__________The Future of Dynasty__________

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

12/30/2013 10:59 am  #1

Rule Changes 2014 Season

I would like to propose the following change in rules and/or scoring:

1- Eliminate fumble recovery points for offensive players. I just find it mediocre that offensive players are being awarded with positive points by recovering their own fumbles or another teammate's. NFL does not permit to make the distinction that only defensive players get the points that is why I offer myself to make the adjustments weekly to each game if this situation presents.

2- Change QB scoring:

- Remove negative points for sacks and incompletions.
- Remove positive points for completions.
- Increase TD positive points to +6.
- Increase INT negative points to -4.

This is a passing league and doing this point setup will make a more distribuited points to all players. Your studs will continue to be studs and the low-tier QB will give some appeal unless it is Eli Manning. Many sacks are credited to the OL and not the QB, lets face it many of them play with a terrible OL.

3- Make a rule that every week each owner MUST start an ACTIVE player:

1 x QB
1 x RB
1 x WR 
1 x FLEX
1 x K
Complete Defense. 

This season marked a low on owner activity and trading. Many owners played without active players on their lineup. A case can be stated that still by not playing active players the team still won, well that is not what Fantasy Football is about. It is to manage your roster as best as possible, either by picking up on waivers, trading or finding hidden value on a player. I will agree with owners that say that their team was plagued with injuries and didn't want to drop a player for their dynasty value. That is why I give the following change:

4- Add rhe following roster options:

a) IR spot goes from 1 to 2. This spot can only be use for non-designated players for return. 
b) Add 1 spot for IR designated to return/PUP. Like NFL rules this can only be used for 1 player per year.
c) Add 1 Practice Squad spot. This spot will be handled the following way:

After the draft is over and team rosters are set, an owner can choose one player to stay in this spot for the whole year, this player can not play until the following season. It is sort of a development spot but locks the player from playing throughout the season. 

Looking forward to your comments. 

Yo solo se que no se nada

12/30/2013 11:49 am  #2

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

1 - I understand (and share) the frustration of these recovering your own fumble issues but at the current state of NFL.com it is very difficult to do something against this or like you say you have to go over each offensive fumble recovery and change the points which is first of all loads of work each week and secondly I don't know if it is even possible to change the points in NFL.com?

2 - I want and gonna do some number crunching next week and see what changes like that really do. Especially with these things sometimes what you think is logical does not reflect in the data you get back so yeah.

Regardless of that these are my comments atm. I like the fact that QB who are accurate are being rewarded. Once again, I don't know if it's possible in NFL.com but it might be better to give them bonus points regarding their completion percentage instead of completion/incompletion difference. This also rewards QB who don't throw a lot but are accurate with their throws (which is mostly the case of mid-tier to low-tier QBs who are not in a high flying pass offense). I would keep the TD points as they are as if TD's are 6 then I think the gap increases between studs (who throw a lot of TDs) and low-tier QBs + now QBs who tend to run some TDs also have an edge (risk/reward and all). I agree with the deduction for sacks, mostly it's not the entire fault of the QBs but some INT are also caused by WRs and not directly by QBs. So I would maybe go from -2 to -1 because I think the yards lost by the sack also counts as negative rushing yards (not sure about this though)? I would keep INT at -3.   

3 - I don't really like forcing owners to play a complete line-up but in my opinion you force them to play a complete line-up or you don't force anything. So I'm definately not a big fan of this one active per position thingie... 

4 - Once again, NFL.com is limited and this would make it even more difficult with the RES and IR position... People were already having trouble following the rules in the start of the season so further complicating this is (at least to me) asking for trouble. I would propose if you force owners into a complete line-up than the rosters have to increase. It's dynasty for a reason so you shouldn't be forced to part with a good player you like because you have injuries/byes. You can make an extra IR spot but if you really are going to enforce owners to post complete line-ups the benches have to expand also. 

Both these 3 points (I think 3 and 4 belong together) are good to bring up and deserve their own topics  to see what's practically possible and what's not. to discuss them further I think after everyone has said their say. I would the rules to stay a bit transparant and not a load of rules on the side that can't be enforced by NFL.com automatically and have to be manually checked. 

Last edited by Gert-Jan (12/30/2013 11:55 am)


12/30/2013 11:58 am  #3

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season


1- We are rewarding +5.5 TD  and -3.5 INT when you take into account the 0.5 completion/incompletion/
2- I believe they do take a hit with the sack yards as the passing yards go down. 
3- You can manually ad or remove points in NFL.com 

I agree that if we enforce active players the bench has to increase. But only if there is injured players, othwerwise it is roster management. 

Yo solo se que no se nada
     Thread Starter

12/30/2013 12:17 pm  #4

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

1 - Well, that's why I suggest changing the completion/incompletion difference to a completion/incompletion percentage. If you wanna get the low-tier QBs closer to the studs than I think that will already do a lot. I'm against completely removing it as to me an accurate QB is more valuable than a QB who misses a lot of passes but because he has a high volume of passes still manages to get decent yardage so that should be reflected in the fantasy points.

2- well the passing yards shouldn't be affected as he doesn't throw the ball so if one thing would change it would the rushing yards but I'm not 100% sure if that's the case. I think that when the QB is sacked that they don't subtract the yards lost but I am not sure.

3- ah okay, so theoretically that would be an option to solve problem 1. Still, it would be a huge amount of work and doesn't really contribute to the transparacy of the whole thing. Just eliminating recovering fumbles is not an option as it is a major play for a defensive player... 

I can understand what you're saying but some players are IA for a couple of weeks and thus cannot be put on IR and especially late in the season it is mostly these players that owners don't want to drop but can't put on a IR/RES spot and thus have to make the decision drop a player you value high or take the risk and play with an incomplete line-up (which makes this league also a bit unique). So what do you do with those players? You can make a whole load of extra rules that have to be checked all the time like a practice squad spot and an IR short return/PUP or an extra spot if a player is IA or injured but not on IR etc. This is not even mentioning the fact that NFL.com sometimes don't even give the correct status about a player or are a couple days late with putting them on IR etc... So to me the most practical thing (if you would force owners to play full line-ups which is also a discussion on its own ) is increase the bench and thus the roster sizes.

If we would leave NFL.com and go to fleaflicker a lot of these issues (not all) can be resolved as it is a bit more flexible in all these things. But yeah, that's also a complete discussion on its own (and most people were against a move like that).


12/30/2013 1:01 pm  #5

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

I agree with gert... I mean, a lot of drafted , towards this point system.. I think we should leave the qb thing alone.

Don't let your mouth write a check, you and your horse can't cash!

12/30/2013 1:16 pm  #6

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

Amber, regardless of the point system that was agreed you were going to draft Peyton.., lol

Yo solo se que no se nada
     Thread Starter

12/30/2013 7:35 pm  #7

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

An offensive player who puts the ball on the ground should lose three points regardless of who recovers the fumble. If he recovers his own fumble he gets three points so it is a wash. Do you think Belichek is okay with Ridley's fumbles if an OL recovers them. Putting the ball on the ground should cost the player who does it.

Lorikeets 2013 8-6 1st Place Division 4
Lorikeets 2012 6-8 3rd Place Division 4
Does it matter which lemming is the leader?

12/30/2013 7:38 pm  #8

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

I like the QB rules as they are. The ultimate control over sacks lies with the QB. He reads the defense. He can audible the blocking scheme. He can scramble. He can throw the ball away. He knows the strength/weaknesses of each of his OL. If you don't like losing points to sacks, get yourself a QB that minimizes his sacks.

Lorikeets 2013 8-6 1st Place Division 4
Lorikeets 2012 6-8 3rd Place Division 4
Does it matter which lemming is the leader?

12/30/2013 7:44 pm  #9

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

The two teams that made the final both manage their rosters so that they don't have empty starting spots. It seems clear to me that carrying injury prone players costs owners over the long haul as well as in the short term. I don't have a problem with an active owner who chooses to have empty starting spots, I think it is foolish, but I don't have a problem with it. I have a problem with inactive owners who have empty roster spots because they don't pay attention. If an owner  isn't going to pay attention to their team, they need to have a good - and TEMPORARY reason - or they need to be replaced.

Last edited by rtretler (12/31/2013 4:14 am)

Lorikeets 2013 8-6 1st Place Division 4
Lorikeets 2012 6-8 3rd Place Division 4
Does it matter which lemming is the leader?

12/30/2013 7:56 pm  #10

Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

I do not have a problem with adding an IR spot or two. I think the development spot is a waste of time and energy. Rookies play more and more in the NFL. The Lorikeets made the final with several rookie starters. We dropped Quinton Patton cause he gets injured a lot. Da'Rick Rogers was on and off our roster on a weekly basis. If you want a roster packed with veterans, that's your choice. If you want a roster with youth, that's your choice. Veterans get hurt or age overnight and that is part of the game. Rookies don't start consistently and may not perform consistently. Having a lot of rookies is a choice. We make choices and live and learn from the consequences. I don't think that we should change the rules merely to insulate ourselves from the reality of the NFL - players come and go suddenly and those that manage their roster best win.

Lorikeets 2013 8-6 1st Place Division 4
Lorikeets 2012 6-8 3rd Place Division 4
Does it matter which lemming is the leader?

Board footera


Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum