Fortunately for Eskylo, the 2nd Stamps bye is on Week 20, and since this league will end on Week 19, he only has to live through one bye week.
What? Why should this league end on week 19? That would be unfair for participants having active players in week 20.
look at last year...when Toronto benched most of their players in Week 20. It's not uncommon. Teams who have nothing to fight for will most likely bench all their star players. Since it would be the championship game, it would be unfair...and since there are only 6 teams already playing on that week, I'd just rather have the Championship Game on a week where all 8 teams are playing...
Eskimos32001, this makes no sense. You say it would be unfair to have that week in the pool because only six teams are playing. But the reason these six teams will be playing is because they will not have played their 18 games, whereas the two teams on a bye will.
To make this pool fair for participants, you can't withdraw weeks. Players from Calgary and Toronto will have played one more game than the others, so you'd just give an unfair advantage to the particpants who picked a lot of players in those teams.
You pretend teams bench a lot of starters anyways, but right now, you have no way of knowing how many teams and which one if any will need a win in week 20 to make it to the playoff or win their division. You can't just assume starters won't play. If its the case, then that's a turn of events. Too bad. But if it's not, you scrap the finale.
I'm going to agree with third and ten on this, if the teams sit out players in week 20, well that's to bad. It's just another thing fantasy poolsters should take into consideration, just like it's taken into consideration in a hockey pool how much a certain goalie plays and who he plays each night.
Add my voice to Third and roughy....Things have to be kept on an even field.... although if I have a comfortable lead, I might rest some of my players for the playoffs!
Ditto to Third, roughy, and my new admirer Sporty.....
I agree as well, its is a 20 weeks season and the pool should be the same.
Aw shucks! :oops: :oops: :oops: You're young enough to be my grand daughter!
I wouldn't go that far......
db k. banks
db b. miles
thank you esk for taking the time for this league.
I agree it has to be 20 weeks. Why should anyone lose players because some teams MAY rest players.
it makes no sense at all that people who picked Calgary and Hamilton players should get an advantage
QB Calvillo, Ray, Mass
RB Edwards, Roberts, Williams
R Copeland, Cahoon, Vaughn
K Duval, Prefontaine
DB Ivory, Karikari, Banks
DL Stewart, Maxi, Davis
LB Strickland, Eiban, Gass
Mark me down as agreeing with Eskimo. Ive
always hated the benching of the best
players in week 20.
Okay, some solid points here...
Here's the new format I propose...
Add/Drop players-Week 10
Last Week of Play-Week 20
Only the Top 2 players from each pool advance into the playoffs. They will play eachother in the first week of the playoffs, and the winners of those 2 games will go head-to-head in the Divisional Semi-Finals.
Why wouldn't you make the playoff format like it is in the CFL?
Check this out:
The top three participants of each pool make it to post season.
On week 21, the #2 and #3 participants of each pool go head to head against one another while the #1 participants of each pool are safe from elimination.
On week 22, the winners of week 21 take on the #1 guy (or gal) of their pool.
On week 23 (Grey Cup game), the two last contenders go head to head against each other.
I believe that would be a nice way to do it because it really rewards the people who finished first of their pool, and it makes us go through the same process as our beloved players. The playoffs are about elimination. You have to be the best each and every week to keep advancing.
What do you think?
......I like that playoff option.....
Third and Ten's idea is a good one, but one question--no crossover? :lol: (only kidding)
...because then the Championship game is played with only 2 teams available. It would cause a low scoring, and one-sided score. It worked last year only because we didn't have keeper teams. With this format, you still have to take into account who's going to advance to the 2nd round of the playoffs, but there are still 4 teams to choose from.
Low scoring, maybe, but not unfair, as both participants will have the same option. It is not important to have a high score. What's important is scoring more than the other participant. Scores can't be as high as those obtained in weeks 1 to 20 anyways because there will be only one game played instead of three or four.
You could even cut the number of selections in half (one QB instead of the usual two, one RB, one receiver, etc.) so participants would not both end up with the two starting QBs and stuff.
You may even make the participants draft their team for the big final. Let's say the person representing Pool A finished the regular season with a score higher than the person representing Pool B, then the pool A person gets the first pick and they draft in that order:
1- Pool A
2- Pool B
3- Pool B
4- Pool A
5- Pool A
6- Pool B
7- Pool B
8- Pool A...