has quickly become a game called "Kicker Blackjack."
There's nothing wrong with that since the rules allow it. Yes, it is virtually impossible to get 21 without a kicker, but people are fielding entire teams of kickers since most score about 7 points a game. But, I feel this isn't a very trying test of a person's ability to get close to the number of 21 with the huge amount of skill players to choose from.
Almost 38% of the members fielding Blackjack teams last week had teams entirely made up of kickers - and so far this week almost 50% have two or three kickers making up their team.
As I said before, it's playing by the rules, but (and I'm hoping not to hurt any feelings here) to me that's "wimping out."
The original idea and game set forth by MCG321 said that a team would consist of no more or less than four players - a RB, a WR, a K, and a "wild card" player. I would assume that this meant not "scrub" players either...meaning the people on your team would be "fantasy football usable" players. That means you would have to choose your players wisely as to have some that you think would score points and others that you don't think would score.
Heck, you could still essentially field an "all kicker" team by picking two skill players (and not second stringers) you thought wouldn't score and two kickers who you thought would do well. But, at least the chance was there that you could be wrong and bust. The way things are set up now, you could play two kickers that you know will get at least 8 points (Akers and someone else) and almost be guaranteed 16 - 20 points every time. You take away much of the possibility (and the chance of the game) of busting by not picking any RB's or WR's.
Before someone asks, I understand determining the limits of a "scrub" player would be somewhat difficult as well. I don't know if you've ever played "Three Card Poker" at a casino, but in that game you can't win extra money if the dealer doesn't have a "qualified" hand. I think a RB who gets 10 carries/game and a WR who gets 3 catches/game wouldn't be a "scrub" player for the most part. As long as the player you picked got to those numbers, the player would "qualify" and therefore your blackjack "hand" would be scored. If both the RB and WR on your team don't "qualify," your hand would not be scored. That would eliminate people picking two backups that would never play in the game, and it would at least create the chance of a player busting by trying to pick only kickers.
I'm not writing this because I'm mad that I'm not winning; I'm doing as good as I would expect to do. But, I'm trying to at least field a team with one RB and one WR and one or two K's every week. This at least shows that I'm thinking about which players I think will score a TD and what kicker(s) could get the nine additional points I need for a blackjack. Granted, it still might not be living by the original rules, but at least it's more challenging than picking 2 or 3 kickers and bringing in 15 points every week...
So, what does this "rant" boil down to? I'd like to see the rules switched up for Cafe Blackjack next year.
I think it's just too easy for people to "copycat" players when they know they can pick two kickers and score well. By forcing players to pick RB's and WR's (and again I reiterate, not scrubs), the game becomes a lot more entertaining and thought provoking because you have to determine who you think may or may not score TD's that week.
End of rant.
I'm expecting a major hammer to fall down on me, so please leave your comments/rage/whatever here. I hope what I said didn't totally offend anyone, and I'll still play the game either way because it is fun and something to think about every week. I just wanted to give another perspective on how the game is shaking out in its inaugural season.