RichDicklessMonocle Off-Season Meeting Agenda

Discussion Points:

• Aligning with the NFL's Expanded Regular Season: The NFL has extended its regular season to 18 weeks, which gives teams an extra week of play. Starting playoffs in Week 15 would mirror this change and allow the fantasy season to reflect the new structure, keeping the league more in line with real-world scheduling.
• Impact on Regular-Season Matchups: Shifting the playoff start date may require changes to the regular-season matchups, particularly if teams need to battle for playoff spots in Weeks 14 and 15. Some teams might feel pressure to perform in the last few weeks, potentially altering the competitive landscape.
• Impact on Fantasy Playoff Timing: Traditionally, fantasy football playoffs happen in Weeks 14-16. With the new proposal, the playoffs would extend to Week 18. The later start could create additional strategy for managers, as teams might have more players who rest in Week 18 (especially in NFL teams that are already secured in the playoffs). How does this affect the competitiveness of the championship round?
• Extended Playoffs and League Engagement: An extended playoff period could maintain league engagement for a longer period of time. Teams that barely miss the playoffs in Week 14 might still have a chance to make it to the end, which could keep more managers engaged as they fight for a spot up until the final week.
• Effect on Trade Deadline and Regular-Season Strategy: With the playoffs starting later, some teams may delay trades or strategic moves in Weeks 13-14, knowing they have more time to catch up or secure their playoff spot. Conversely, managers may become more aggressive in the weeks leading up to Week 15 to secure a playoff berth. How do we feel about this potential shift in strategy?
• Scheduling Flexibility: The proposal to start playoffs in Week 15 would require revisiting how the schedule is laid out. For example, we would need to ensure that all regular-season matchups happen in a timely manner. Additionally, if we decide to expand the league in the future, the schedule format would need to accommodate 10 teams, which could make Weeks 15-18 even more critical for playoff positioning.

Considerations:

• Manager Feedback: It's important to consider how managers feel about the later playoff start. Some managers may prefer the traditional timeline, while others may enjoy the extended season.
• Week 18 Player Resting: NFL teams with secured playoff spots often rest key players in Week 18. Fantasy teams relying on NFL stars in these games may face challenges, potentially leading to less competitive matchups in the final playoff week. Should there be a backup plan if key players are rested in Week 18? If a player gets rested it's an automatic 33 points? 😂😂😂😂
• Playoff Format Changes: This proposed change to the schedule might prompt a review of the current playoff format. Would it make sense to introduce a new seeding format or adjust the number of teams in the playoff bracket? How do we feel about expanding the playoff field in line with league expansion?
• Impact on Championship Week: With Week 18 as the potential championship week, should we take into account the possibility that player injuries or NFL game conditions could heavily influence the final outcome? What measures can we take to mitigate this?

Discussion Points:

• Key Features to Prioritize:
  • Customizable league settings (e.g., playoff formats, scoring rules).
  • User-friendly interface for both desktop and mobile users.
  • Reliable live scoring and updates.
  • Active support and regular updates.
  • Additional tools, such as draft assistance and trade analyzers.
• Migration Timeline:
  • Set a deadline for deciding on the new platform (e.g., by the end of April).
  • Ensure all league managers are onboarded and familiar with the new app by June.
  • Conduct a mock draft or test session over the summer to ensure a smooth transition.
• Cost Implications:
  • Compare the free and premium options available on each platform.
  • Evaluate whether any additional costs align with league preferences.
• Feedback Mechanism:
  • Create a survey to gather league members' final input before making the switch.
  • Allow members to suggest additional platforms or features they value.

Discussion Points:

• Why Introduce a Trade Deadline?
  • Ensures fairness and integrity by preventing last-minute trades that could unbalance playoff matchups.
  • Encourages managers to plan strategically before the deadline.
  • Aligns with common practices in professional leagues and other fantasy platforms.
• Timing of the Trade Deadline:
  • Option 1: Week 10 (before the playoff push begins).
  • Option 2: Week 11 (one week before playoffs start, giving managers time to finalize their rosters).
  • Option 3: Week 12 (late-season deadline, keeping options open for longer).
• Impact on League Dynamics:
  • Encourages early-season trading and active management.
  • Prevents managers from making potentially collusive trades late in the season.
  • Fosters a more competitive playoff environment by locking rosters in advance.
• Potential Drawbacks:
  • Restricts flexibility for managers dealing with late-season injuries or slumps.
  • Could discourage trading if managers feel rushed to make moves by the deadline.

Discussion Points:

• Team One Update: Josh is preparing to join RDM 10, bringing additional competition and excitement to the league.
• Finding Reliable and Engaged Managers: It's crucial that any new members are active, reliable, and committed to engaging in league activities (trading, waiver wire management, weekly participation).
• Impact on Draft Strategy: The expansion will require a shift in the draft strategy. With 10 teams, the pool of available players will be more limited, making late-round picks more crucial.
• Impact on Waiver Wire: A larger league will likely create a more competitive waiver wire experience. It's important to consider how this might affect the distribution of talent throughout the season.
• Impact on Scheduling: With more teams, the season structure and playoff format may need to be adjusted to accommodate the increase in competition. We need to ensure that matchups remain competitive and that scheduling remains fair.

Discussion:

• Benefits of including more teams while rewarding top performance.

Discussion Points:

• 1st Down Bonus for Running Backs (RB): Reward consistency in moving the chains.
• 1st Down Bonus for Wide Receivers (WR): Acknowledge key contributions in critical moments.
• 1st Down Bonus for Tight Ends (TE): Encourage greater value for tight ends in the scoring system.
• 1st Down Bonus for Quarterbacks (QB): Highlight quarterback efficiency in securing first downs.

Key Considerations:

• How much should the bonus be? (e.g., 0.5 points, 1 point).
• Potential impact on positional value and draft strategies.
• Does this align with the league's goals for scoring fairness and engagement?

Proposed Field Goal Scoring:

• Field Goals Made:
  • 0-19 yards: 3 points
  • 20-29 yards: 3 points
  • 30-39 yards: 3 points
  • 40-49 yards: 4 points
  • 50-59 yards: 5 points
  • 60+ yards: 6 points
• Points per FG Yard: Introduce a bonus for field goal yardage over 30 yards.

Key Considerations:

• Does this make kickers too impactful compared to other positions?
• Will the change incentivize drafting elite kickers earlier?
• Balancing scoring fairness for short-distance accuracy versus long-distance power.

Discussion Points:

• 3-and-Out Bonus: Add a small bonus (e.g., 0.1 or 0.2 points) when a defense forces an opponent to punt after three plays.
• 4th Down Stop Bonus: Reward defenses for stopping the opponent on 4th down with a small bonus (e.g., 0.1 or 0.2 points).

Key Considerations:

• Ensuring consistency: All defenses will qualify for these bonuses to maintain fairness.
• Impact on scoring: Small point changes keep the impact minimal but reward critical defensive plays.
• Do these changes align with the league’s philosophy on defensive scoring?
• Feedback from managers: Gauge interest and collect suggestions for other potential defensive bonuses.

Discussion Points:

• Punt Return Yards: Award points based on yardage gained during punt returns. (e.g., 1 point for every 10 or 15 yards).
• Kick Return Yards: Award points based on yardage gained during kick returns. (e.g., 1 point for every 10 or 15 yards).

Key Considerations:

• Does this increase engagement with special teams without overcomplicating scoring?
• Determining the yardage threshold for points (e.g., 1 point per 10 yards vs. 1 point per 15 yards).
• Balancing the impact of return yards with other scoring elements.
• Feedback from managers: Would they prefer to include return yard bonuses or keep special teams scoring as-is?

Discussion Points:

• 40+ Yard Rush Bonus: Award a bonus for any rush over 40 yards (e.g., 3 points).
• 40+ Yard Reception Bonus: Award a bonus for any reception over 40 yards (e.g., 3 points).

Key Considerations:

• Does this bonus reward big plays appropriately without making them too impactful on scoring?
• Should the bonus be awarded for yardage gained on a single play only (e.g., no cumulative yardage)?
• Should the bonus be awarded for rushing and receiving plays, or just for one category?
• What amount should the bonus be? (e.g., 3 points, 5 points).
• Would this incentivize different strategies or increase excitement around big plays?

Discussion Points:

• Current Format: 2-Week Playoff Matchups - The league has used 2-week playoff matchups for the past few seasons. This format has provided more consistency and less randomness, allowing fantasy teams to showcase their strength over a longer period. - Some managers appreciate the opportunity to recover from a bad week and think that the 2-week format rewards consistency more than a one-week knockout.
• Switch to 1-Week Matchups for the First Round - With an expansion to 6 or 7 teams, the first round could be a one-week matchup to speed things up, and then transition to 2-week matchups for the semifinals and championship. This could give lower-seeded teams a chance to get eliminated more quickly. - A single-week format could lead to more dramatic, winner-takes-all games, especially if more teams are involved.
• Implications of Expanding to 7 Teams - If we expand to 7 teams in the playoffs, we would have three rounds (quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals). If we kept 2-week matchups, this would extend the playoff period significantly. - In this scenario, we'd likely need to start the playoffs in Week 13 to ensure there's enough time for all rounds to be completed, which could potentially conflict with the regular-season schedule. Should we start the playoffs earlier, or would the added playoff length make the regular season feel too short?
• Pros and Cons of 1-Week vs. 2-Week Playoff Matchups - **1-Week Matchups:** - Pros: Increased excitement, each game is more critical, reduces the length of playoffs, and may better align with an expanded league format. - Cons: Less room for error, could feel like a "one-off" rather than a reflection of overall team performance over time. - **2-Week Matchups:** - Pros: More time to recover from a bad week, rewards team consistency, and makes playoff outcomes feel more earned. - Cons: Longer playoffs may stretch into Week 18 (especially with 3 rounds), increasing the risk of NFL teams resting key players in the final round. - Potential for a longer playoff period if expanding to 6 or 7 teams (quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals). Would a three-week playoff schedule feel too long for our league format?
• Expansion to 6 or 7 Teams: What Would That Mean for Matchups? - If we expand to 6 or 7 playoff teams, the first-round bye (if applicable) and matchups would need to be adjusted to ensure fairness. - With three rounds, starting the playoffs in Week 13 might be necessary to ensure the entire playoff series fits within the regular season, but this could compress the remaining regular-season schedule.

Considerations:

• League Feedback: We should get feedback from league members to understand whether the majority prefer the excitement of 1-week matchups or the consistency of 2-week matchups.
• Impact of Expanding the League: Expanding to 7 teams could have major impacts on how playoffs are structured. Would a three-round playoff with a 1-week first round and 2-week semifinals and finals be ideal, or would we prefer to keep all rounds 2 weeks?
• Scheduling Conflicts: Expanding the playoff structure might lead to a conflict with scheduling. How do we balance an expanded playoff field with starting playoffs in Week 13? Would we need to shorten the regular season or adjust the trade deadline?
• Manager Engagement: With longer playoffs, we may see more teams eliminated earlier in the process. Would a shorter, 1-week first round make for more intense matchups, or would it lead to more manager disengagement as fewer teams are involved for longer?
• Week 18 Considerations: A 2-week playoff format might see teams relying on players who are resting or inactive in Week 18. How do we handle this, and would it impact the fairness of the championship round?

Alternative Options:

• Single-Week Playoffs for All Rounds: Transition to a single-week playoff format for all rounds, eliminating the 2-week structure entirely. This would reduce the length of the playoffs and streamline the end-of-season process.
• Start Playoffs in Week 14: Start the playoffs a week earlier (in Week 14) to better accommodate a 2-week playoff format for each round. This would give the league more breathing room but could shorten the regular season.
• Expand Playoffs to 6 Teams: Expand the league to 6 teams and retain the current 2-week format. This would allow for a 3-round structure with a longer playoff period but avoid the potential issues of expanding to 7 teams.

Discussion Points:

• Draft Date: - We need to decide on a specific date for the draft. Should it be held on a set weekend (e.g., a Saturday or Sunday before the season starts) or is there flexibility for another date based on manager availability? - Consideration for possible conflicts with managers' schedules, holidays, or other events that may impact attendance.
• Draft Time: - What time will work best for all managers? Should it be a set time (e.g., 7:00 PM EST) to ensure consistency across years, or will we pick a time that works for the majority of managers based on their availability? - Should we consider different time zones for remote participants, ensuring fairness for all managers?
• Online vs. In-Person Draft: - **In-Person Draft:** A face-to-face draft creates a stronger sense of camaraderie and competition. It allows for more interaction and could enhance the experience, particularly for those who enjoy the social aspect of the draft. - Pros: Better camaraderie, in-person banter, more engagement. - Cons: Requires travel, can be harder to schedule with all managers, especially those living far apart. - **Online Draft:** An online draft provides convenience and allows all managers to participate without needing to travel. It ensures that everyone can join regardless of their location. - Pros: Easier for everyone to attend, no travel required, accessible to all locations. - Cons: Less interaction and excitement compared to in-person drafts, potential technical difficulties.
• Hybrid Draft Option: - Is there a possibility of having a hybrid draft, where some managers attend in person while others join remotely (via video call or an online platform)? This could give the best of both worlds, but it might require additional coordination.
• Impact of Draft Format on the Season: - The format (in-person vs. online) might affect how engaged managers feel for the rest of the season. Would in-person drafts enhance the competitive spirit and engagement in the league? How important is the social aspect of the draft compared to the convenience of online participation?
• Contingency Plans: - If we choose an in-person draft, we should have a contingency plan for anyone who may not be able to attend due to unforeseen circumstances. I am sure I can get it all connected together online... Can remote participation be set up for last-minute absences, or will we allow proxy picks?

Considerations:

• Manager Availability: Ensure that most managers can attend by surveying availability ahead of time. Flexibility on the time or date could be key in accommodating everyone.
• Time Zone Differences: Take into account the different time zones of remote participants. Would a set time that works across time zones be the most efficient approach?
• Travel Restrictions: Consider potential travel issues or other factors (e.g., distance, schedules) that may affect the feasibility of an in-person draft.
• Draft Platform and Tools: For an online draft, we’ll need to select a reliable platform (e.g., Zoom, Google Meet, or a fantasy football-specific platform) and make sure that everyone is familiar with it beforehand.

Possible Options:

• In-Person Draft: Host the draft at a central location for all participants. This option creates a strong community feeling, though it may not be ideal for everyone.
• Online Draft: Host the draft using an online platform, allowing remote participation for all. This is likely the most convenient and accessible option for everyone.
• Hybrid Draft: Have an in-person draft with the option for remote participation for those who cannot attend physically. This option allows everyone to be part of the experience, but it may require extra coordination.
• Flexible Date and Time: Select a time and date based on the majority of managers' availability. Use a scheduling tool like Doodle Poll or Google Forms to identify the best options.
• Back-Up Plan for Absences: If someone cannot attend, we could allow proxy picks, or managers could pre-submit their rankings to be used for the draft.

Discussion Points:

• Concept: - Each week, in addition to their regular head-to-head matchup, each manager will also compete against the league median score (the middle score among all teams that week). - Teams that score above the median get an additional win, while teams scoring below it receive an additional loss.
• Advantages: - Helps reduce frustration from bad-luck losses when a manager scores well but still loses due to an unusually high opponent score. - Rewards consistently strong scoring, ensuring that high-performing teams have a better chance to make playoffs even with unlucky matchups. - Encourages more competitive balance across the league.
• Challenges: - Requires additional tracking and management each week to calculate the league median and assign the extra win/loss. - Could create confusion among managers who are unfamiliar with the concept or not fully aware of how their "extra game" result is determined. - Might reduce the importance of head-to-head matchups for some managers.
• Impact on Standings: - With an additional game each week, standings may reflect more accurately which teams are consistently strong across the season. - Could impact playoff seeding, making it more merit-based and reducing the influence of luck.

Considerations:

• Education for Managers: Ensure all managers understand how the league median is calculated and how it affects weekly results.
• Fairness: The system aims to make the league fairer by minimizing the impact of random head-to-head results.
• Automation: Consider using fantasy platforms that support league median calculations to simplify the process, or develop a system for manually tracking and communicating results.
• League Size: Larger leagues may see more variation in weekly scores, which could make the median more impactful, while smaller leagues may have less deviation from week to week.

Possible Options:

• Adopt the Extra Game: Begin implementing the additional game against the league median starting this season.
• Pilot the Concept: Test the system for a few weeks or in a smaller league subset to gauge its effectiveness and gather feedback before full adoption.
• Adjust Scoring Thresholds: Instead of using the median, consider a different scoring threshold, such as the league average, for the additional matchup.
• Opt-Out Option: Allow managers to vote on whether to include the league median game before finalizing the season setup.
• Education Sessions: Host a pre-season meeting or send out detailed guidelines to ensure managers understand and are on board with the change.