It's that time again. We're not playing around this year. I'm going to use Fantrax to track the league, which should allow us to set everything up super easy. However, we need to debate a few things.

1. Interest/teams? We had 12 last year. Obviously, ccrunner isn't welcome back this year, which leaves us 11. If we can get 12 again, fine. Max? I'd say 16.

2. Service? Fantrax can be done for FREE. We should be able to customize scoring how we want. However, the $80 allows some incredible stat-tracking and league access. I'm not sure it's worth it, as I've only done leagues as a player with the $80. For the basics we need, the free services might be fine since we can use the forums for anything that isn't included.

3. Buy-in? Adding to #2, obviously an $80 service fee significantly cuts into the pool. Do we raise the buy-in to say, $25? Or do we keep it $20 and just payout whatever is different? Open for ideas here.

4. Scoring/Settings? Last year's scoring was decent, but I know there were some detractors. Would anyone like to see changes to either the point allocations or to how the weeks are scored?

5. Roster Moves? The website allows you to add/drop/trade players, but all of this can be disabled. How should we handle subs? My preference here would be to still track this stuff on the board, as last year we really did try to limit subs and such when guys couldn't play. The only negative of Fantrax is, we're NOT going to be able to do the "provisional" scoring like we did last year when a guy was still up in the air to play or not.

I'm already setting up the league and I will invite you in so you can check out the site and format. Post your email you would like an invite to and any thoughts on the above topics. I'd like to get the draft started sometime in early October, maybe like October 10th so we're good to go by the start of the first week of games.

I don't have time to think through the scoring and substitution policies right now, but I am in again this year and would be fine with paying $25 or more.

Im in.

I would like to possibly set up some stuff a little different in terms of point breakdown. I think blocks were weighted a little to heavily, personally.

A few other additions. This league does allow IR spots. I'm not sure if that changes how we do subs. Also, it allows you to customize number of games per week. It becomes interesting with those weird schedules up until conference play that includes some 3 or 4 game weeks for teams and other weeks where a team might not play at all. My thoughts?

I like 12-16 teams, as long as we get a solid group.

I think the Fantrax free version will work for what we need.

$20 or $25 buy-in. The more the buy-in, the more we can be creative with prizes. Weekly winners, player of the year, freshman of the year, etc.

I liked the setup of last year, with the conference/league parameters. Maybe we allow 2 wild cards this year to incorporate some of the smaller school players? The scoring settings are fine with the PTSx1, REBx1.25, ASTx1.5, STLx2, BLKx2 and TOx-1. However, we can also add in other categories if needed. The biggest challenge before was having to manually add it all.

With the rosters, Fantrax sets their own positions. This also makes roster changes and formatting much easier.

As for weekly subs, can you set up a certain amount of games to max out in for a given week?

This would allow us bench spots and we can make it more fair in that we all get the same # of games played. Also brings in some strategy on when to play some/sit them if they have a pre-season tourney or something.

Im loving the maximum amount of games. I think if we set that to a certain #, we no longer have an issue with a player being "questionable". If he misses Tuesday, you play your bench player and then sub them out for Saturday...

I'm in. You guys can figure out the specifics. I'm in no matter what.

Just don't allow CC back

I'm in. I'd like to bump the buy in up from $20. Thought last years' scoring was fine, but would be open to suggestions for improvement.


The only major problem that needs to be addressed is the discrepancy in weekly games. Everyone needs to be on even footing every week, not hugely lopsided from 1 week to the next with an "it'll even out in the end" philosophy.

One of the issues with game limits would be that it penalizes teams who play in tournaments or events that would require a few weeks with more than 2 games. Those teams will usually then have a few other weeks where they play 0 or 1, instead of a balance of 2 per week for the non-tournament teams. You also have some conferences with 16 games and others with 18 games, which will backload some weeks later in the year where others will play more non-conference games. The OOC games are usually focused around academic and holiday schedules early on, which can also create imbalances in the weeks.

The whole "it will balance out" statement comes from the idea that almost all teams eligible for this pick'em play either 30 or 31 regular season games. We just need to figure out how to even it out and not penalize people for picking teams who have heavy weeks early.

For instance, last year Baylor had a week where they played 3 games in a week TWICE, but also had a week without a single game. Over the course of those 3 weeks, they would average 2 games per week, but obviously would likely lose the week where they had a 0.

I'm in again. I think the fantrax thing sounds awesome and I have no problems with doing the upgrade. I mean even if we only get 10 people that's just an extra 8 dollars.

I thought the scoring was really good. I don't think it should be changed but have no problems if others want it changed.

I feel like there is no way you're going to get everyone on even footing each week. The only way to do that is to go by points per game.

The Fantrax scoring options are similar to what you would get on any standard fantasy league. Weekly H2H, Roto, H2H Roto and total points. Now, total points would be the most fair but that also keeps very little interest in things week to week and it also means less interest towards the end of the year when it's clear some teams won't catch up.

Pbviously if we do the same scoring (1 point for last, 12 for first, etc), it will require some manual scoring, but the totals will be kept on the website which makes it very easy.

Im down to up the buy-in to anything up to $50.

I really do think we should put a game limit per week though. Can you change it week to week? That way we essentially can max out the number of possible games each week.

Are we allowed bench spots? Cause in your Baylor scenario that is easily fixed with bench spots. When they play 0 games, you simply put in the bench player.

Yes, I can limit it to 2 games per week at each starting spot. So, say the rosters have 14 players and we start 12. You can basically choose to start whatever 12 you want, but if a guy has 3 games, only 2 would count. Alternatively, if a guy only plays 1 or even 0, you can bench him. It would mean it requires some more strategy than it did last year where we basically played the whole team every week.

Azubuike24;1657055 wrote:Yes, I can limit it to 2 games per week at each starting spot. So, say the rosters have 14 players and we start 12. You can basically choose to start whatever 12 you want, but if a guy has 3 games, only 2 would count. Alternatively, if a guy only plays 1 or even 0, you can bench him. It would mean it requires some more strategy than it did last year where we basically played the whole team every week.

I think thats the best option.

If a player has 3 games, and a UTL only has 1, could you move the player with 3 to the UTL spot for one of the games? I think any roster moves like that should be fine, so long as the total # of games you get is 2 per spot...

If you have a bunch of players playing 3+ games, it would require some forward thinking on what games to bench them and what games that week to play them.

The way it works is say, instead of 14 weeks, you can make it 28 "half weeks" with it being like Monday-Thursday and Friday-Sunday. So you could change who starts in each spot before each of those periods. However, that isn't going to help you in a M-T-W tournament format, for instance.

You guys just tell me what the deal is and I'm in, haha. I really liked the scoring last year so don't think it should change too much but I'm ok with whatever we do.

And like Laley anything up to $50 I'm ok with.

I PM's birddog, Pick6, sportswiz, and rec a link to the thread just incase they aren't looking at the CBB forums yet.

Who else should we try and get to join? Did wildcats express any interest/disinterest last year?

I feel like Ohiobucks1 might be interested.

Still can't believe Rec didn't do this last year. Seems like the perfect game for him. Could see many great rants or raves from him due to his players, lol.

Terry_Tate;1657176 wrote:Still can't believe Rec didn't do this last year. Seems like the perfect game for him. Could see many great rants or raves from him due to his players, lol.

He did do it last year. Don't think he did the tournament player pick'em.

Yeah, we talked him into this. Just doesnt get into the player pick-em for the tourney.

Well damn I have a terrible memory, lol.

Im in again. I am up for whatever as far as payment goes. I liked the scoring last year. Dont really care too much about all the logistics and roster stuff. You guys can figure out that lol.

So, do we have a list of confirmed entrys yet?

I'm in to defend my crown.