H2H League - Play vs. 2 Opponents per Week???

[ffb]

I play in a 12-team head-to-head league. My commish has suggested each team play against 2 opponents per week. You would start only one squad, but match up against 2 separate opponents each week and walk away w/ 2 wins, 1 win/1 loss, or 2 losses.

This is up for debate at our draft next week and I'm looking for thoughts, opinions, pros/cons, anything that would help me/us decide if this is worth pursuing or not.

Thx

[kinghill]

Why?

[ffb]

Why?

This is my question. Commish seems to think it will shake things up, but I can't find a good reason to do it at all.

I suppose if you find yourself losing to your first opponent by a very small margin (~1 pt.) but end up beating your second opponent, you at least take away a draw vs. a loss.

Doesn't this even make a difference in the end though? I don't think it does, but want to be able to tell my commish why.

[kinghill]

Why?

I don't think it does, but want to be able to tell my commish why.

Just tell him he's gay, then go to his house and punch him in front of his wife and kids. That'll show him.

[aqua]

The only time I have heard about this sort of thing is in leagues with an odd number of teams. I've never heard of someone choosing to do this just for the heck of it. The cliche "If it isn't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind.

Some of the best and worst feelings in fantasy football come when one team tanks and scores almost no points and it still manages to beat the other team and when one team scores the second most points on the week but happens to be playing the top team and loses anyways - even though they would have beaten any other team.

By implementing this sort of system, I think you are robbing yourself of some of the highs and lows of fantasy football. Sometimes the top teams need to face each other and someone needs to lose - and get nothing to show for it.

Also, and of lesser importance, this will eliminate/lessen the occasional strategy of just plugging in consistent guys when your opponent is depleted (or on bye weeks) rather than the high risk/reward players. You will likely always need to go for as many points as possible and I think that anything that reduces the strategy element of fantasy football is a bad thing.

Although I have a few more points against it, those are the main ones off the top of my head.

[Battlecreek Dragon]

I agree.

For the most part I think it will impact the 6 teams in the middle of the standings the most, but it will likely serve to tighten you league a bit from top to bottom.

I say, let the chips fall where they may. Somebody will whine about bad luck and all that every year regardless of how many games you play.

[Lofunzo]

Why?

I don't think it does, but want to be able to tell my commish why.

Just tell him he's gay, then go to his house and punch him in front of his wife and kids. That'll show him.

Right. That is some great planning right there.

Is there any site that would support this setup??

[ffb]

apparently cbssportsline will support this setup. this per my cmish, have not ck'd into it myself

[aman74]

Some of the best and worst feelings in fantasy football come when one team tanks and scores almost no points and it still manages to beat the other team and when one team scores the second most points on the week but happens to be playing the top team and loses anyways - even though they would have beaten any other team.

To me, that's the worst part of fantasy football. I would rather have things decided by skill and having a larger stat base to go off of would accomplish this.

By implementing this sort of system, I think you are robbing yourself of some of the highs and lows of fantasy football. Sometimes the top teams need to face each other and someone needs to lose - and get nothing to show for it.

They still face each other.

Also, and of lesser importance, this will eliminate/lessen the occasional strategy of just plugging in consistent guys when your opponent is depleted (or on bye weeks) rather than the high risk/reward players. You will likely always need to go for as many points as possible and I think that anything that reduces the strategy element of fantasy football is a bad thing.

Huh? Yeah, you have to try and put the best time up every week. You are saying you miss the easy weeks, I don't see how that reduces strategy.

To me, I'd be interested in Rotiserrie or total points rankings, but people aren't up for it and it has it's downsides as well. To me, this doubleheader may be a good compromise.

AOL supports it I believe.

[aman74]

Although with double headers bad and good weeks could be compounded.