So now that most of the FF leagues are over (I know there are a few more off seasons) I would like to propose a new rule for scoring next year, But in addition to this I think this thread would be a good place to open discussion about things that should be changed in the ways leagues run, scored, etc. Now that we have been doing this for a few years it is time for us to get organized more then we are.
my rule change: I propose that every person’s score in each event is divided by the number of teams they have picked for that event. Too many times I have seen people win events just because they got lucky and got the 1 winner of the chairmans and the event, but the other teams did nothing. In other Fantasy sports you get points from your entire team, not just one player. Thus by taking the average score of all of your teams it will be factoring all of your picks into the score regardless how they performed. Now in the end I feel like this will make the scores alot more fair and takes away from winning an entire league just because the random number generator likes your name.
One small problem–since everyone picks the same number of teams, everyone’s score is divided by the same number, resulting in the same people winning whether you divide or not. (Unless I’m missing something, that is.)
I think the regional scoring is about right–a balanced team will shine, while a team strong in just one aspect will do decently. Here’s my data from the Palmetto league:
As you can see, 11’s scoring in several areas racked up far more points than Chairman’s winner 1398 did. I don’t think anyone on that list is particularly out of whack. On-the-field performance will get you far, but a good balance will go all the way. Consider the three regional winners, 11, 247, and 1251. All of them scored a shiny 30 points for winning the regional, and eight more for the high match score, but 11 also had a nice seeding and an Imagery award, which was enough to propel them to the top. 1251 and 247 didn’t perform as well in the qualification rounds, and that pulled them lower in relation to their alliance partner.
Note that I counted 11/247/1251’s High Match Score as an award, since that’s how it best fit my spreadsheet.
Some might say that the Championship Chairman’s Award is high, but I think it’s fine–bringing home the clock earns 80 points, while winning the Championship (which requires winning a division) scores 60 in total (25 for the division, 35 for Einstein). EI in Atlanta should be higher (45 in Preseason–I’d say add at least 20 to that number), and there needs to be a CA Honorable Mention award. (It gets you a return trip to Atlanta, so I’m inclined to make it 60 as well.) With so many great teams on that level, you’re not going to have easy picking for these awards.
You don’t get points in fantasy football, baseball, basketball, hockey, soccer, golf, or auto racing for being the most inspiring player. Why do we get them in fantasy FIRST?
Because I decided that all of FIRST matters as much as what happens on the field. It has long been concluded that FIRST is very different from traditional sports so why am I going to treat Fantasy FIRST as they are?
You can always make a separate field results only league if it’s really that important. Fantasy FIRST is pretty free from to allow such variations but as long as I am running a league all results will matter.
Most teams are organized into various groups: marketing, Chairman’s, website, animation, etc. Disregarding the efforts of those students, to me, is like saying that the kicker (or, given the size of some of those subteams, the whole defensive line) no longer counts in fantasy football.
edit: And, by the same token, teams that aren’t going beyond the robot are fielding something like a football team with no linebackers. You might get somewhere, but not as far as with a whole team.
I’m going to say why we need Chairman’s in Fantasy FIRST from a different perspective. The point values is a whole different discussion, but here’s why we need to keep Chairman’s (and all the other awards):
In one of my Fantasy Football leagues, points (including negative) can be acheived a whopping 28 different ways. Even if you combine the different ways to score touchdowns, etc, you still have more than 20 ways to score points. If you remove awards from Fantasy FIRST, you have a mere 6. Wins, Losses, Ties, Ranking, Selection and Elimination Advancement. Some would argue your WLT could be combined into Record, and Ranking is based primarily on your record, and is effectively “double scoring” your record (which is why is typically isn’t used in FantasyFIRST). Beyond that, due to the massive variables, WLT often doesn’t really reflect the caliber of robot a team built (401, while a solid team in 2006, really should not have been 2nd seeded on Archimedes, for example).
Now granted, an average Football player will usually not score points in more than 3 or 4 different ways, but there are also typically 6+ different positions in Fantasy Football. There arn’t any “positions” in Fantasy FIRST. By allowing awards to give points, you create more oppurtunities for participants to structure their alliances how they wish. They can go for the consistant team who should get a winning record and advance to the elimination rounds without a problem, or the team with a shakier robot, but a chance to win Chairman’s (and a skilled FF participant often knows some of the Chairman’s contenders). In a way, it creates “positions” for Fantasy FIRST.
