Some of you may remember that at the end of the last season of the DynaBowl, when tallying up wins and losses and working out the draft order there was some ‘heated’ debate. I forget who was involved or exactly what the outcome was, aside from Dyna Hard, the 4th top scorers in the league in 2014, getting the first pick in the draft.
Anyway, it got me thinking. Firstly, how did a possible perception of unfairness occur and secondly is there anything that could be done to rectify this?
So, one of the quirks with Fantasy Football is how short the season is and how few games are played in a typical, traditional season. 13 games is not very many. It’s less than are played in the NFL, let alone football, basketball, ice hockey or let alone baseball. As such, it’s really difficult to use the season as a marker of true quality.
This is often noted in NFL, but at least in the NFL your opponent on any given weekend (or Thursday night. Or Monday night) has an impact on how you play your game. In fantasy football it would theoretically be possible to be the second highest scorer every single week and not win a game. Or be the second lowest scorer every week and win every game. Obviously the chances are ludicrously small, but it is just about possible. Therefore a win/loss record doesn’t necessarily reflect the strength of the teams.
Extrapolating from this, not only does it mean that the order the picks are made in could be compromised, but so too could the teams making the playoffs. In theory the best 4 teams should make the playoffs, but in 2014 The Brees made the playoffs despite scoring more regular season points than only 2 teams. Again, this isn’t like the NFL (or the Premier League) where a low scoring team can be successful by having a really good defence. A low scoring team has no control over whether they get beaten or not – it’s entirely based on luck.
In a venture like the ChatterBowl this is less of an issue (to me, at any rate), but the DynaBowl is a comparatively serious endeavour, given the time spent assessing rookies for the draft, assessing the value of contracts, managing the cap etc and so on. Given the time spent on managing teams, shouldn’t we work to reward the best teams rather than leaving it up to luck?
Of course, luck will always be present (as will Luck, the unbreakable man). This can be in the form of a defensive player getting 3 of his 5 sacks in one week or a 90 yard pick 6, or it can be that your opponent loses his bets 3 players to a bye the week you play him. I’m not saying we completely eliminate luck – we couldn’t.
What I am saying is that we should look to ways to reduce it so that the best teams are rewarded and the worst teams get the chance to pick from the new players before everyone else.
“But wait!” I hear you cry, “How much does the schedule really affect the standings?”
With our schedule in 2014, every team ended up with 5, 6, 7 or 8 wins. But complete fluke we were really bunched together. With a random re-arrangement of the fixtures, ensuring that no one played the same team in the same week they had before (so every fixture was new), the first variation I have produced the following results:
| Team | Wins | Losses |
| Dyna Hard | 11 | 2 |
| Dynasore Losers | 10 | 3 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 9 | 4 |
| Tamworth Two | 7 | 6 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 6 | 7 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 5 | 8 |
| Champions of the Sun | 5 | 8 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 4 | 9 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 4 | 9 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 4 | 9 |
I promise this was complete fluke that the worst team in 2014 ended up on top with this schedule and The Brees came in second from bottom.
Under this scenario our 2014 champions, DynaForOne Firebirds, didn’t make the cut for the playoffs.
The point of this is merely to say that schedule plays a massive part of success and perhaps we should look to remove that element as best we can.
I’m not saying we should just work on total points or anything like that. We all like the weekly competition. But there may be other options that operate as halfway houses, which are just as fun but more representative. Specifically two other options (with further variations thereon).
OPTION 1 – DOUBLE HEADERS
This is pretty simple. Everyone plays two fixtures a week. That’s it. It just doubles the number of games per season giving you a better chance of producing a record that is more representative of a team’s talent.
So I had the original schedule and the schedule used to create the above standings. Using those templates I just rearranged the order of the teams (so if, in week 1 team 1 played team 2 etc, I just changed who team 1 was and who team 2 was (etc and so on), which then created effectively a new schedule. I then created tables for how the season would have gone with the new double fixture lists. There are several versions to demonstrate how different results would have been, each of which is reproduced below for illustrative purposes and because I have no limit on space. The first of these tables uses the original schedule and the revised one produced above as the two schedules (I used total points, not head to head, as a tie-breaker, for simplicity):
| Team | Total Points | Wins with schedule 1 | Wins with schedule 2 | Total Wins | Total Losses |
| Dynasore Losers | 2478.93 | 8 | 10 | 18 | 8 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 2494.355 | 8 | 9 | 17 | 9 |
| Dyna Hard | 2396.135 | 5 | 11 | 16 | 10 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 2397.8 | 7 | 6 | 13 | 13 |
| Tamworth Two | 2388.085 | 6 | 7 | 13 | 13 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 2297.19 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 14 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 2258.885 | 8 | 4 | 12 | 14 |
| Champions of the Sun | 2392.665 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 15 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 2138.915 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 17 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 2008.795 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 17 |
| Team | Total Points | Wins with schedule 1 | Wins with schedule 2 | Total Wins | Total Losses |
| Dynasore Losers | 2478.93 | 9 | 10 | 19 | 7 |
| Champions of the Sun | 2392.665 | 7 | 9 | 16 | 10 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 2494.355 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 11 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 2397.8 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 11 |
| Tamworth Two | 2388.085 | 5 | 8 | 13 | 13 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 2297.19 | 6 | 7 | 13 | 13 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 2258.885 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 14 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 2138.915 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 16 |
| Dyna Hard | 2396.135 | 6 | 3 | 9 | 17 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 2008.795 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 18 |
| Team | Total Points | Wins with schedule 1 | Wins with schedule 2 | Total Wins | Total Losses |
| Dynasore Losers | 2478.93 | 9 | 8 | 17 | 9 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 2494.355 | 7.5 | 9 | 16.5 | 9.5 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 2397.8 | 7 | 9 | 16 | 10 |
| Dyna Hard | 2396.135 | 7.5 | 7 | 14.5 | 11.5 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 2297.19 | 7 | 7 | 14 | 12 |
| Champions of the Sun | 2392.665 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 14 |
| Tamworth Two | 2388.085 | 6 | 6 | 12 | 14 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 2258.885 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 16 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 2138.915 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 17 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 2008.795 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 17 |
| Team | Total Points | Wins with schedule 1 | Wins with schedule 2 | Total Wins | Total Losses |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 2494.355 | 10 | 9 | 19 | 7 |
| Dynasore Losers | 2478.93 | 8 | 9 | 17 | 9 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 2397.8 | 6 | 9 | 15 | 11 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 2297.19 | 7 | 8 | 15 | 11 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 2258.885 | 9 | 6 | 15 | 11 |
| Tamworth Two | 2388.085 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 14 |
| Champions of the Sun | 2392.665 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 15 |
| Dyna Hard | 2396.135 | 6 | 3 | 9 | 17 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 2008.795 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 17 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 2138.915 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 18 |
| Team | Total Points | Wins with schedule 1 | Wins with schedule 2 | Total Wins | Total Losses |
| Dynasore Losers | 2478.93 | 11 | 8 | 19 | 7 |
| Dyna Hard | 2396.135 | 6 | 10 | 16 | 10 |
| Tamworth Two | 2388.085 | 7 | 9 | 16 | 10 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 2494.355 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 11 |
| Champions of the Sun | 2392.665 | 7 | 8 | 15 | 11 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 2397.8 | 7 | 6 | 13 | 13 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 2258.885 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 14 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 2297.19 | 6 | 4 | 10 | 16 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 2008.795 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 17 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 2138.915 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 21 |
| Team | Total Points | Wins with schedule 1 | Wins with schedule 2 | Total Wins | Total Losses |
| Dynasore Losers | 2478.93 | 8 | 10 | 18 | 8 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 2397.8 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 10 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 2494.355 | 8.5 | 7 | 15.5 | 10.5 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 2258.885 | 7 | 8 | 15 | 11 |
| Dyna Hard | 2396.135 | 8.5 | 6 | 14.5 | 11.5 |
| Tamworth Two | 2388.085 | 7 | 6 | 13 | 13 |
| Champions of the Sun | 2392.665 | 6 | 6 | 12 | 14 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 2297.19 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 14 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 2008.795 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 18 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 2138.915 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 20 |
So with this method we end up with more match-ups and more rivalries, but there’s a risk that too many games are happening at once and we lose a bit of focus. It could be more fun or it could be confusing and, frankly, I don’t think we’d know until we did it.
OPTION 2 – VICTORY POINTS
So, under this scenario, each team would get 2 points for a win and 1 for a tie, rather than the traditional W/L result, but what we add in is 2 further points for the top 3 scoring teams in the week, 1 point for the 4 teams that score in the middle and 0 points for the 3 lowest scoring teams. This way, if you are the second top scoring team in a week, and you lose to the top scoring team, all is not lost! You still get 2 points towards your playoff push.
Want examples? Why sure. In week 1 of the 2014 season, the top scoring team beat the 4th top scoring team while the 2nd top scoring team beat the 3rd top scoring team. So under the victory point scenario, Dynablaster Bombermen would have scored 1 point despite the loss and Dyna Hard 2 points, despite their loss.
What would last season’s table have looked like?
| Team | Victory Points | Scoring Points | Total Points |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 16 | 18 | 34 |
| Dynasore Losers | 16 | 17 | 33 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 14 | 15 | 29 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 16 | 12 | 28 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 14 | 12 | 26 |
| Champions of the Sun | 12 | 14 | 26 |
| Tamworth Two | 12 | 13 | 25 |
| Dyna Hard | 10 | 14 | 24 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 10 | 8 | 18 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 10 | 7 | 17 |
Less of an impact – the same 4 teams in the playoffs and a little shuffling lower down, but I think you’d agree that it is a slightly more fair representation of the quality of teams.
The advantage is that even if you’re clearly beaten or going up against a team that is much stronger you still have something to cheer and getting a few more points in your Monday night game could give you an extra point and push you a step closer to the playoffs.
OPTION 3 (?!?) – COMBINED DOUBLE HEADERS AND VICTORY POINTS!
Using the first double header table to construct a double header and victory points table, we get the following:
| Team | Total Wins | Total Losses | Victory Points | Scoring Points | Total Points |
| Dynasore Losers | 18 | 8 | 36 | 17 | 53 |
| Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules | 17 | 9 | 34 | 18 | 52 |
| Dyna Hard | 16 | 10 | 32 | 14 | 46 |
| DynaForOne Firebirds | 13 | 13 | 26 | 15 | 41 |
| Tamworth Two | 13 | 13 | 26 | 13 | 39 |
| Champions of the Sun | 11 | 15 | 22 | 14 | 36 |
| Dynablaster Bombermen | 12 | 14 | 24 | 12 | 36 |
| Here Comes The Brees | 12 | 14 | 24 | 12 | 36 |
| The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness | 9 | 17 | 18 | 8 | 26 |
| East Flanders Dungeoneers | 9 | 17 | 18 | 7 | 25 |
