Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


    
      
        Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
        (https://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi)
      

        the Gridiron >> between the 20's >>  The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
        
(Message started by: StegRock on Oct 15^th, 2006, 12:24am)

Title: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by StegRock on Oct 15^th, 2006, 12:24am

[smiley=soapboxer.gif]

Even though we all, even the most hardcore of us, deep down kind of know that playing in too many fantasy leagues bites, e.g., your rooting interests inevitably conflict, and it becomes too time-consuming, I never quite realized the sweeping negative or, at least, lame effect it can have on the hobby in a more general way until a phone [smiley=phone.gif] conversation I had with one of our esteemed members, WB, a week or two ago. By way of a question he asked, a stark "bigger picture" reality stared us both back in the face... He asked me, "When you play in a bunch of leagues, which one(s) become(s) the one(s) you primarily care about, emphasize if you will, and devote your thought and efforts to?" The answer, even to me, a guy who has never made it a practice to play in more than one or two leagues, was obvious: "The ones you are doing best in." And, while there might be those of us "bigger than that", let's face it... It's only human nature. And, in any event, even if doesn't go according to how well you are doing, even for a chap like me who is playing in just two leagues, there are no two ways about it, I care more about and put (slightly) more effort into one than the other, i.e. the GBRFL than I do JYJ's league (which I play in really just for "marketing" purposes). Bottom line, the more leagues you play in, the more leagues you play in that aren't getting your "best",... and exponentially so as more leagues are added to your plate, I might add.

Now, on the face of it,... whatever, right? But, when you think that reality through vis-a-vis the boom of internet-based leagues (at Yahoo, ESPN, etc., etc.) these days, it paints an ugly [smiley=zombie.gif] bigger picture. When you play in one of these multitude of leagues, you may not be playing against the "best" of anybody in the league, no less the bottom guys, who probably aren't even hardly paying attention anymore as they focus on the leagues they are in in which they have a shot. Hell, you might not even be giving it your best. At that point, what the hell is the point? Is that a victory you can honestly tout (like fantasy footballers are famous for doing,... especially in this faceless message-board forum environment)?

To make my point perhaps more lucid, let's tease this out to a logical, hypothetical extreme... Let's say you have 10 guys playing together in 10 leagues, and each is disposed to put in an amount of effort that parallels how well he is doing in a given league given that he is also playing in a number of leagues outside these ten. And, as it turns out each one wins one of the leagues. So, what have you got at the end of the day? Everybody's league victory comes against 9 half-hearted opponents (and probably 5 or 6 less-than-half-hearted opponents). Yippie... :-/ How hollow is that victory? Again, that's an extreme hypothetical,... but you get the point. This is an extreme example, BUT, in a way, our hobby could become dominated and even ruined (for some of us) by this mentality. I mean... that IS what would be the case if every (average Joe) fantasy footballer played in like a minimum of 4 or 5 leagues, and my suspicions are that that is NOT far off from the truth. In fact, I think the average Joe fantasy footballer is playing in quite a few more than just 4 or 5, in many cases none of which is his primary one, like the GBRFL is for me, e.g., and I also agree with WB that for the average fantasy footballer their efforts correlate to where they are in the standings. YUCK! :P So (if you follow and even just partially agree with that logic), what does that mean for the average fantasy football league out there??? They're lame.

So, the paradox is that while we think that playing in a lot of leagues seemingly expands the hobby even though there is an "ill" feeling to it, we are watering the hobby down by doing so. How fun is it to beat up on guys who aren't giving their all, MOREOVER, as WB's aforementioned question suggests, when "giving it their all" is merely relative to where they are (after the fact) in the standings (point being, at least for me, e.g., it is static; while I could, but won't, give such an excuse in JYJ's league, I can NEVER get away with such a cop-out in the GBRFL, and that's never going to change, so at least my opponents in each league, respectively, know what they are getting from me going in; it's not a fluid reality based merely on my position in the standings). At the end of the day, do we really want a hobby built in the spirit of "competition", but where the victories are so hollow?!?! How good of a "competitive" hobby can it be when you know that you likely are not getting your competitor's best when joining "yet another league"?

The ultimate irony, assuming the number of fantasy players remains the same,... as the number of fantasy leagues increases, the level of competition decreases (even though, deep down, we know that playing in numerous leagues somehow stinks)!!! So, next time you have yet another opportunity to join yet another league, follow your "instincts" and just say, "NO!" Try to get in one or maybe two well-established REALLY GOOD ones, and leave it at that... and help maintain the integrity of the hobby. Either that or, at least, shut up telling us about "THE" league you won (of the 10, 20, 30, whatever, you played in). ... By playing in extra leagues, you may be making the hobby bigger in a sense (i.e. if you are bringing new people into the hobby doing so), but you are not making it BETTER!

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Oakland4life on Oct 15^th, 2006, 4:57am

Well, I guess I will tell you that I am in 3 leagues, two of them on www.fantasyfootballer.com ( ;) )

When I personally talk about my "other" league. You are correct in the assumption that 5 or 6 of the 14 teams in my "other" league are sub-par participants at best. But, on the other hand I personally know 11 of the 14 members. So my victorious seasons with my "other" league is never hampered because of their sub-par participation in the league. Simply because their my friends. And who doesn't like beating their friends [smiley=woohoo.gif]

On any event, A couple of my friends and I the other night in my "other" league were having this similar dillema. "why don't those #!!@$ just leave so we can get some real competition in here, or just make it 10 teams?" Ultimately, we never do it because they are friends. Maybe my case is different than others, I have joined a random Yahoo league before, and that REALLY sucked. So that is why I have come here to www.fantasyfootballer.com ( ;) )

Quote:

"When you play in a bunch of leagues, which one(s) become(s) the one(s) you primarily care about, emphasize if you will, and devote your thought and efforts to?" The answer, even to me, a guy who has never made it a practice to play in more than one or two leagues, was obvious: "The ones you are doing best in."

Yes, I am dead last in BOTH leagues this year, (granted it is my first year) but in any event, I am playing with a lot of top teir fantasy football veteran owners. So this is kind of where I dissagree with the "The one your doing best in theory" While I do tend to lean towards my "other" league, that really does not effect my daily interactions with my leagues on this site. I am last in the GoTG because I have made some poor decisions, and it cost me the season LMAO. But in any event because I am only in 3 (one of which I don't have to manage) I DO have the time to make sound decisions, and do the work of byes, matchups, injuries, WW, etc,..... So I do see your point in limiting your leagues.

Quote:

To make my point perhaps more lucid, let's tease this out to a logical, hypothetical extreme... Let's say you have 10 guys playing together in 10 leagues, and each is disposed to put in an amount of effort that parallels how well he is doing in a given league given that he is also playing in a number of leagues outside these ten. And, as it turns out each one wins one of the leagues. So, what have you got at the end of the day? Everybody's league victory comes against 9 half-hearted opponents (and probably 5 or 6 less-than-half-hearted opponents). Yippie... How hollow is that victory?

If other people who are in 5,6,7 whatever leagues want to be apart of that, so be it. I still don't mind beating them either. Winning is winning. I don't consider it a"hollow" win. I put forth my best effort into winning. If my other opponents don't want to put forth the effort, I still did. If I lose to a half-hearted opponent, well, that just REALLY sucks. Because I know that I put forth the effort, and he didn't. And he STILL won. Thats also apart of this game. LUCK. We have spoke about this earler in another thread. But luck plays a vital role in fantasy football. Thats why my feelings about winning against lesser opponents will never be hampered. I put forth the effort, and he didn't get lucky.

I still have to compete against 6-8 owners that do put forth some effort in their team. And if I don't beat them, I won't win the Championship. Bottom line is, winning is winning. You can't really cheat in Fantasy Football. And cheating is the only way I would feel "hollow" about winning.

Just my personal opinion though.

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by StegRock on Oct 15^th, 2006, 7:46am

Nice meaty response, O4l. [smiley=thumbsup.gif] I just want to comment on one small, rather inconsequential statement of yours. It's actually something I wanted to insert into my spiel above, but I felt it was just too peripheral. But, you have provided me the perfect opportunity... :)

on 10/15/06 at 04:57:26, Oakland4life wrote:

Well, I guess I will tell you that I am in 3 leagues, two of them on www.fantasyfootballer.com ( ;) ).

In this context that I've presented, the CBFL "draft only", "best ball" format does seem like a fantastic alternative for "extra" league participation. By its very nature, it doesn't require great commitment or participation. The "draft only" aspect is, of course, the key to that, but even the "best ball" format could be employed as a mitigating factor of lack of participation in regular leagues. [smiley=yes.gif]

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Chumpzilla on Oct 15^th, 2006, 9:33am

Steg, I agree with your assessment, however, I do think there are two things that help in minimizing this mentality.

Cold Cash - The amount of money "invested" in a league often keeps all players interested. The more insignificant the amounts (entry/transaction fees), the more likely bottom feeders may become complacent.

Dynasty Leagues - Makes owners pay attention because complacency impacts NEXT year as well as the current year. If you take a dynasty league and require a decent cash outlay, it (in my experience) usually keeps all owners interested for the entire season.

Again, this is my personal experience. I participate in many leagues (too embarrassed to disclose the # :-[) and never seem to lose interest in any of them where the dynasty format and/or [smiley=money.gif] is involved.

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Philly on Oct 16^th, 2006, 2:14pm

I'm down to 3 (*and a half) leagues now and it's almost liberating.

My primary league (regardless of whether I'm doing well or now) is the original league I started in. Part of the reason it is primary is because there is money involved (not a lot, but enough that winning the league is quite important. Another reason it is a primary league is I personally know a lot of the guys involved.

My second league is the GBRFL2. It's a format that requires maintaining interest and looking beyond the current year. I also have gotten to know many of the people in the league through the Grid and enjoy the level of competition and participation.

My final league is the Giants of the Gridiron. I'm an active participant and the competition level is pretty good, but there are some guys in the league I don't know at all.

*And then I have a half league. I'm playing a public college fantasy football league on Sportsline.com. I don't know any of the other owners and only about half of them are even making an attempt to win. I will be hard-pressed NOT to win this league easily. Despite that, I don't even consider it a "league won" because there's no buy-in or commitment from so many of the teams. I'm doing it primarily as research to find out how college fantasy football works (or might work better).

I know last year I was involved in six leagues and it got to the point where I couldn't find the time to pay attention to all of them. Even the GBRFL2, where I was doing relatively well, suffered from a lack of attention from me at times. And I even dropped the CBFL this year because (1) I wasn't sure I could commit to the draft and (2) even following the league during the year requires time that I can't afford to invest.

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by StegRock on Oct 16^th, 2006, 5:00pm

My only responses...

on 10/15/06 at 09:33:27, Chumpzilla wrote:

Cold Cash - The amount of money "invested" in a league often keeps all players interested. The more insignificant the amounts (entry/transaction fees), the more likely bottom feeders may become complacent.

First off, though this may be a way to mitigate the problem, it does bring with it its own very dirty laundry. But, secondly, I don't think this necessarily gets the job done. If someone competes in NOTHING BUT money leagues and, perhaps, moreover, has the money to blow, I see it coming out in the wash the same way. I don't see this as a "logically necessary" solution.

Quote:

Dynasty Leagues - Makes owners pay attention because complacency impacts NEXT year as well as the current year. If you take a dynasty league and require a decent cash outlay, it (in my experience) usually keeps all owners interested for the entire season.

This is a better, shall I say cleaner, solution. It does a much better job of mitigating the problem. But, again, to tease this out logically, if a dude plays in nothing but dynasty leagues,... yadda, yadda, yadda... You know where I'm going with this. That said, dynasty leagues don't bring with them "dirty laundry" like the above.

Nice commentary, though, Chumpman! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by StegRock on Oct 16^th, 2006, 11:24pm

on 10/16/06 at 14:14:19, Philly wrote:

I even dropped the CBFL this year because (1) I wasn't sure I could commit to the draft and (2) even following the league during the year requires time that I can't afford to invest.

This is a really nice, subtle point worth having broken out. [smiley=yes.gif]

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by T-Rave on Sep 7^th, 2007, 12:09pm

Thought I'd resurrect this interesting thread -- I noticed this same phenomenon last year in the leagues I played in. I played in . . . I think, 4 leagues. Maybe 5. (This alone proves Steg's point). Three of these were Yahoo leagues with friends, and one was the GBRFL. I won 2 of the leagues (GBRFL and one Yahoo league). To tell you the truth, though, I almost didn' t notice that I won the Yahoo league because I spent just about ALL my fantasy football time working on my GBRFL team (which, by way of shameless plug, is an awesome league, format, etc.). Playing in so many leagues really does dilute your effort, spreading it out over too many places. I think this happens because when you first start playing, it's a helluva lot of fun, trash-talking on message boards and prepping each week. So your second year of playing you decide to do more, and you don't see what will happen, viz., lackluster interest or performance in most or all of the leagues you play in.

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Philly on Sep 7^th, 2007, 12:37pm

Something came to mind recently, and this thread gives me an opportunity to share it (and let others explore it too)...

I first started playing fantasy football in 1997 or so. Early on, I either won or finished top 3 in my money (and still primary) league. Then in 2000 I hit rock bottom and finished dead last - mostly due to injuries and bad luck. During this time, I'd say about 75% of the owners were competitive.

From 2001-2003, I ran a streak of 3 straight 2nd place finishes (I had the "best" team in the league each of those years, but was hurt by a major injury immediately before the playoffs in each of those years.) In each of those years we only had 1 owner (of 12) that didn't know what he was doing.

Since then, I've been average to below average in that league.

I can honestly say that I know more about fantasy football now than I ever did, and I'm very aware of all of the players in the NFL, so my lack of success should not be the result of declining skills. Also, I've been fortunate to play with some very savvy owners. While the rest of the owners have certainly gotten better over time (as more tools are available for them to employ), I also have access to those same tools and more.

I've also failed to win (or even be competitive in some cases) any other leagues that I've been in (again, except for a couple internet leagues where the competition was frightfully poor and uninterested).

The only correlation I can make is the fact that I got married in 2000 and started having children in 2003. Anyone else notice any correlation between fantasy success and outside forces?

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Callie on Sep 7^th, 2007, 1:46pm

Two questions, just out of curiosity. When you got married and had kids, did you put less time into FF? (Like a good husband and father concerned with his family, his home, and his career.) Or did you keep putting in the same time? (As in somehow making time for it - like having a job that allowed that. ;D )

If you spent the same amount of time and played mostly with the same or similar guys, maybe you burned through your learning curve faster than they did, & then they caught up.

Or it's just a coincidence. (People who make a lot of charts see a lot of that. Just ask me. ;D )

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Philly on Sep 7^th, 2007, 2:35pm

on 09/07/07 at 13:46:34, Callie wrote:

I think I probably spend the same amount of time, overall, as I did before. However the difference may be when I spend that time. As a bachelor, it was very easy for me to be at the computer at 12:55 PM on Sunday, making any necessary lineup adjustments. Now I'm usually submitting my lineup sometime late Saturday night and rarely catching any of the pre-game shows.

Title: Re: The paradox of playing in TOO many leagues
Post by Callie on Sep 7^th, 2007, 3:18pm

on 09/07/07 at 14:35:35, Philly wrote:

I hadn't really thought about it until you brought it up, but I used to depend more on the pre-game shows than I do these days, too. I can usually get more info on the internet now than I can get from those shows. It's still something I watch for last minute who-will-start things, but even that gets posted online in time to make any changes I need.

I have too many leagues though. I've been setting things up so that my redraft leagues are almost plug and play rather than risk/reward with adjustments all over the place. (And no bye week issues like I've been knowingly getting into in the keepers. ;D )