Looking For Feedback On NFBC Cutline Rules

[FrozenTundra]

I think having two FAAB periods is very important. I would definitely keep the first one where it is. The second one could be moved up a couple of weeks to leave more time for the new players to make an impact before the first cut is made. It seems the bulk of the complaints about the FAAB process can be addressed by making it much more user-friendly. I look forward to that. This year's scoring seems very good and I would not be in favor of any changes.

It has occurred to me that the awards should be changed so that both teams that make the first cut get some money. The entry fee could be raised to $150. This adds $250 to the league "pot." Increase the first place award by $50 to $300 and give second place $150. Take the remaining $50 and use it to boost the prize pool. I don't think this modest increase in price would impact the number of entries very much. On the other hand, giving cash to the second place team might well encourage more people to sign up. In any event, I think making the first cut should be rewarded.

I continue to enjoy Cutline a great deal and if the FAAB process is streamlined may well play more than the four teams I have this year.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I think having two FAAB periods is very important. I would definitely keep the first one where it is. The second one could be moved up a couple of weeks to leave more time for the new players to make an impact before the first cut is made. It seems the bulk of the complaints about the FAAB process can be addressed by making it much more user-friendly. I look forward to that. This year's scoring seems very good and I would not be in favor of any changes.

It has occurred to me that the awards should be changed so that both teams that make the first cut get some money. The entry fee could be raised to $150. This adds $250 to the league "pot." Increase the first place award by $50 to $300 and give second place $150. Take the remaining $50 and use it to boost the prize pool. I don't think this modest increase in price would impact the number of entries very much. On the other hand, giving cash to the second place team might well encourage more people to sign up. In any event, I think making the first cut should be rewarded.

I continue to enjoy Cutline a great deal and if the FAAB process is streamlined may well play more than the four teams I have this year.

I can tell you that all of our conversations last week with IT was to make FAAB easier and less time consuming, not to eliminate FAAB for the Cutline. With the influx of injuries, I think you need a couple of in-season FAAB pickups to improve your team or you need many more draft rounds. The Cutline was designed to have quick nightly drafts and a way to compete for the overall title even if you drafted in December or January. We want to keep it that way, so we are heading down the path of improved FAAB rather than no FAAB.

It's easy to tweak the FAAB dates. The second Monday of the season makes sense, and I'm all for moving the last one up a week or two. But you don't want it too early because half of the teams in each league still need to tweak their lineups for the playoff run.

We have been told that we can run these as slow drafts as well as nightly drafts if that's a format that helps things out. We can set those up that way next year as well.

And one other point, I don't think we'll be adding to the league prizes. Sorry, but this is a lottery ticket-style game where the goal is to beat the Cutline several different times and earn a seat at the "final table" where the big money is awarded. It's not a true season-long game; we have many other games like that. This is an easy format after Draft Day where you could turn $125 into $50,000 with a few breaks. It's different from our other games.

And as for the scoring setup, it replicates our 5x5 Rotisserie game very well and I think this year the scoring is even more fine-tuned and better than last year's. Could we win over some DFS players with a true DFS scoring setup that included doubles, triples and walks? Maybe, but truth be told, I'm not sure DFS players would still play a season-long game with that exact scoring setup. Maybe, but we aren't a DFS game. This scoring setup replicates our 5x5 scoring setup as the ADPs clearly show. So we'll likely stick with this format. Hope that helps.

[Deadheadz]

All it takes is a worthy scoring system like all other points style fantasy baseball games use, and I woukd play this. Will never play if the points are quirky and replication of roto is attempted. It is impossible to replicate and predictably needed change after one year. New potential customers that are used to normal daily scoring are going to be turned off by radical scoring as well.

DFS-style scoring systems are based on 1980's box scores, we can and have done better here for players that have an attention span of more than six hours. DFS scoring is the microwaved Walmart hot dog of fantasy baseball, it solves a basic hunger with no thought required whatsoever. That doesn't make it great, just easy.

After trying out Cutline this season I can say I like the scoring system. From what I remember it was meant to approximate Roto mainly because NFBC wanted the ADP for all of the baseball games be fairly comparable. I'd agree it's unique and there's no reason to copy DFS scoring.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

All it takes is a worthy scoring system like all other points style fantasy baseball games use, and I woukd play this. Will never play if the points are quirky and replication of roto is attempted. It is impossible to replicate and predictably needed change after one year. New potential customers that are used to normal daily scoring are going to be turned off by radical scoring as well.

DFS-style scoring systems are based on 1980's box scores, we can and have done better here for players that have an attention span of more than six hours. DFS scoring is the microwaved Walmart hot dog of fantasy baseball, it solves a basic hunger with no thought required whatsoever. That doesn't make it great, just easy.

That is your opinion, and I would expect it to be since you designed this garbage. This is the first season long game that has implemented such a system. CDM had been around for years. Before that we had sportsbuff, bigleague, etc etc. Numbers predictably declined. Doesn't work as I expected. Not too late to fix it.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Chad, please don't compare the NFBC to SportsBuff. That's not a comparison I would ever want to be associated with. For the record, SportsBuff didn't go under because of its scoring system. Salary cap season-long games have faced challenges for years because of its format, not because of its scoring system. The NFBC Cutline Championship will succeed or fail on its format and ease to manage rosters moreso than its current scoring system.

Again, the format is designed for quick, easy 10-team drafts that allow NFBC owners to use similar draft sheets to draft these teams. It comes very close to replicating 5x5 scoring. Maybe in the future we'll have a game that includes points for doubles, triples and walks. You can email me your game format and I'll gladly look it over. If it merits a new contest we'll do it. Thanks.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

I don't think you have space for another game with a different type of scoring system. I think you need to make the best scoring system for your current offering. If you think this is it, then there is no problem. If you are concerned about numbers decreasing, then you might want to look at the scoring system more closely and determine if it is the right one. Seems to me, that there was a need to adjust it a great deal. Why? Because roto cannot be replicated into points. Completely different animal. Therefore you should get the best point system possible for full season, whatever that is. I am wrong a lot. I am probably wrong on this as well. You probably have the nuts scoring system. Just doesn't seem like it to me. You are to be applauded for the excellent concept no matter what.

[Bama]

I don't think you have space for another game with a different type of scoring system. I think you need to make the best scoring system for your current offering. If you think this is it, then there is no problem. If you are concerned about numbers decreasing, then you might want to look at the scoring system more closely and determine if it is the right one. Seems to me, that there was a need to adjust it a great deal. Why? Because roto cannot be replicated into points. Completely different animal. Therefore you should get the best point system possible for full season, whatever that is. I am wrong a lot. I am probably wrong on this as well. You probably have the nuts scoring system. Just doesn't seem like it to me. You are to be applauded for the excellent concept no matter what.

I have to agree with Chad on this. A game based on points will never have the same stategy or ADP of a roto game. It doesn't affect me or my decisions but for someone who hasn't played the game and is looking at it the scoring system it looks confusing at best and idiotic at worst.

As for the FAAB I really think this would be a better game with 3 FAAB periods but maybe with only 3 or 4 players added to original roster, looks like I'm alone on this . One chance that is definitely needed is the first period needs to be moved to second week of season which h I think would help with some of the problems with it. 38 is a good number of rounds in draft to start I think, like the fast draft and would not want to add rounds.

[KJ Duke]

A game based on points will never have the same strategy or ADP of a roto game.

Ken, you're correct that cutline strategy is very different from NFBC roto lges because it's a completely different game as a 10-owner league, no need to balance categories, optimal scoring, and a playoff structure. All of those things require different strategy. This is not a main event league with optimal scoring as a twist, you need to think differently about how to win strategically.

However, cutline scoring gives players approximately the same value versus each other as in NFBC roto because unlike DFS-scoring, walks, doubles and triples don't count; and the relative value of the stats which do count is similar to how you'd calculate auction dollar values. If anyone doesn't understand the math behind the scoring system they probably can't calculate auction values either (which is actually harder), but that doesn't stop a lot of people from playing roto because winning is based on performance not projections.

Also, Cutline ADP's are in fact very close to NFBC roto ADPs ... so you can have the opinion that ADPs shouldn't be similar, but they in fact are. Hope that clears it up for you and anyone else confused about how the game is intended to be both similar, and different, from roto.

[marknym]

I can tell you that all of our conversations last week with IT was to make FAAB easier and less time consuming, not to eliminate FAAB for the Cutline.

I'll stick with DCs then.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I can tell you that all of our conversations last week with IT was to make FAAB easier and less time consuming, not to eliminate FAAB for the Cutline.

I'll stick with DCs then.

Me too.
It's not just the ease of FAAB with the site that is time consuming. It is also the thought process in how to proceed for each player. It is just the nature of the beast.
As Steve alluded to, it is a low cost contest. It is just not worth the time having to put that much time and effort into the game when larger dollar games are more deserving of FAAB time.
It'll be a continual tough nut for this game to crack.

[Deadheadz]

Me too.
It's not just the ease of FAAB with the site that is time consuming. It is also the thought process in how to proceed for each player. It is just the nature of the beast.
As Steve alluded to, it is a low cost contest. It is just not worth the time having to put that much time and effort into the game when larger dollar games are more deserving of FAAB time.
It'll be a continual tough nut for this game to crack.

There are DCs at different price points that all remain eligible for the overall prize.
Is there any reason NFBC can't stage a few $1000 Cutline leagues to run in early-mid March where the additional $8750 in fees would go to league prizes for 1st and 2nd but still have the toe in the overall pool?

Or a $500 entry Cutline? Would that keep you interested enough to care about running FAAB?

Is there a way to grow the number of entrants to Cutline rather than the number of entries? Higher league prizes from higher entry fees may keep the vets interested in the game as presented now but the low entry fee for the chance at $50,000+ overall prize is a good strategy to attract non-NFBCers.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I can tell you that all of our conversations last week with IT was to make FAAB easier and less time consuming, not to eliminate FAAB for the Cutline.

I'll stick with DCs then.

Me too.
It's not just the ease of FAAB with the site that is time consuming. It is also the thought process in how to proceed for each player. It is just the nature of the beast.
As Steve alluded to, it is a low cost contest. It is just not worth the time having to put that much time and effort into the game when larger dollar games are more deserving of FAAB time.
It'll be a continual tough nut for this game to crack.

I certainly understand guys. Baseball is different than football with more players, more positions to fill, minor-leaguers and a long, long off-season to draft from. It's my opinion -- and I could be proven wrong -- that you need a couple of free agent pickups to level the playing field for early drafters and late drafters. Hopefully this becomes a contest with drafts from November to late March.

We hope to make this an affordable game with a larger prize deserving of FAAB time twice per year. Stay tuned. Could be a fun nut to crack.

Again, I appreciate all of the feedback. It's all helpful. It has reinforced our thinking of what this contest can be. We hope for bigger numbers next year and beyond.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Me too.
It's not just the ease of FAAB with the site that is time consuming. It is also the thought process in how to proceed for each player. It is just the nature of the beast.
As Steve alluded to, it is a low cost contest. It is just not worth the time having to put that much time and effort into the game when larger dollar games are more deserving of FAAB time.
It'll be a continual tough nut for this game to crack.

There are DCs at different price points that all remain eligible for the overall prize.
Is there any reason NFBC can't stage a few $1000 Cutline leagues to run in early-mid March where the additional $8750 in fees would go to league prizes for 1st and 2nd but still have the toe in the overall pool?

Or a $500 entry Cutline? Would that keep you interested enough to care about running FAAB?

Is there a way to grow the number of entrants to Cutline rather than the number of entries? Higher league prizes from higher entry fees may keep the vets interested in the game as presented now but the low entry fee for the chance at $50,000+ overall prize is a good strategy to attract non-NFBCers.

Anything is possible, but the above isn't the direction we are going. If we thought there was an audience for $1,000 10-team leagues -- even with optimal scoring -- we'd do them. But I don't think that's the direction the industry is heading. An affordable format with a nice prize to attract new users is definitely the right direction to take.

[rickerbockerNFBC]

I love the format and everything about the cutline except the cut portion. I wish the league had no playoffs and just cumulative score at end of season determines standings and payouts. It doesn't seem like that is the direction everyone wants to take it. So, until then, I will not participate in the league. But the price point and off season draft part I love!!!

[JohnP]

I love the format and everything about the cutline except the cut portion. I wish the league had no playoffs and just cumulative score at end of season determines standings and payouts. It doesn't seem like that is the direction everyone wants to take it. So, until then, I will not participate in the league. But the price point and off season draft part I love!!!

Give it a try! Season ends on July 10 which is about 55 percent of the season completed. The last couple weeks of a season is always a mess anyways in my opinion so this contest avoids that part which arguably makes the regular season portion of the contest represent about 60% of the meaningful games. Top team in a 10 man league doubles their money and top 5 get to participate in a post season tourney. Two FAAB periods aren't so painful. Best ball format is sweet. Lots to like I think. Looking forward to a couple tweaks to what I think should be a growing contest.

[orangemen90]

When this game was introduced, I felt that it begged to be FAAB-less (Faabuless?)
Much like NFFC DC's, it would offer simplicity with no worries about lineups or FAAB.
D&F (Draft and Forget leagues) are a kick.
Unfortunately, there are far fewer offered to the season-long players than the normal lineup/FAAB driven leagues.

While no FAAB would be appealing from a time management standpoint, I think gameplay would suffer so I tend to believe it has better potential numbers with limited FAAB ... and the issue alluded to above by Catch is another thing that would make faab-less hard to pull off.

This is the type of discussion I was looking for because I know Dan and others would like to see this FAAB-less and I like that idea, too. But I just wonder who would draft early in that scenario. Look at all of the injuries in today's game and how does 17 reserves even last from January to September? I don't see it happening.

Here's my question for those in this contest: How many players did you replace in June because of injuries on top of the two free roster additions? Was it 5 or more? If not, then maybe we could go FAAB-less, but I'd love to know that number. Thanks.

My feeling if the FAAB was done away with and it was just Draft Champions with a Cutline.. the game would have less fun from a total lack of game management. The folks that are against the FAAB also are pushing their own agendas. The result will be less folks playing the game with no FAAB.

[DOUGHBOYS]

The sheer diversity of statements based on FAAB, playoffs, scoring system, and its uniqueness may be the number one reason why the contest is not growing greatly.
No matter what tweaks or changes that are made, it won't be everybody's cup of tea.
But for those that are playing the contest, they are really enjoying it.
Instead of 'growing' the contest, maybe it should just stay 'as is' .
Be, and have its own niche for those that really love the game.

[Deadheadz]

The sheer diversity of statements based on FAAB, playoffs, scoring system, and its uniqueness may be the number one reason why the contest is not growing greatly.
No matter what tweaks or changes that are made, it won't be everybody's cup of tea.
But for those that are playing the contest, they are really enjoying it.
Instead of 'growing' the contest, maybe it should just stay 'as is' .
Be, and have its own niche for those that really love the game.

I think you're probably right.

The volume of entries from existing players may go down but I think the hope is that NFBC will attract new players to the site using cutline and once they're here they might get a better feel for the rest of the games and gradually grow those other games as well.

Cutline's low entry fee will get em hooked. Two FAAB periods will help them get their toes wet before jumping into the 12 and 15 team leagues that aren't DC.

[KJ Duke]

The sheer diversity of statements based on FAAB, playoffs, scoring system, and its uniqueness may be the number one reason why the contest is not growing greatly.
No matter what tweaks or changes that are made, it won't be everybody's cup of tea.
But for those that are playing the contest, they are really enjoying it.
Instead of 'growing' the contest, maybe it should just stay 'as is' .
Be, and have its own niche for those that really love the game.

It has a number of unique features, and if anyone is hardened against one of those features they may not play it which will make it more a niche game relative to slow draft numbers. But I think the lack of growth from year one-to-two was one part FAAB being cumbersome last year (and to a somewhat lesser extent again this year), and one part the natural process of a game finding its audience. I cut my team count by 7 this year primarily because of FAAB and I know a number of others did the same; that could easily be the entire difference from 2016. Likewise in year one it was a novelty and you're never going to get 100% retention, and it seemed to be more heavily promoted in year one. So it had a few strikes against it to top a better-than-expected team count from season one. In market terms, it was just going against a tough comp. That happens to the best products and companies at times.

I think Greg is right to ask the question "what can we do to make it better", but most seem to have been one man's improvement is another's detriment. Making it easier to do FAAB is probably the only thing that gets universal support ... if FAAB is made less time consuming I think the game will be growing nicely again next season. Improved display of real-time scoring, along the lines of what the DFS companies can do, would help too by making it more fun to follow along live.

[Tom Kessenich]

Making it easier to do FAAB is probably the only thing that gets universal support

Not to sidetrack the thread but I think this applies to all of our non-DC contests which is why that is a high priority item for our new tech people when we leave the STATS site completely. We've encharged them with helping us make FAAB easier across the board with the belief that will enhance growth in all of our contests and all three sports.