T1B

mvscal wrote:

Cuda wrote:Just so's you know, Tatum Bell is currently 3rd RB on the Broncos depth chart.

I thought he was #2. Who passed him?

I believe Anderson & Dane are ahead of him right now.

mvscal wrote: The next time a QB throws for 400 without a TD will be the first. That is your first mistake.

So in other words, you've got no response for my theoretic. Got cha.

Lets do some more math, whaddya say:

Rushing yards (we just tweaked scoring a bit this year):

1 pt per 20 yards (was 25), 3 point bonus at 100, 125, 150, 200

Running backs score .5 pt per reception, 2pts for 2pt conversion

So lets take a look at the running back position and what it takes to score the eqivalent number of points as the receiver who caught 10 passes for 100 yards. A running back rushing for 100 yards, which is still considered the benchmark would receive a total of 8 points, assuming he didn't score any tds. If he goes for 125, he gets an additional 4 points, which takes him to 12 points. If he goes for 150, he gets another 4 points which brings him to 16. So, if you have a running back that doesn't score any td's, he'd have to run for a minimum of 170 yards to receive the same number of points as the receiver that caught 10 passes for 100 yards.

I can do this all day long if you'd like. or you could simply eject now with the remaining tatters of your credibility........

KC Scott wrote: The smart player would have drafted 2 WR in the first rounds and waited for a QB till the late rounds

Fuck that, I'd have a team of 12 wide receivers and never be beaten....

All than needs to be said about pmscal's scoring system is that it would have turned Larry Centers into a fantasy stud.

mvscal wrote:

Raydah James wrote:Name those other fucking categories you moist messy twat.

The last three years:

Torry Holt: Started 42 games, 302 receptions, 4,370 yards, 26 TDs

Randy Moss: Started 45 games, 266 receptions, 3,746 yards, 37 TDs.

You really can't go wrong with either of them.

Look at the descrepancy in TD's.


No fucking question who ultimately PWNS.


And thats with Randy being double covered every fucking game.


No contest, Moss is the fucking man.

BSmack wrote:All than needs to be said about pmscal's scoring system is that it would have turned Larry Centers into a fantasy stud.

I buwahahahaa'd.

mvscal wrote:
7 of the top 10 scorers were QBs. There were 2 RBs (Tomlinson & Alexander) and 1 WR (Muhammed) to round it out.

Huh?

You must give 6 pts. for a TD pass then?

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:All than needs to be said about pmscal's scoring system is that it would have turned Larry Centers into a fantasy stud.

He wasn't ever a stud, but he was a decent wild card option depending on his match up. Why is that bad?

Isn't that about how you would rate him as an NFL player?

No, in 95 and 96, under your scoring system, Centers would have been a monster.

mvscal wrote:But he wasn't. I had him in 96. His receiving numbers were great, but his rushing totals and TDs were too low to make him a stud or even a starting running back.

He was a useful role player if he had a favorable matchup or as an injury fill in. Not terrible, but nothing to write home about.

Monsters are guys like Faulk in his prime, Tomlinson and Priest Holmes.

I looked back and saw that RBs only get a half point per reception.

That being said, he still was a hell of a lot more valuable in your league than any other.

And I still hate awarding points for receptions and not for carries.

Felix wrote:WTF kind of scoring system is that?

By my estimates, a receiver that caught 10 passes for 100 yards would get 17 points, while the QB that threw those passes would get a total of 2 points......

Damn, I've seen some stupid scoring systems, but that one blows donkey dicks.

I also like the fact that a back gets a half point for a reception.......

:roll: :roll:

Actually- a receiver getting more points for yardage than a QB is normal. (IE- 1 point for 10 yard a receiver, 1 point for 25 yards a QB).

mvscal wrote:

Felix wrote:Yo bud, it isn't that tough to figure out, it's just simple math.

If the analogy I laid out about the 400 yards is wrong, then POINT OUT MY ERROR

The next time a QB throws for 400 without a TD will be the first. That is your first mistake.

WRONG. Mark Brunell did it. He threw for over 400 yards, 0 TDs, and 4 INTs in a game. It was 1996 or 1997, and I had him on my team. My league didn't have negative points for INTs and other owners started bitching. It does happen.