WoV Picks Game Suggestions and Voting

Greetings!

What a busy day.

The purpose of this thread is for Suggestions and Voting on Suggestions for potential improvements to the WoV Picks Game for the 2014 NFL Season.

Okay, this thread shall achieve its stated purpose the following way:

1.) Any Member of WoV may suggest a potential improvement to the game, however, a Member who played in this year's WoV Picks game must move to have the suggestion voted upon.

2.) If a Member who played in the WoV Picks game this year makes a suggestion, at the request of that Member, it will automatically be voted upon.

3.) The time for Suggestions is open as of right now, and will be closed at the conclusion of the WoV Playoff Picks game, which is right after the Super Bowl. If anyone has any ideas for improvement of the game between now and then, please post them for discussion.

4.) At such time that the Super Bowl has been played, the Suggestions will be consolidated and posted within a voting thread.

5.) Fourteen days will be allotted for everyone to have a chance to vote.

6.) Voting shall take place by way of each Member quoting the individual Suggestion and either typing, "Yes," or, "No," below it. Majority Rule shall always win, a tie vote at the end of fourteen days shall result in no change, and a Member does not necessarily have to vote on every Suggestion.

That's all for now, please make your Suggestions in this thread, at this time.

Since this is for discussion I would like to through these out. I am not firm on where I would stand on the following potential rule changes but would like to see the opinions.

Remove the confidence pick. Maybe I want this since I went 0-3 with it lol.

Also no minimum/maximum plays per week. Or minimum of 1 game to 10 games per week.

Again just ideas to discuss

Quote: JW17

Since this is for discussion I would like to through these out. I am not firm on where I would stand on the following potential rule changes but would like to see the opinions.

Remove the confidence pick. Maybe I want this since I went 0-3 with it lol.

Also no minimum/maximum plays per week. Or minimum of 1 game to 10 games per week.

Again just ideas to discuss

I like the no max idea. Dislike a minimum of 1. Maybe a minimum of 3 to 5?

Quote: steeldco

I like the no max idea. Dislike a minimum of 1. Maybe a minimum of 3 to 5?

I'll put anything to a vote, but would suggest that five be the minimum if we are going to allow for a range of Picks.

I would vote against it, but I don't think it is a terrible idea. The reason I am opposed (even though it is mostly Variance) is that it just seems more skillful to be Picking against the five Lines that you like the best. Also, unless a person is genuinely skilled, the closer a person should be to .500 with the more games picked, so based on the current pay system, a winner would likely have to worry about making more picks to not win as much money.

Here is an idea I like - maybe have everyone put ten dollars in up front - this would be in addition to the total normal prize pool and would help with two things- making sure everyone stayed in start to finish and also to increase the pool

I can't legally handle anyone else's money and still operate the game, technically, I don't think anyone from the website can.

If we set a minimum, it should be lowered from 5 to 4. Some weeks there are 6 teams on bye and a Thursday game. Thanksgiving there are 3 games. It's hard to find 5 good lines in only 10 or 12 games. However I have no problem keeping it at 5. I'd say set a max at 8 if the max changes.

My suggestion is to pay up before the season. Everyone pays up prior to the season or at least by week #2 or your picks are deleted. $10-$20 buy in. Winner gets 60% of the pool, 2nd gets 25%, 3rd gets 15%

I'm not adverse to playing no maximum if that's what the majority wants, but I would vote to keep the 5 games for apples-to-apples skill-predominant contest. The more games you pick, the larger part luck enters into it, IMO. For a little variance, the confidence optional pick is fine with me. I didn't go back and check draws to see how much that affected total picks, but there was already a wide range of games picked in the final standings, pretty much between 70 and 100. Some people benefitted from less picks but better quality picking; other people (me, for example), did better on confidence picks overall than my general percentage-I would credit that to feeling good about one or two games and being able to pick without a total stat geekout every week, and some luck, so I didn't have to be as skilled as others to be statistically in it til near the end, which was fun.

Quote: Beardgoat

If we set a minimum, it should be lowered from 5 to 4. Some weeks there are 6 teams on bye and a Thursday game. Thanksgiving there are 3 games. It's hard to find 5 good lines in only 10 or 12 games. However I have no problem keeping it at 5. I'd say set a max at 8 if the max changes.

My suggestion is to pay up before the season. Everyone pays up prior to the season or at least by week #2 or your picks are deleted. $10-$20 buy in. Winner gets 60% of the pool, 2nd gets 25%, 3rd gets 15%

I was not in it this year as I came to this site late but I will be in next year.

I personally like the idea of multiple prizes. I think it would keep people a little more interested the entire year. If you are in 4th you may have a shot at 3rd but you have no chance at 1st.

What about a season minimum as opposed to a by week minimum? Must pick 80 games over the season?

I would also go for a larger number of winners, like top 3, but with that dilution of the prize pool amongst three winners, you might have to increase the pay to $1.25 to $1.50 per percentage point you fell behind the top score.

Quote: GWAE

I was not in it this year as I came to this site late but I will be in next year.

I personally like the idea of multiple prizes. I think it would keep people a little more interested the entire year. If you are in 4th you may have a shot at 3rd but you have no chance at 1st.

I also happen to like the idea of multiple prices, it was put up for vote last year and failed, but it could obviously be voted upon again.

The only problem with multiple prizes and distribution, pre-pays, and all of that is we get on some legally shaky ground (by which, I mean, patently illegal) when I get into handling other people's cash related to the game. For my part, I'm offering a prize of $25 with the current game and last year's game, I don't offer or guarantee anything over-and-above the $25.

Now, I do have a good friend of mine, who happens to be an attorney (LOL) moving to the area, so I might ask him about, "Donations," to WoV, and what WoV could do is allocate some of its own funds to the prize pool for this contest as a promotional thing. That still probably would be flimsy, though.

EDIT: Although, the shares of all of those who did not finish in the cash could simply be divided up amongst the winners to such an extent that certain people who didn't finish in the cash would pay third place, others would pay second...etc

Quote: Paradigm

What about a season minimum as opposed to a by week minimum? Must pick 80 games over the season?

The season minimum effectively is 80, as long as people only skip one week. Sixteen weeks * 5 Picks per week, the people who picked less than eighty total games simply had some no-decisions in there. Even with a handful of Confidence Picks towards the end, three or four, I finished with 79 decisions.

Forget the pennies variations..... Every player who loses puts in $20. First place gets 60%. Second place gets 25%. Third place 10%.

And........ Last place gets 5%.

Quote: SOOPOO

Forget the pennies variations..... Every player who loses puts in $20. First place gets 60%. Second place gets 25%. Third place 10%.

And........ Last place gets 5%.

That will be an, "If," vote, if there are prize tiers to begin with, should there be a fixed wager?

I think people like the current system, I know I do, because even if you lose, the quality of your picking can still prevent you from having to pay as much as last place.

Mission is be willing to bet we could work around this such as I donate an amazon gift card preseason for lets say 1250 to the site via an electronic code then everyone in the contest chips in 25 dollars to cover cost and the site donates it back to the winner. I'm an attorney by trade but do not practice so I will defer

Quote: SOOPOO

Forget the pennies variations..... Every player who loses puts in $20. First place gets 60%. Second place gets 25%. Third place 10%.

And........ Last place gets 5%.

I like the payment based on %. It provides a small reward for correct picks once you are out of contention for the win.

I do agree on three prizes don't really care about the breakdown but the winner should get at least half. I also would add up the amounts starting with the biggest loser until crossing the % and have all those players pay the first winner, then do the same for second and third. This would be to ensure each loser only has to pay a single winner.

Five seems like a good number to pick. I would not want to pick lots more games. Five is about the right amount of effort for a small stakes, fun game like this.

Quote: jml24

I like the payment based on %. It provides a small reward for correct picks once you are out of contention for the win.

I agree, and that's the other point, it keeps people playing. I understand the position that people will stay interested when they already have money in, but I tend to disagree with that position as it becomes further and further out of likelihood for a person to mount a comeback.

Quote:

I do agree on three prizes don't really care about the breakdown but the winner should get at least half. I also would add up the amounts starting with the biggest loser until crossing the % and have all those players pay the first winner, then do the same for second and third. This would be to ensure each loser only has to pay a single winner.

I'm not going to say whether MinnesotaJoe or NCFatCat are going to pay or not, MJ hasn't been on for awhile, though, but I think starting with the furthest behind is unfair to the winner. I think it would be best for the winner to collect all money and then distribute it appropriately (based on what is collected within a given timeframe) to second and third place.

Quote: Mission146

The season minimum effectively is 80, as long as people only skip one week. Sixteen weeks * 5 Picks per week, the people who picked less than eighty total games simply had some no-decisions in there. Even with a handful of Confidence Picks towards the end, three or four, I finished with 79 decisions.

I agree that effectively it is the same. I was trying to respond to the issue that some weeks have less lines available due to Thanksgiving games, bye weeks, etc. and by making it a season minimum vs. a week by week minimum, you could avoid that kind of apparent pinch in weeks with less lines.

Maybe you make it 70 season picks......just trying to get to a more flexible week by week answer for some that felt 5 game minimum was too restrictive. It does need to be 70+ picks in total IMHO.

Oh, I love the confidence picks not sure how many I made, but I won a lot of them :-). Plus with a season minimum and the ability to double weight with your confidence picks, you again provide more flexibility in picking week to week.

All that said, I would still likely pick 5 per week so as not to get behind.

Quote: Mission146

I think people like the current system, I know I do, because even if you lose, the quality of your picking can still prevent you from having to pay as much as last place.

+1....if I can't win because I am effectively out of it after week 12, my picks still count because they minimize my loss.

Quote: Paradigm

I agree that effectively it is the same. I was trying to respond to the issue that some weeks have less lines available due to Thanksgiving games, bye weeks, etc. and by making it a season minimum vs. a week by week minimum, you could avoid that kind of apparent pinch in weeks with less lines.

I understand that, but I kind of like the pinch, in a way, and I think it makes the Skip Week usage seem more strategic.

Quote:

Maybe you make it 70 season picks......just trying to get to a more flexible week by week answer for some that felt 5 game minimum was too restrictive. It does need to be 70+ picks in total IMHO.

Oh, I love the confidence picks not sure how many I made, but I won a lot of them :-). Plus with a season minimum and the ability to double weight with your confidence picks, you again provide more flexibility in picking week to week.

All that said, I would still likely pick 5 per week so as not to get behind.

I think I kind of see your point in the first paragraph, rather than having a Skip Week, we could have it so that an individual may make less than five Picks in a given week, but must make seventy Picks total. We could combine that with a Minimum games per week Rule for all weeks while still allowing for one Skip Week entirely. I might like that idea, although, I don't like being able to make a virtually unlimited amount of Picks in a certain week, and would prefer the max to be five or 4 + 1 Confidence.

I don't even know if I could bring myself to put doing away with Confidence Picks to a vote, but it has been suggested, so I guess I have to.

Good point about records and incentive to keep playing. I never thought of that

The one suggestion I have is to close the regular season at week 16. With teams resting starters the final week, it becomes more a matter of luck than skill.

My initial reaction is that more than five picks each week is too many.

If we have a set entry fee regardless of record, what if the contestants were divided into two divisions, East vs. West or North vs. South, so that there would be two "winners" at the end of week 16, than they could face off for a portion of the initial entry fee in week 17.

Instead of a confidence pick, how about five picks and the option of a two team parlay for the sixth, but if either leg fails or pushes, the player takes two losses?

Quote: Ayecarumba

The one suggestion I have is to close the regular season at week 16. With teams resting starters the final week, it becomes more a matter of luck than skill.

My initial reaction is that more than five picks each week is too many.

I went 4-2 the final week with the 2 due to a Confidence Loss, so the final week is clearly 100% skill and 0% luck...j/k

Actually, I somewhat like the idea and am surprised it has not been previously proposed. It will be voted upon.

Quote:

If we have a set entry fee regardless of record, what if the contestants were divided into two divisions, East vs. West or North vs. South, so that there would be two "winners" at the end of week 16, than they could face off for a portion of the initial entry fee in week 17.

Instead of a confidence pick, how about five picks and the option of a two team parlay for the sixth, but if either leg fails or pushes, the player takes two losses?

The divisions is an interesting idea, perhaps they could pick AtS through the Playoffs to decide a winner, instead.

The two-team parlay thing, while an intriguing idea, could get confusing in a real hurry.

Quote: Paradigm

+1....if I can't win because I am effectively out of it after week 12, my picks still count because they minimize my loss.

+1. How about pay as normal. Winner pays 10 (or 15%) of what they collect to second place. Gives something to runner up.

Also, what is the deal with skipping weeks? First week is free, second week is 0-5?

I like the idea of a 70 pick minimum BUT you need to have some way of 'encouraging' the person who goes 40% after 50 picks. Or possibly the person with 72 picks and a 60% record to keep playing?

I wasn't sure if AyeCarumba had skipped a week already. If he had, it seemed odd he could sit out an extra week.