? Couldn't win a fucking AFC championship game until his GM, head of the competition committee changed the fucking rules to benefit their pussy style of play. There's a winner for ya! Daddy daddy, Ty Law took my ball, make them stop him Daddy! Waaaaaa.

Are you f'in kidding me? During the regular season, this "Bills defense here" had one shutout (against the Colts, ok), and in 6 games they held the opponent to 10 points or less. Heck, the only other team that even put 30 points up against them was San Francisco. Hell, that year, they had a cornerback and a safety in the pro bowl (hell, one of them intercepted Moon on that last pass), and you're chuckling about their secondary? Not to mention a lil' dude called Bruce Smith.

Oh yes, "all time meltdown" indeed. But you're going to blame that on Moon? Are you joking? Your vision might be skewed by Dallas ripping them apart in the Superbowl, but prior to that tear-up, Moon had the best run picking apart the secondary.

So, let's recap. He puts his team up 32 points, in the course scoring more against the opposition than any other offense had to that point, and we...blame him for the loss? Sorry, no matter how I twist and turn that, it doesn't make sense. What, he didn't throw for 5 touchdowns instead of "just" 4? HOW DARE HE?!

That was a complete team meltdown, but even had Moon won, he's still be a B caliber QB in my book, ring or no ring.
edit: That being said I will fuck some shit up with that team in Super Tecmo Bowl - best football game ever?

And the Bills D, the AFC East was a joke back then, Pats, Colts, Jets, Fins - horrible, play them twice each especially Colts and Fins in Buffalo - cakewalks.
Bills D sucked Bruce Smith notwithstanding. The architect for that team was Bill Polian of Colts GM fame. And he built the Bills same as the current Colts. High powered offense, weak but fast D.

Hell the entire AFC was noticably inferior for most of the 80s & 90s. Not exactly stout competition to prepare you for the SB as evidenced by the many blowouts we endured back then.

Super Bowls really used to suck as games go.
They've gotten so much more competitive lately.

Hey, y'know Deacon Jones was only in the playoffs, like, twice? What a choker! "Changed the face of defenses for all time" my ass, dude ain't got the rings, I'm not interested!

Honestly, I'm against that too. I hate how guys like Marino for instance never get a fair shake when they've done so much and made so many players around them look better, while others have just lucked out and had awesome weapons propel them to the big game.