Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Patrick Bateman

Rotoworld Forum Moderator's Week 10 PPR Rankings

5 posts in this topic

Here you go, community. Do what you will with them. Embrace them, tout them, criticize them.....laugh at them but they're here for your disposal. All we ask is that you remember that this thread is here as a resource and tool to stimulate conversation, not as a place to ask you're own Assistant Coach questions about who to start in your league. Thanks and best of luck to everyone this week!!!!

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/45074/383/forum-moderator-week-10-ranks

*Note: Based on participation rates, we will not be having the community ranks anymore.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go, community. Do what you will with them. Embrace them, tout them, criticize them.....laugh at them but they're here for your disposal. All we ask is that you remember that this thread is here as a resource and tool to stimulate conversation, not as a place to ask you're own Assistant Coach questions about who to start in your league. Thanks and best of luck to everyone this week!!!!

http://www.rotoworld...r-week-10-ranks

*Note: Based on participation rates, we will not be having the community ranks anymore.

Take this as a bit of feedback if you will, but I think part of the issue with the community ranks was the requirement to rank so many players within the position. I think if we had made it...and I hate to draw the comparison...like Yahoo's rankings where community members ranked their top 10 and averages were calculated to create a list, there would have been a higher level of interest.

For example, in the Forum Moderator's Week 10 rankings, we get down to Robert Turbin vs. Marcel Reece at the RB rankings; that's all well and good as an exercise for the most adamant fantasy addicts, but:

  1. At that point, the rankings are essentially arbitrary. There's a realistic, if not probable, chance that neither back will break 20 yards.
  2. If you're relying on either back at this point, your season is already shot (unless you're playing in some mega-league where you start 5 RB's or there's 20+ teams).
  3. It changes the time commitment from small to prohibitively large. From what I recall, the community rankings didn't require members to grade out a top 50 RB's, but it did require something like 25+ QB's, which I found slightly excessive. In a 2 QB league the information might be slightly useful, but to the overwhelming fantasy majority, there's not a real reason to care about whether Mike Glennon or Thad Lewis is going to have a better matchup.

Just my $.02.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do I set a discussion on this forum for fantasy football? I'm on my phone and it won't let me view the full web version could this be whu?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go, community. Do what you will with them. Embrace them, tout them, criticize them.....laugh at them but they're here for your disposal. All we ask is that you remember that this thread is here as a resource and tool to stimulate conversation, not as a place to ask you're own Assistant Coach questions about who to start in your league. Thanks and best of luck to everyone this week!!!!

http://www.rotoworld...r-week-10-ranks

*Note: Based on participation rates, we will not be having the community ranks anymore.

Take this as a bit of feedback if you will, but I think part of the issue with the community ranks was the requirement to rank so many players within the position. I think if we had made it...and I hate to draw the comparison...like Yahoo's rankings where community members ranked their top 10 and averages were calculated to create a list, there would have been a higher level of interest.

For example, in the Forum Moderator's Week 10 rankings, we get down to Robert Turbin vs. Marcel Reece at the RB rankings; that's all well and good as an exercise for the most adamant fantasy addicts, but:

  1. At that point, the rankings are essentially arbitrary. There's a realistic, if not probable, chance that neither back will break 20 yards.
  2. If you're relying on either back at this point, your season is already shot (unless you're playing in some mega-league where you start 5 RB's or there's 20+ teams).
  3. It changes the time commitment from small to prohibitively large. From what I recall, the community rankings didn't require members to grade out a top 50 RB's, but it did require something like 25+ QB's, which I found slightly excessive. In a 2 QB league the information might be slightly useful, but to the overwhelming fantasy majority, there's not a real reason to care about whether Mike Glennon or Thad Lewis is going to have a better matchup.

Just my $.02.

Yup, did the rankings one time, and after it made me rank 50 some RB's without leaving until it was completed down to the last guy I never bothered again. There should just be a computerized list that shoots out and you move guys up and down based on your preference. I have no interest in sorting out Jonathon Franklin/Christine Michael/Ronnie Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites