Interesting new league idea

[Cult of Dionysus]

I would urge everyone to focus on finalizing a great set of Bylaws. JGD has issued a working draft, which has been edited once, but only a few have commented on it. Coogan doesn't have anything yet, if I'm not mistaken.

As for the buy-in, there's two actually to issues at play. First is the amount of the buy-in. The second, and usually ignored point, is purse allocation. If you may have noticed, I proposed a $100 buy-in / $1,200 purse with the Champion getting a full $1,000, the runner up getting $100. That's something worth playing for. And not a huge buy-in either.

Most league take the "let's spread it around" approach and doll out winnings to all the playoff teams and some other achievements. However, unless the buy-in is really large, you end up diluting the winnings.

I bet that most of you couldn't say what the winning prize is for most of your leagues without looking. I sure don't. Which is telling, imho.

But if you can win $1,000 for a mere $100 buy-in . . . I bet every Owner would know what's at stake.

[Coogan Football]

I would urge everyone to focus on finalizing a great set of Bylaws. JGD has issued a working draft, which has been edited once, but only a few have commented on it. Coogan doesn't have anything yet, if I'm not mistaken.

I have some so far, I took some from both of what you guys had said earlier in the thread (great ideas, btw) and tweaked a few things. Once I get the initial franchise owners in place we are going to collectively decide on the concrete settings/bylaws.

We also are gonna have 3 different owners work as a "board of directors" type group that commish (all being equal) the league together because I think it's gonna be hard to find an independent commish.

So far we have 7 franchise owners in place and 2 others to assist with running the league, both of whom are very respected and experienced forum members.

[Goirish374]

how many different leagues are being talked about in this thread again?

almost certainly best to keep this thread for JGD's league and start other threads for other leagues.

[thebeast]

I don't really get the angle of "if there's less money people don't care". Everyone involved here is the sort of person that reads dynasty forums in January. We're all pretty obsessive. I know I don't put in less effort to cheaper leagues. I want to do well everywhere.

Pretty much.

I'm certainly not in a place financially to drop 1k on a league, and as this is my baby...

So when you're talking about a league where the owners pay the bill, potentially either split the prize pool with coaches, or pay coaches, and you're discussing scenarios where coaches have contracts and can be fired, but the owner can't be a coach, well a stake of a $75 buy-in isn't going to keep this league going very long. You jeeed real money to incentivize new coaches to join as that's how they're going to get paid.

I'm sure you'll get the interest upfront and get the league(s) going but I would bet it won't persist beyond 1 year in its original form.

[FiremanEd]

Why can't there be a buy-in investment from all levels? Having a $100 Owner, $20-25 Coach would bring both vested interest and increased winnings, especially considering there will be probably two coaches per team. Gives a basis for what they should get of the 'winnings' as well to cover their investment. Just a thought. The idea of an Owner covering the entire investment makes sense compared to real world, but I don't think it necessarily means one can't occur to achieve league objectives. It seems a little odd to me that someone else would cover my costs entirely and then compensate me at the end. I don't think any truly invested person would be opposed to a small entry fee.

[JoshGordonsDealer]

Why can't there be a buy-in investment from all levels? Having a $100 Owner, $20-25 Coach would bring both vested interest and increased winnings, especially considering there will be probably two coaches per team. Gives a basis for what they should get of the 'winnings' as well to cover their investment. Just a thought. The idea of an Owner covering the entire investment makes sense compared to real world, but I don't think it necessarily means one can't occur to achieve league objectives. It seems a little odd to me that someone else would cover my costs entirely and then compensate me at the end. I don't think any truly invested person would be opposed to a small entry fee.

This is what I imagine happening with the $100, however, I want it to be up to the owners/coaches to decide who pays what percentage.

In many franchises, I imagine they will have one coach who will pay 25% of the entry fee, and he'll get a percentage of the winnings with "bonuses" if he compounds certain achievements (division win + championship game, etc...)

While I welcome the money advise, it won't be a high stakes league as long as I'm at the helm. If that weeds certain folk out, so be it.

[JoshGordonsDealer]

Incidentally, I've done a large revision of the bylaws to include:

- Scoring
- Costs/Payouts
- Startup Auction/Rookie Draft Info

Sometime today, I'll add:
- Trade details
- WW details
- Player drop details
--
One decision I want to further explain...

I've gotten a lot of advice to do three separate draft: Rookie, IDP, and Offensive. I've chosen to do all veterans together, because:
1. I don't want to tell teams how to spend their money. IDP positions are deep enough, and should score enough, that they are well-valued and can be built around.
2. I don't want to force teams to spend a certain amount on IDP players vs. Offensive players. This plays into the idea that teams will be free to build however they choose.
3. If teams are forced to designate a certain amount of funds available for the offensive draft vs. the IDP draft, they'll be cornered into that decision.

[Cult of Dionysus]

On the basis that a robust discussion generates a better product:

Fumbles lost at -4 is silly. Simply don't get it.

QB scoring is way above other positions. This looks like a 2QB league, and with these scoring settings, they will dominate roster decisions, scoring more points and having much higher floors than any other position. Go with 2 pts per 100 yds. If you don't believe me, check out weekly QB results in USFL Superflex. Floors are lower than normal, while ceilings are virtually the same. QBs are a little more valuable than other positions, but not dramatically.

Only allowing 4 players to be auctioned at any one time is CRAZY. Talk to other experienced auctioneers, it won't work. 12 is minimum for a start-up and you could even go with 24.

Why separate waiver wire budget from franchise cap?

Having only one auction (for vets) and one draft (for rookies) sorta goes against the concept of co-management. It means that multiple GMs may be involved in the same auction. By having one set for Offensive players and one set for Defensive players, you stratify the roles more, which makes it easier for a franchise to hire out certain GM duties. Also, you multiply the number of off-season league events from TWO to FOUR. I get your points above, but if you set the lineup requirements and the scoring rules right, those issues will have minor impacts.

Still think 98 contract years is high.

[JoshGordonsDealer]

As always, CoD, thanks for the feedback.

Fumbles lost at -4 is silly. Simply don't get it.

Agreed, going to change it to -2 for fumbles lost, no penalty for recovered fumbles.

QB scoring is way above other positions. This looks like a 2QB league, and with these scoring settings, they will dominate roster decisions, scoring more points and having much higher floors than any other position. Go with 2 pts per 100 yds. If you don't believe me, check out weekly QB results in USFL Superflex. Floors are lower than normal, while ceilings are virtually the same. QBs are a little more valuable than other positions, but not dramatically.

Also leaning this way.

Only allowing 4 players to be auctioned at any one time is CRAZY. Talk to other experienced auctioneers, it won't work. 12 is minimum for a start-up and you could even go with 24.

I think I'm going to go with 12, each franchise can have one player up for auction at a time.

Having only one auction (for vets) and one draft (for rookies) sorta goes against the concept of co-management. It means that multiple GMs may be involved in the same auction. By having one set for Offensive players and one set for Defensive players, you stratify the roles more, which makes it easier for a franchise to hire out certain GM duties. Also, you multiply the number of off-season league events from TWO to FOUR. I get your points above, but if you set the lineup requirements and the scoring rules right, those issues will have minor impacts.

By "selling" rookie draft slots, I ensure that it's integrated into the auction. Conversely, I suppose that I could simply include rookie slots in the auction, however, I like adding more offseason events.

In regards to the IDP and Offensive draft being separate, would I designate a certain amount of cap that has to be spent on IDP/Offense?

Still think 98 contract years is high.

That puts us at under 2 years for the average contract. I feel like 98 is pretty solid, honestly

[Cult of Dionysus]

Appreciate the feedback.

Regarding the multiple auctions, it's actually really easy. Each franchise has their cap space. They can use as much or as little as they want in each auction. Owners and GMs can discuss/negotiate internally within their franchise as to how much space they want to "allocate" to each auction. Indeed, that will make the whole co-management angle much better more intense as franchises will need to figure out what they want to do, probably even through Skype or a phone call.

Since you've set up the lineups and scoring in a balanced fashion, I'd imagine franchises will try to balance their cap space on both sides of the ball. But the neat thing is that some franchises may go with a 60-40 split one way or another. It's organic. No need to over-regulate this element. Sure, someone will go too heavy on one side. But since cap hits don't spread over multiple years, it's pretty easy to overcome a bad auction strategy.

[conbad]

I will throw my name in for an owner role. I love the concept of this league. It will be very difficult for something like this to last longterm. So many variables to this league. I would lean towards the higher end of the buy-in as I believe higher payouts allow for more flexibility with coordinators contracts and more skin in the game usually holds interest better and longer than less skin. My background is commissioning two redraft leagues and one dynasty league that has been going for three seasons now.

[JoshGordonsDealer]

Appreciate the feedback.

Regarding the multiple auctions, it's actually really easy. Each franchise has their cap space. They can use as much or as little as they want in each auction. Owners and GMs can discuss/negotiate internally within their franchise as to how much space they want to "allocate" to each auction. Indeed, that will make the whole co-management angle much better more intense as franchises will need to figure out what they want to do, probably even through Skype or a phone call.

Since you've set up the lineups and scoring in a balanced fashion, I'd imagine franchises will try to balance their cap space on both sides of the ball. But the neat thing is that some franchises may go with a 60-40 split one way or another. It's organic. No need to over-regulate this element. Sure, someone will go too heavy on one side. But since cap hits don't spread over multiple years, it's pretty easy to overcome a bad auction strategy.

This was one of my big questions -- how to teams decide to allocate and is it a hard commitment? For example, if a team decides to get ballsy and allocate 80% to offense, is that a done deal? And is it blind, or do other teams know going in?

[ChocolateCityCurse]

@JoshGordonDealer:
I think it would be good to include scoring for punt return yards & kickoff return yards.
You've created a rich scoring system, no reason why special teams should be omitted IMO.
Thanks!

[JoshGordonsDealer]

@JoshGordonDealer:
I think it would be good to include scoring for punt return yards & kickoff return yards.
You've created a rich scoring system, no reason why special teams should be omitted IMO.
Thanks!

Good call -- will do. Just an oversight, I usually play with Special Teams scoring

[JoshGordonsDealer]

Hey everyone!

Thanks for bearing with me. As I mentioned to someone, in the span of a couple weeks, my wife got pneumonia and her grandfather on the other side of the country suffered a massive stroke, so I've been in full "husband mode" with not a ton of time for fantasy football. I think the bylaws are essentially functional (though likely not final) and I've posted in the "Owner's Wanted" forum.

Let's get this ball rolling!