2023 NCAA Fantasy Champions League

[ay2013]

Nov 18, 2023 23:03:45 GMT -5 uofaGRAD said:

I would need to think a little more before any sort of official vote, but I have to believe I’d be inclined to want a returner that takes the place of your first round pick (decided pre-draft order release), NO SECOND ROUND PENALTY.

But to Trojan's point about having some sort of risk, this really doesn't do that, it essentially just makes the first rounds picks, and which teams they will be on, all but known. We could always craft rules to give certain teams unfair advantages, but, IMO, the goal *should* be to craft new rule changes to make it competitive and fun but equitable. In this proposal, it doesn't really achieve that - It's just allowing returning teams the ability to keep the best player on their team for the next year. Currently, the draft rules are random and equitable - you *could* be #1 and get the ability to pick a Mariana Hayden or Jordan Thompson, of you could be #14 and have no chance at all, but the rule is fair and gives each team a chance to get those players. This new rule would allow the returning teams to circumvent the randomness of the draft, without consequence and could very easily lead to a situation where a team gets to have BOTH a top overall pick AND the best of round 2 - that would never have happened in any prior iteration of fantasy and kind of flys in the face of the equity of a snake draft. I could see a situation where IF a team pre-designates a first round pick, they don't pick in their normal 2nd round window, they pick BEFORE the 3rd round begins (essentially if you pre-designate, you pick at the END of round 2).

[uofaGRAD]

Nov 18, 2023 23:24:26 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

Nov 18, 2023 23:03:45 GMT -5 uofaGRAD said:

I would need to think a little more before any sort of official vote, but I have to believe I’d be inclined to want a returner that takes the place of your first round pick (decided pre-draft order release), NO SECOND ROUND PENALTY.

But to Trojan's point about having some sort of risk, this really doesn't do that, it essentially just makes the first rounds picks, and which teams they will be on, all but known. We could always craft rules to give certain teams unfair advantages, but, IMO, the goal *should* be to craft new rule changes to make it competitive and fun but equitable. In this proposal, it doesn't really achieve that - It's just allowing returning teams the ability to keep the best player on their team for the next year. Currently, the draft rules are random and equitable - you *could* be #1 and get the ability to pick a Mariana Hayden or Jordan Thompson, of you could be #14 and have no chance at all, but the rule is fair and gives each team a chance to get those players. This new rule would allow the returning teams to circumvent the randomness of the draft, without consequence and could very easily lead to a situation where a team gets to have BOTH a top overall pick AND the best of round 2 - that would never have happened in any prior iteration of fantasy and kind of flys in the face of the equity of a snake draft. I could see a situation where IF a team pre-designates a first round pick, they don't pick in their normal 2nd round window, they pick BEFORE the 3rd round begins (essentially if you pre-designate, you pick at the END of round 2).

this is what i envision when i think about returner leagues tbh, but i also realized i misspoke completely.

draft order in my returner leagues were NOT random. it was inverse order of standings from the season prior. so the top teams that normally had the best players got their returner, but then didnt get to pick until the end of the first round. i think what you said at the end would be a good compromise. if you designate a returner, that's your first round pick, and you "hypothetically" go in the first picks of the first round, therefore when it snakes, you're at the end of the second round.

[trojansc]

Nov 18, 2023 23:24:26 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

Nov 18, 2023 23:03:45 GMT -5 uofaGRAD said:

I would need to think a little more before any sort of official vote, but I have to believe I’d be inclined to want a returner that takes the place of your first round pick (decided pre-draft order release), NO SECOND ROUND PENALTY.

But to Trojan's point about having some sort of risk, this really doesn't do that, it essentially just makes the first rounds picks, 

I do think it is still risky. I mean, for example, if I had Sophie Fishcer, I'd just be happy to get her back and not care about whether or not I lucked out in draft order.

But then I have Tatum Parrott. I could easily see a scenario where I'd choose her as a 14th overall pick - but not as an overall #1 pick. Would I then choose to keep her as a returner or take my luck in the draft? But with your proposal there's no way I'd take her by having to miss 2nd round pick too. I'd be ok with freak getting a little luck by getting Fischer and pick #15 if that was the worst case scenario compared to the missing 2nd round pick scenario.

[ay2013]

Nov 18, 2023 22:49:21 GMT -5 vballfreak808 said:

I was thinking about it recently, having the possibility of an IR (Injured Reserved) spot on the roster like in other fantasy sports. I know we don't get the coverage and public announcements of injuries like other sports but if we have a player who hasn't played two weeks in a row (ZERO sets), we can move them to the IR spot and add another player on if they want to. And once that player returns to action, the following week that player has to come off the IR and then one player has to be dropped to make room for them (if they elect to add someone).

Just a thought. We didn't really have of an issue this season, but in the situation you drafted/added a good player but it's too risky of a move to drop them in case they do come back and someone else takes them. It's always a bummer to see players sit on the roster not knowing if they will play soon or at all the rest of the season

Or we could just have a larger roster all-together - I think vballfan17 proposed going to 18-20? I think it would make it easier than having to manage another list of players. 10 active spots, 8-10 reserve/bench spots. Also on the wildcard topic, especially if we expand the roster size, why don't we just go back to expanded conferences for the player verse instead of top 100? It would probably be easier than managing a wild-card spot - like do you only get one during the draft and its use it or lose it? if you drop the player or they get injured can you replace them with another wildcard? Is the spot always reserved for a wild-card?

The following conferences have had at least two teams in the top 100 RPI for most of the year:

P5: ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12(?), SEC
Mid-Major: A10, ACC, ASUN, Colonial, C-USA, Horizon, Ivy, MAC, Big East, Missouri Valley, Mountain West, Patriot, Sun Belt, WAC, WCC

I feel like I'd rather expand the player verse entirely than mess with a wild card pick.

[ay2013]

Nov 18, 2023 23:37:13 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 18, 2023 23:24:26 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

But to Trojan's point about having some sort of risk, this really doesn't do that, it essentially just makes the first rounds picks, 

I do think it is still risky. I mean, for example, if I had Sophie Fishcer, I'd just be happy to get her back and not care about whether or not I lucked out in draft order.

But then I have Tatum Parrott. I could easily see a scenario where I'd choose her as a 14th overall pick - but not as an overall #1 pick. Would I then choose to keep her as a returner or take my luck in the draft? But with your proposal there's no way I'd take her by having to miss 2nd round pick too. I'd be ok with freak getting a little luck by getting Fischer and pick #15 if that was the worst case scenario compared to the missing 2nd round pick scenario.

How do you feel about what I previously said, where you don't really "miss" your 2nd round pick window, it's just at the end of the second round.

[trojansc]

Nov 18, 2023 23:44:25 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

How do you feel about what I previously said, where you don't really "miss" your 2nd round pick window, it's just at the end of the second round.

So like, what you're saying is, let's say only me you and uofa picked returners. we would count our returners as #1,#2,#3 (and then I assume randomly) assigned draft spots that would mean we would pick again at #22, #23, and #24 (the last spots of the 2nd round)? I could be on board with that or with replacing first round, or even uofagrad's point about inverse standings/reverse draft order.

[ay2013]

Nov 18, 2023 23:52:00 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 18, 2023 23:44:25 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

How do you feel about what I previously said, where you don't really "miss" your 2nd round pick window, it's just at the end of the second round.

So like, what you're saying is, let's say only me you and uofa picked returners. we would count our returners as #1,#2,#3 (and then I assume randomly) assigned draft spots that would mean we would pick again at #22, #23, and #24 (the last spots of the 2nd round)? I could be on board with that or with replacing first round, or even uofagrad's point about inverse standings/reverse draft order.

A drafting example:

Actual Draft Order:

Round 1:

#1 - A (Pre-Designated)
#2 - B
#3 - C (Pre-Designated)
#4 - D
#5 - E
#6 - F (Pre-Designated)
#7 - G
#8 - H
#9 - I (Pre-Designated)
#10 - J
#11 - K (Pre-Designated)
#12 - L
#13 - M (Pre-Designated)
#14 - N

Round 2:

#14 - N
#12 - L
#10 - J
#8 - H
#7 - G
#5 - E
#4 - D
#2 - B
#13 - M
#11 - K
#9 - I
#6 - F
#3 - C
#1 - A

Round 3:
repeat round 1, then draft normaly.

I'd still propose that you have to pre-designate BEFORE you know your draft order.

[trojansc]

Nov 18, 2023 23:58:40 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

Round 3:
repeat round 1, then draft normaly.

I'd still propose that you have to pre-designate BEFORE you know your draft order.

I think that's good, not super harsh potential penalty with still potential risk/reward. I don't think i've heard anyone complain about being able to keep a returner, so, it could just be a matter of voting on which of these systems people think would be best. This would be fine to me.

I would be curious if anyone would change their vote from something they voted on before this season started. The most-close vote was whether on same roster or different roster for 2x matches per week, right? Was there anyone who would change what they voted on? I can't remember if any of the other stuff were highly debated. I voted points again - but I'm not sure how close that was compared to Overall W/L record.

[uofaGRAD]

Nov 19, 2023 0:03:40 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 18, 2023 23:58:40 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

Round 3:
repeat round 1, then draft normaly.

I'd still propose that you have to pre-designate BEFORE you know your draft order.

I think that's good, not super harsh potential penalty with still potential risk/reward. I don't think i've heard anyone complain about being able to keep a returner, so, it could just be a matter of voting on which of these systems people think would be best. This would be fine to me.

I would be curious if anyone would change their vote from something they voted on before this season started. The most-close vote was whether on same roster or different roster for 2x matches per week, right? Was there anyone who would change what they voted on? I can't remember if any of the other stuff were highly debated. I voted points again - but I'm not sure how close that was compared to Overall W/L record.

i'd probably vote for points lol

[uofaGRAD]

boo natalie glenn is back but as a 3ro player i think

[vballfreak808]

Nov 18, 2023 17:05:12 GMT -5 eazy said:

Nov 18, 2023 17:04:36 GMT -5 uofaGRAD said:

I’m not sure what’s up with Ifenna.

Glenn has been out for a while now though, but crazier things have happened. wouldn’t be shocked if they brought her back for Hawaii lol

Hopefully just as a serving sub for one point.

Well Glenn making an appearance but front row only

[ay2013]

Nov 19, 2023 0:03:40 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 18, 2023 23:58:40 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

Round 3:
repeat round 1, then draft normaly.

I'd still propose that you have to pre-designate BEFORE you know your draft order.

I think that's good, not super harsh potential penalty with still potential risk/reward. I don't think i've heard anyone complain about being able to keep a returner, so, it could just be a matter of voting on which of these systems people think would be best. This would be fine to me.

I would be curious if anyone would change their vote from something they voted on before this season started. The most-close vote was whether on same roster or different roster for 2x matches per week, right? Was there anyone who would change what they voted on? I can't remember if any of the other stuff were highly debated. I voted points again - but I'm not sure how close that was compared to Overall W/L record.

There really is just a problem with points now and it is that you just don’t have control over other people’s matchups - unless we all have to play the same positions, it just seems unfair to the OTHER teams… a team could actually have the best overall fantasy team, but opponents still stack against them, only leaving 1 maybe 2 toss up categories, meanwhile other matches people play the exact same lineup putting all five categories in play. Once it gets to the end of the season people at the bottom of the league could play to give more points to certain winning teams or keep points from certain teams so they can only win 3 categories.

[trojansc]

Nov 19, 2023 0:23:57 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

There really is just a problem with points now and it is that you just don’t have control over other people’s matchups - unless we all have to play the same positions, it just seems unfair to the OTHER teams… a team could actually have the best overall fantasy team, but opponents still stack against them, only leaving 1 maybe 2 toss up categories, meanwhile other matches people play the exact same lineup putting all five categories in play. Once it gets to the end of the season people at the bottom of the league could play to give more points to certain winning teams or keep points from certain teams so they can only win 3 categories.

I think part of that manipulation in the second part of the post could happen even in this H2H format (adding/dropping to target one opponent and not another)

I have three 5-0 wins this year, and none of them came when playing the exact same roster. One of them I was down 2 OH's and still won kills. I think those SHOULD count more.

OTOH, I lost 1-4 one time this year playing the same exact roster. I still do think that should penalize me more than a 2-3 loss, but I know some may feel differently.

[ay2013]

Nov 19, 2023 0:31:10 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 19, 2023 0:23:57 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

There really is just a problem with points now and it is that you just don’t have control over other people’s matchups - unless we all have to play the same positions, it just seems unfair to the OTHER teams… a team could actually have the best overall fantasy team, but opponents still stack against them, only leaving 1 maybe 2 toss up categories, meanwhile other matches people play the exact same lineup putting all five categories in play. Once it gets to the end of the season people at the bottom of the league could play to give more points to certain winning teams or keep points from certain teams so they can only win 3 categories.

I think part of that manipulation in the second part of the post could happen even in this H2H format (adding/dropping to target one opponent and not another)

I have three 5-0 wins this year, and none of them came when playing the exact same roster. One of them I was down 2 OH's and still won kills. I think those SHOULD count more.

OTOH, I lost 1-4 one time this year playing the same exact roster. I still do think that should penalize me more than a 2-3 loss, but I know some may feel differently.

But in head to head, you still control your own destiny - just win your own matches, regardless of the outcome of the other matches.

[uofaGRAD]

Nov 19, 2023 0:16:52 GMT -5 vballfreak808 said:

Nov 18, 2023 17:05:12 GMT -5 eazy said:

Hopefully just as a serving sub for one point.

Well Glenn making an appearance but front row only

this could prove incredibly consequential. debeer had a massive match that i believe wouldve taken huskerpower above eazy in both kills and digs as we speak, making it 3-2 huskerpower. natalie had a horrible match that wont make any sort of difference. aces and digs seem to be the path for huskerpower to have a chance at winning if ifenna doesnt play. if ifenna does play, it would be MASSIVE. her blocking could overtake eazy's, while also having potential to put up at least one ace. she might could even surpass glenn's digs.

CMON IFENNA!!