A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
I dont where to begin with these. Straight up ******ed points. I wont even bother. Ill let you try and work out why.
Fantasy 2022 - EMPIRE League - Discussion
- Thread starter Exe Gesis
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I dont where to begin with these. Straight up ******ed points. I wont even bother. Ill let you try and work out why.
- Aug 24, 2017
- 2,230
- 3,186
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
I feel like I need to say something here. I apologized earlier for stuffing up and not setting a lineup for a couple of weeks. It wasn't intentional or with any thoughts of tanking involved. My head just hasn't been in the right space to be thinking about fantasy lineups all year. I've always tried to put aside some time on a Sunday night to go over my lineups but not every week have I had the opportunity. One week I was even dead convinced I had properly set my lineup only to find I'd started a player on a bye. At the end of the day it's done and I feel bad enough already without page after page of it being bought up, that I've bought this league into disrepute or something like that. Has no one in the history of this league stuffed up their lineups before this year? Am I going to be the scapegoat for a longtime member leaving the league? Like lets put some perspective on this, it's a fantasy league. And yes its a paid league so there's an expectation that everyone be doing the right thing each and every week but you know what, life happens and things have to take priority over a fantasy league sometimes. Do you guys think I want to throw away nearly $30 every year just to get an earlier pick that I could well stuff up anyway?
Surely after I've apologized for these errors you guys could move on and just accept I made a mistake, not ram it down my throat every time I log onto bigfooty, and see another comment made about it. And its not like those 2 games I lost due to non-starters were a forgone conclusion that I would have won if (and that's a big IF) I'd set the perfect lineup. Against Stinger he had a higher potential points than myself and even if I'd swapped the 2 offensive players that were on bye I come out not even 4 points up. Lamar injures himself in the 2nd and scores negative points for Stinger. As I said, it was no forgone conclusion that I win that game. Also the fact I'm in an average division seems to be exacerbating the point. Even with an extra 2 wins I wouldn't have even been close in any other division.
Not sure what else to say really. Let's just get on with it.
Surely after I've apologized for these errors you guys could move on and just accept I made a mistake, not ram it down my throat every time I log onto bigfooty, and see another comment made about it. And its not like those 2 games I lost due to non-starters were a forgone conclusion that I would have won if (and that's a big IF) I'd set the perfect lineup. Against Stinger he had a higher potential points than myself and even if I'd swapped the 2 offensive players that were on bye I come out not even 4 points up. Lamar injures himself in the 2nd and scores negative points for Stinger. As I said, it was no forgone conclusion that I win that game. Also the fact I'm in an average division seems to be exacerbating the point. Even with an extra 2 wins I wouldn't have even been close in any other division.
Not sure what else to say really. Let's just get on with it.
shiny_on_top
Club Legend
a,c,d,a,a
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Thats fine, I had moved on and we are putting steps in place to make sure accidents dont impact the league in future so all good, was just making the point where you and Stinger thought it was funny this morning that it really isn't. Some people are upset enough to leave and will do so. Im not scapegoating you. Was just making it known what the situation is that we are dealing with, 2 people are likely gone, possibly 3. Hopefully GG (or others) can find the replacements and the league can continue.
I wont say another word if you and stinger dont.
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Gees you were having a good old laugh at Alpha during its tanking episode which was far more blatant and worse than this and now you’re telling Lenny not to post a laughing emoji.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #1,356
I'm sorry that people have felt scapegoated or antagonized by others.
I personally have no bones with anyone. I've always appreciated people have lives, or incidents pop up in real life, always unintentional.
So I hope everyone hangs in with the league, and votes changes in, as they are geared only toward ensuring no one feels like there's a lapse in league integrity, and no one feels scapegoated or accused of it.
That's my aim with the desired rule changes, even including the scoring, making it have integrity within itself.
Everyone wants a hugely active league, but it can't always be that way due to the above. As long as people's hearts are in the right place, which I believe is the case, and that they like the league and want to be involved long-term.
It'd be a shame if the league collapsed over 2022's incidents. Look at it like a silver lining to make for a better league.
I personally have no bones with anyone. I've always appreciated people have lives, or incidents pop up in real life, always unintentional.
So I hope everyone hangs in with the league, and votes changes in, as they are geared only toward ensuring no one feels like there's a lapse in league integrity, and no one feels scapegoated or accused of it.
That's my aim with the desired rule changes, even including the scoring, making it have integrity within itself.
Everyone wants a hugely active league, but it can't always be that way due to the above. As long as people's hearts are in the right place, which I believe is the case, and that they like the league and want to be involved long-term.
It'd be a shame if the league collapsed over 2022's incidents. Look at it like a silver lining to make for a better league.
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Alpha a cash league is it? Nice comparison.
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Big deal. Alpha longer running league.
00Stinger
100 - 7
tbf I'm stirring the pot with the posters who think it was a blatant tank as it was a toss of the coin result at best
I also find it super amusing with the importance of a couple of draft spot movements to some
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
B, A, D, A, C
00Stinger
100 - 7
tbf I find it funny that you feel the need to keep on bringing it up..........
And ffs Blacky is playing a blackmail game of 'if you don't change the league to how I want it, I'm out' so i'm not sure why you seem so concerned that 1 of 16 players is leaving.
I joined 3 years years ago and this will be the second player moving on in the that time so it's hardly a case of the league falling apart. Who are the others leaving?
shiny_on_top
Club Legend
Geez that’d be a shame. Half the division leave in one offseason after we’ve been rivals for the best part of 10 years. I think J Shuttlesworth may have been a year or two after the league started but a long time none the less.
Sadly not sure if any of us have won it… Happy to stand corrected.
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Can we get more detail on the scoring changes if it’s voted in? Worse thing we can do is give defenders more points. Balance seems right as is so may need further voting/discussion on actual changes
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
From memory
Higher points on sacks for LBs, which is good as edge rushers who play in a 3-4 are actually worth rostering. Stops players becoming worthless when MFL changes their position based on a teams base defense. (would be so much easier if MFL had Edge and IDL like every other site pretty much does now)
DEs getting a slight buff to be similar to DTs who score much better
Last edited:
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
TheGreatBarryB these are the two most accurate posts of planned hybrid scoring details.
The offensive points will stay the same, we all argued against that getting nerfed of some stats (team first downs) last offseason
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Thanks. Got to be careful the changes gg implemented we agreed at the time were too much a hit on offence and too big a boost on defence. Not sure if that was only change to offence …don’t want scores across the league being too flat . Still not sure why we need the changes. Concern to me is people are voting for it and probably don’t really understand what the changes are. Anyway leave it to the vote
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
From what I remember, the pass rushers who have big years will score heavily. Like the elite offensive players. Could easily have a 300+ point season. Very rare though, TJ Watt and Aaron Donald were the only pass rusher I remember over 300 with the implemented changes. Couldn't remember seeing anyone else over 250.
I dont want offense stats changing. They should remain the same where QBs, TEs, WRs and RBs have more players over 300.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #1,370
What i will do is implement the scoring changes, and then people can assess it again like they did previously. It will take ages to implement it all again, but thats the only way for people to properly see it.
From memory, most people said....they were ok with the hybrid version but because id just done it without asking first, then scrap it and bring it up for a vote next offseason, that a number of people who said "no" to the changes said theyd say "yes" next offseason.
Anyway, I'll implement it again and then people can visualize it better.
From memory, most people said....they were ok with the hybrid version but because id just done it without asking first, then scrap it and bring it up for a vote next offseason, that a number of people who said "no" to the changes said theyd say "yes" next offseason.
Anyway, I'll implement it again and then people can visualize it better.
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Yeah but we said clear no to changes on offence so don’t worry about those
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #1,373
I will tweak hybrid anyway, because i think mobile QBs were being slightly disadvantaged in the previous hybrid version.
But essentially, the changes on offense were fixing errors in a few equations and literal typos here and there.
Little things, not fundamental changes to how they score. Especially now that points for "first downs" was reinstated (hybrid) there isn't a deal-breaking difference anymore.
I kinda remember some examples....like say Tom Brady scored 450 before, in hybrid he scored like say 435. Whilst Jared Goff scored say 160 he now scored say 175. And some players like RBs scored say 10 pts more. Many others were affected by say only 1-5 pts. It's all because of typos like fumbles and incorrectly working equations on bonus pts categories.
The drastic difference is that IDPs are more evened out amongst themselves. Which also was geared toward helping the MFL problem when a DT became a DE or a DE became a LB, it made that player useless to own.
Don't look at it as shamelessly bumping up defense and nerfing offense. But like reducing DTs to a more reasonable mark, and then increasing DE/LB/DB to that same rough mark.
DTs were scoring just a bit too much, so top DTs down from say 250 to 230.
DEs and LBs is where the big difference is, pushed up from say 170 before to 220.
CBs and S smaller increase to be around say 190-215 instead of 170-190.
The outcome of hybrid is that the top offensive players still score significantly more than the top IDPs. Like say 300-430. Whilst the top IDPS are around the 180-230 range across the board (dt, de, lb, cb, s).
As you go further down the list of offensive players,, the average and fringe, theres more evenness with the glut of average defensive players.
The top say 75 to 200 scorers is populated more equally across offensive and defensive positions.
But, keep in mind, IDP scoring was overhauled based on statistical re-analysis of the previous five years of NFL, and not just pulling equations out of my ass.
Eg, if the top DTs were getting say 20-30 tackles a year, and the top DEs getting say 40-50 a year, and the top LBs getting say 90-100 tackles, and the top DBs getting say 70-90, then creating new equations for tackles so that purely on tackles theyd all roughly score the same points.
Again wait till the playoffs end, I'll do the scoring changes, so that everyone can actually SEE.
But essentially, the changes on offense were fixing errors in a few equations and literal typos here and there.
Little things, not fundamental changes to how they score. Especially now that points for "first downs" was reinstated (hybrid) there isn't a deal-breaking difference anymore.
I kinda remember some examples....like say Tom Brady scored 450 before, in hybrid he scored like say 435. Whilst Jared Goff scored say 160 he now scored say 175. And some players like RBs scored say 10 pts more. Many others were affected by say only 1-5 pts. It's all because of typos like fumbles and incorrectly working equations on bonus pts categories.
The drastic difference is that IDPs are more evened out amongst themselves. Which also was geared toward helping the MFL problem when a DT became a DE or a DE became a LB, it made that player useless to own.
Don't look at it as shamelessly bumping up defense and nerfing offense. But like reducing DTs to a more reasonable mark, and then increasing DE/LB/DB to that same rough mark.
DTs were scoring just a bit too much, so top DTs down from say 250 to 230.
DEs and LBs is where the big difference is, pushed up from say 170 before to 220.
CBs and S smaller increase to be around say 190-215 instead of 170-190.
The outcome of hybrid is that the top offensive players still score significantly more than the top IDPs. Like say 300-430. Whilst the top IDPS are around the 180-230 range across the board (dt, de, lb, cb, s).
As you go further down the list of offensive players,, the average and fringe, theres more evenness with the glut of average defensive players.
The top say 75 to 200 scorers is populated more equally across offensive and defensive positions.
But, keep in mind, IDP scoring was overhauled based on statistical re-analysis of the previous five years of NFL, and not just pulling equations out of my ass.
Eg, if the top DTs were getting say 20-30 tackles a year, and the top DEs getting say 40-50 a year, and the top LBs getting say 90-100 tackles, and the top DBs getting say 70-90, then creating new equations for tackles so that purely on tackles theyd all roughly score the same points.
Again wait till the playoffs end, I'll do the scoring changes, so that everyone can actually SEE.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #1,374
All those figures above are not to be quoted. I can't exactly remember what they were. But just to paint you the picture.
The top offense score significantly more than top IDPs. But the average players are more populated together.
Because, you know, a receiver who gets only 300-500 yards a year is not gonna score much, but there are a LOT of LBs and DBs who get like say 50 tackles a year, etc.
In order for IDPs to be more even amongst themselves, and remedy the MFL position change problem, DE/LB needed a bump up. But again, i kept it reasonable. Established a mark of reasonableness. Eg, not like i made IDPs score 300-400 for the boner of it.
The top offense score significantly more than top IDPs. But the average players are more populated together.
Because, you know, a receiver who gets only 300-500 yards a year is not gonna score much, but there are a LOT of LBs and DBs who get like say 50 tackles a year, etc.
In order for IDPs to be more even amongst themselves, and remedy the MFL position change problem, DE/LB needed a bump up. But again, i kept it reasonable. Established a mark of reasonableness. Eg, not like i made IDPs score 300-400 for the boner of it.
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 95,774
- 140,920
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Cap will need to increase by that 10m we had planned to cover the IDP bump also.
