a little something i wrote over at the football cafe

[wrveres]

ooops almost forgot .. a little more "Fuel" ..






16 vs. 162

[Rico The Retard]

Football side=Bad
Baseball side=Good
Rico the Retard=Great

[raiders_umpire]

Football side=Bad
Baseball side=Good
Rico the Retard=Great

dont know about the football side being bad, but i do think fantasy football is not too fun.... baseball side great.....rico the retard great ummmmm NO

[Sox FANatic001]

Rico the Retard=Great

amen to that

[GSes]

Football side=Bad
Baseball side=Good
Rico the Retard=Great

lol and to think we wanted to trade rico to the footall side

ahh mabe we can keep him!

[portisfan24]

ooops almost forgot .. a little more "Fuel" ..






16 vs. 162

why is more games harder exactly?

[Bukoski77]

Guys, let's play nice, ok?

Both Cafe's are great, and very informative resources for our fantasy playing. I'm sure we can all agree on that, right?

Now if everyone wants to discuss the differences in fantasy baseball vs. fantasy football, feel free (even though there are a few threads already on this. Use the "search" feature to find them ), but let's cool the flames and not make any of this personal.

I've chimed in on this same debate and topic a few times before over the last year and a half, but one more time cant hurt.

Let me first say I am an admitted member of both Cafes. GSes was correct about all the complaining over players not produceing their expected performances over at the football cafe. The counter point that all the complaining happens here at the baseball cafe is also true as well. The difference is that the complainers seem to last all year at the football cafe where as in the baseball cafe the fair weather complainers are pretty much gone and have already given up bye late April to mid May.

To Play Nice.
The football cafe is great, but the baseball cafe is even greater.

Fantasy Baseball VS Fantasy Football.
Baseball wins a little more than 11 to 1. 16(average fantasy football season) divided into 162(average Roto league season) equals 11.25. Unh huhh....... Baseball requires way more research, strategy, and math ability than football. I could keep going on this tangent all day.

The biggest reason I will state Fantasy Baseball is better is simply that
All The Players On The Field In Baseball Are Accounted For In The Scoreing Of Fantasy Baseball

I'm yet to hear a valid counter argument of why fantasy football is better than fantasy baseball after that over at the football cafe.
Fantasy Football is like a game of checkers oppossed to a game of chess with Fantasy Baseball.

Fantasy Football never has and probably never will in any format taken into account the performance and play of the Offensive Line. Heck Fantasy Football as a game is just now catching up to the concept of giving defenders individuality, ala IDP(Individual Defensive Players). Anyone that has ever been involved with organized football at any level can tell you that the offensive and defensive lines are the most important parts of the game. Coaches stress that on every level of organized play starting with 8 year old Pee-Wee leagues. Why do you think for years that Denver has produced great running backs or that over the past two years any Viking RB getting 20+ carries usually has stellar games? Are M.Bennett, M. Williams, M. Moore, and O. Smith all really 4 of the top 20RB's in the NFL based on some of the performances they have churned out over the last 2 years when given the role as the feature back with 20+ carries? Or could it be that offensive lineman are the heart and soul of any football team and control the tempo of the game for any "skill position"?

Anyone want to play a baseball league with me where we dont draft individual pitchers and go bye cumilative team pitching totals?..........LOL

Fantasy Baseball wins easily.

Football side=Bad
Baseball side=Good
Rico the Retard=Great

Dangit man. We were trying to get a marble thrown in with that trade to the football cafe for you. Do you realize how much of your salary we are going to have to absorb after that post now?

Just fooling around man, lol. You might be a distraction at times but your good for the game as you create fan intrest.

[Cornbread Maxwell]

I play both, and while I do think FBB is tougher and a better game in general, I would like to stick up for FFB. The difference between the two fantasy games is monumental, and the only similarity between the two is that they both use real stats from real athletes to play their respective games - other than that we are comparing apples and oranges.

On one hand you have a statistical game with emphasis on a return to the mean mentality that is relatively accurate due to the nature of a 162 game season. FFB meanwhile is more situational based and has much more riding on one game, so the decisions being made are based on opponents and other short term situations much more than FBB. While FBB decisions do have an aspect of situational matchups, it isnt nearly as much of a factor as in FFB. Thats why there are so many start/sit questionson the FFB side - its simply the nature of the game - people are looking for any minor thing to help them make a good decision, while in FBB we have a small bench and typically our main starters are going to play regardless of matchups (especially hitters). Also, because injuries are much more prevalant in football, that also leads to more speculation on the performance of replacements - adding to the start/sit type questions.

Like I said, apples and oranges - both have their merits, but those who play both fantasy games know that they are two completely different animals that require two different sets of skills - one to learn the subtle nuances of a marathon roto type approach, and the other to make quick decisions and read the rapidly changing landscape of the NFL.

[portisfan24]

I play both, and while I do think FBB is tougher and a better game in general, I would like to stick up for FFB. The difference between the two fantasy games is monumental, and the only similarity between the two is that they both use real stats from real athletes to play their respective games - other than that we are comparing apples and oranges.

On one hand you have a statistical game with emphasis on a return to the mean mentality that is relatively accurate due to the nature of a 162 game season. FFB meanwhile is more situational based and has much more riding on one game, so the decisions being made are based on opponents and other short term situations much more than FBB. While FBB decisions do have an aspect of situational matchups, it isnt nearly as much of a factor as in FFB. Thats why there are so many start/sit questionson the FFB side - its simply the nature of the game - people are looking for any minor thing to help them make a good decision, while in FBB we have a small bench and typically our main starters are going to play regardless of matchups (especially hitters). Also, because injuries are much more prevalant in football, that also leads to more speculation on the performance of replacements - adding to the start/sit type questions.

Like I said, apples and oranges - both have their merits, but those who play both fantasy games know that they are two completely different animals that require two different sets of skills - one to learn the subtle nuances of a marathon roto type approach, and the other to make quick decisions and read the rapidly changing landscape of the NFL.

cornbread comes through again. Great explanation

[perlick29]

I think Cornbread summed it up well there. But I will say this, the football cafe can be very hostile at times, where as I haven't seen the same anger come from this side when people are trying to ask legitimate questions.