Performance Scoring Sucks

[bolkonsky_ffc]

Forgive me for the background information, but I need to rant.

I am a 10 year FF veteran. I have three money leagues that I pay attention to. By far the most important to me is the 16 team Dynasty League with IDP's (3rd year) where I am the commissioner and founder.

Through my experience, I have learned that FF has an unusually high "fluke factor" compared with other fantasy sports. My goal in creating our Dynasty league was to generate a league where the fluke factor was reduced to a minimum. Accordingly, we have IDP's, contracts, salaries and a college draft. The team that won our league last year was clearly the best team in the league and that made me very happy.

The league that is driving me nuts, and the impetus for this post, is my "second" league. At the behest of the league members, I joined to help a friend who had drafted TB Defense with the 1st overall pick the previous year. The league is based on performance scoring (huge bonuses for long TD's and "Big Games").

Now, I realize that I brought this on myself by joining the league, but I can't help but get really f&*^%$% mad when AJ goes off and makes it virtually impossible for a team to win a game unless you have one of the other 3 guys that went nuts that week. I mean, I know he had a great week, but should that be determinative? Shouldn't a solid game from 3-4 players be worth more than one guy who goes ballistic (its not even close in this league)?

When you couple the scoring method with the way we draft (first off, drafts suck but that is a different post....we pick names out of a hat for draft position), it makes the entire exercise seem like a waste of time. We might as well have everyone toss $100 into a pot and have a monkey throw darts at pictures of the league owners to see who wins it.

Again, I realize I made my own bed here and that this is simply the nature of this league. What I want to know is, is there anyone out there who thinks performance scoring is a good thing? If so, why?

[proKrastinate]

Forgive me for the background information, but I need to rant.

I am a 10 year FF veteran. I have three money leagues that I pay attention to. By far the most important to me is the 16 team Dynasty League with IDP's (3rd year) where I am the commissioner and founder.

Through my experience, I have learned that FF has an unusually high "fluke factor" compared with other fantasy sports. My goal in creating our Dynasty league was to generate a league where the fluke factor was reduced to a minimum. Accordingly, we have IDP's, contracts, salaries and a college draft. The team that won our league last year was clearly the best team in the league and that made me very happy.

The league that is driving me nuts, and the impetus for this post, is my "second" league. At the behest of the league members, I joined to help a friend who had drafted TB Defense with the 1st overall pick the previous year. The league is based on performance scoring (huge bonuses for long TD's and "Big Games").

Now, I realize that I brought this on myself by joining the league, but I can't help but get really f&*^%$% mad when AJ goes off and makes it virtually impossible for a team to win a game unless you have one of the other 3 guys that went nuts that week. I mean, I know he had a great week, but should that be determinative? Shouldn't a solid game from 3-4 players be worth more than one guy who goes ballistic (its not even close in this league)?

When you couple the scoring method with the way we draft (first off, drafts suck but that is a different post....we pick names out of a hat for draft position), it makes the entire exercise seem like a waste of time. We might as well have everyone toss $100 into a pot and have a monkey throw darts at pictures of the league owners to see who wins it.

Again, I realize I made my own bed here and that this is simply the nature of this league. What I want to know is, is there anyone out there who thinks performance scoring is a good thing? If so, why?

i too think that sometimes really big games outweigh too much on someones team. For instance, in my work league, Culpepper had 75.83 points last week. Thats insane. Our league average for a given week is about 90 - 115 points. Needless to say Culpepper won that match. Even though this leagues scoring is a little bit different in terms of "Performance", it still sucks. In another example you have a running back that gets stuffed all day, running a measily 20 yards on 8 carries. But he catches 7 passes for 40 yards. He has just scored just as many points as the runningback who rushed for 150 yards and caught 2 passes for 10. How does that make sense?