2016 WoV NFL Picks Game (Discussion Thread)

Quote: SOOPOO

I can still go 0-12 for a 50% record. I am trying to defend my Mr. Average crown.

Not gonna happen SooPoo...I am zeroing in on your Average Crown ;-)

Is it easier to go 1-4 or 4-1?

Greetings!

The Week 16 Lines are as follows:

Redskins (-3) @ Bears (+3) O/U 47
Dolphins (+3.5) @ Bills (-3.5) O/U 41.5
Buccaneers (+3) @ Saints (-3) O/U 52.5
Falcons (-3) @ Panthers (+3) O/U 52
Vikings (+7) @ Packers (-7) O/U 43
Jets (+16.5) @ Patriots (-16.5) O/U 44
Titans (-5) @ Jaguars (+5) O/U 43.5
Chargers (-6) @ Browns (+6) O/U 43.5
Colts (+3.5) @ Raiders (-3.5) O/U 53
49ers (+3.5) @ Rams (-3.5) O/U 39.5
Cardinals (+8.5) @ Seahawks (-8.5) O/U 43
Bengals (PK) @ Texans (PK) O/U 42
Ravens (+5.5) @ Steelers (-5.5) O/U 44.5
Broncos (+3.5) @ Chiefs (-3.5) O/U 37.5
Lions (+7) @ Cowboys (-7) O/U 44.5

(Christmas) Greetings!

The Week 16 Picks have been posted:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/sports/26768-2016-wov-nfl-picks-game-official-thread/5/#post569185

Miplet has default picks?

Quote: Ayecarumba

Miplet has default picks?

There are also no picks posted for MidwestAP, Rainman, and RDW4POTUS.

miplet has default picks, not sure what they are though. MidwestAP is already eliminated from 2 byes

Quote: wudged

miplet has default picks, not sure what they are though. MidwestAP is already eliminated from 2 byes

Note: 2 byes don't eliminate you from the top prize... just the other two prizes.

Although I do admit he is, in effect, also eliminated from the top prize not because of his byes but because of his record. It's mathematically impossible for him, at 27-37, to overtake the leaders.

Last 5 dogs listed excluded the Seahawks if they are the favorite


Colts (+3.5)
49ers (+3.5)
Ravens (+5.5)
Broncos (+3.5)
Lions (+7)

Quote: EdCollins

Note: 2 byes don't eliminate you from the top prize... just the other two prizes.

Although I do admit he is, in effect, also eliminated from the top prize not because of his byes but because of his record. It's mathematically impossible for him, at 27-37, to overtake the leaders.

Yea, I meant he was eliminated from winning any prize he still had the possibility of winning.

Week 16 Unofficial Results

Mission146 (2-4)
Jets +16.5 (loss)
Browns +6 (win)
Rams -3.5-CONFIDENCE (loss)
Texans PK (win)
Broncos +3.5 (loss)

TheoHuxtable (2-4)
Dolphins +3.5 (win)
Bengals PK (loss)
Steelers -5.5 CONFIDENCE (loss)
Lions UNDER (loss)
Patriots -16.5 (win)

WizardofNothing (4-2)
Bears +3 (loss)
Bears over 47 (win)
Bills -3.5 (loss)
Bills over 41.5 (win)
Saints -3 confidence (win)

GWAE (3-3)
Bears +3 (loss)
Dolphins +3.5 (win)
Buccaneers +3 (loss)
Vikings +7 (loss)
Ravens +5.5 confidence (win)

Zourah (3-3)
Bears +3 (loss)
Raiders -3.5 CONFIDENCE (win)
Titans -5 (loss)
Rams UNDER 39.5 (loss)
Saints OVER 52.5 (win)

Paradigm (6-0)
Cardinals +8.5 (win)
Falcons -3 (win)
Browns +6 (win)
Raiders -3.5 (win)
49ers +3.5 (Confidence) (win)

JohnnyQ (2-3)
Bears (+3) (loss)
Buccaneers (+3) (loss)
Falcons (-3) (win)
Jaguars (+5) (win)
Bengals (PK) (loss)

SM777 (0-6)
Bengals PK (loss)
Lions +7 (loss)
Jets +16.5 CONFIDENCE (loss)
Chargers -6 (loss)
Titans -5 (loss)

SOOPOO (1-5)
Jets +16.6 confidence (loss)
Panthers +3 (loss)
Chargers -6 (loss)
Titans -5 (loss)
Ravens +5.5 (win)

Terapined (3-3)
Bears +3 (loss)
Bucs +3 (loss)
Ravens +5.5 (win)
Jets +16.5 (loss)
Bucs over confidence (win)

BeachBumBabs (4-2)
Falcons -3 confidence (win)
Vikings +7 (loss)
Chargers -6 (loss)
Cowboys -7 (win)
Saints -3 (win)

GenWyzgy (2-3)
Saints OVER 52.5 (win)
Bears +3 (loss)
Falcons OVER 52 (loss)
Packers -7 (win)
Texans OVER 42 (loss)

Wudged (6-0)
Falcons -3 - Confidence (win)
Texans PK (win)
Cowboys Over 44.5 (win)
Patriots -16.5 (win)
Dolphins +3.5 (win)

Wizard (2-3)
Saints (-3) (win)
Vikings (+7) (loss)
Browns (+6) (win)
Rams (-3.5) (loss)
Broncos (+3.5) (loss)

FourFiveFace (3-3)
Panthers +3 (loss)
Jets +16.5 (loss)
Cardinals +8.5-Confidence (win)
Ravens +5.5 (win)
Lions +7 (loss)

JML24 (2-4)
Bills -3.5-Confidence (loss)
Browns +6 (win)
Rams -3.5 (loss)
Texans PK (win)
Lions +7 (loss)

AyeCarumba (3-2)
Bears +3 (loss)
Vikings +7 (loss)
Browns +6 (win)
Raiders -3.5 (win)
Cowboys -7 (win)

OdiousGambit (2-3)
Panthers +3 (loss)
Jaguars +5 (win)
Browns +6 (win)
Rams -3.5 (loss)
Bills -3.5 (loss)

JohnZimbo (3-2)
Bears over 47 (win)
Cardinals +8.5 (win)
Dolphins +3.5 (win)
Vikings +7 (loss)
Steelers -5.5 (loss)

10dollarbri (2-3)
Bears +3 (loss)
Panthers +3 (loss)
Jaguars +5 (win)
Broncos +3.5 (loss)
Cowboys -7 (win)

EdCollins (5-1)
Chiefs -3.5 confidence (win)
Dolphins +3.5 (win)
Raiders -3.5 (win)
Rams under 39.5 (loss)
49ers +3.5 (win)

PlayYourCardsRight (2-3)
Browns +6 (win)
Bengals PK (loss)
Colts +3.5 (loss)
Chiefs UNDER 37.5 (loss)
Saints OVER 52.5 (win)

JoelDeze (5-1)
Saints -3 confidence (win)
Patriots -16.5 (win)
Texans PK (win)
Panthers +3 (loss)
Dolphins +3.5 (win)

Scottimus1 (3-2)
Redskins (-3) (win)
Dolphins OVER 41.5 (win)
Buccaneers Over 52.5 (win)
Titans (-5) (loss)
Chargers (-6) (loss)

Aluisio (4-2)
Ravens +5.5 (win)
Falcons -3 (win)
Jets +16.5 (confidence) (loss)
Packers -7 (win)
Raiders -3.5 (win)

JW17 (4-2)
Browns (+6) confidence (win)
Broncos (+3.5) (loss)
Cardinals (+8.5) (win)
Bills (-3.5) (loss)
Jaguars (+5) (win)

Miplet (2-3)
Colts (+3.5) (loss)
49ers (+3.5) (win)
Ravens (+5.5) (win)
Broncos (+3.5) (loss)
Lions (+7) (loss)

MidwestAP (0-5)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)

Rainman (0-5)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)

RDW4POTUS (0-5)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)
forfeit (loss)

Name	Wins	Losses	%
Wizard	50	27	64.94%
Scottimus1	55	34	61.80%
10DollarBri	43	32	57.33%
Mission146	43	33	56.58%
JoelDeze	53	41	56.38%
FourFiveFace	50	40	55.56%
Terapined	40	33	54.79%
SOOPOO	47	39	54.65%
Paradigm	48	40	54.55%
BeachBumBabs	51	44	53.68%
OdiousGambit	40	35	53.33%
JML24	41	36	53.25%
Wudged	44	40	52.38%
AyeCarumba	45	41	52.33%
GWAE	49	45	52.13%
EdCollins	42	40	51.22%
SM777	41	41	50.00%
Aluisio	42	43	49.41%
JohnnyQ	36	39	48.00%
GenWyzgy	42	46	47.73%
Miplet	38	42	47.50%
TheoHuxtable	39	45	46.43%
Rainman	40	48	45.45%
RDW4POTUS	33	41	44.59%
WizardofNothing	41	52	44.09%
Zourah	35	46	43.21%
JW17	38	50	43.18%
JohnZimbo	35	51	40.70%
PlayYourCardsRight	33	53	38.37%
MidwestAP	27	47	36.49%
Totals	1,261	1,244	50.34%

Record of Skipped Weeks:
(players listed alphabetically)

100DollarBri: Week 8
Aluisio: Week 1, Week 12
JML24: Week 7
JW17: Week 13
MidwestAP: Week 6, Week 14, Week 16
Miplet: Week 3
Rainman: Week 7, Week 16
RDW4POTUS: Week 10, Week 16
SM777: Week 8
Terapined: Week 2
TheoHuxtable: Week 2
Wizard: Week 14
Wudged: Week 7

The wins & losses above now include an 0-5 forfeit (second skipped week) for MidwestAP back in Week 14, which was not included prior to this.

Congrats to SM777, for going 0-6 this week, and is now a serious threat for the Most Average prize.

(SM777 was 41-35 last week, and seemingly out of contention.)

Quote: EdCollins

Congrats to SM777, for going 0-6 this week, and is now a serious threat for the Most Average prize.

(SM777 was 41-35 last week, and seemingly out of contention.)

Fortunately for the rest of us vying for the middle, SM777 already used their skip week.

Please confirm: A partial or incorrectly structured set of picks results in losses for the missing or incorrect picks, but does not disqualify the player as long as at least one pick is valid?

Quote: Mission on page 10

…In summary, everyone must make five total picks, every week, regardless of whether or not a Confidence Pick is made.

Any further instances of anyone making less than five Picks shall result in all unmade Picks counting as a loss…

I'm loving the heated battle for mediocrity. My favorite horse, however, is Miplet, to offset the sidebets he's going to have to make good. 4-2 next week would do it.

Also interesting is a couple of folks who are.better off not betting the confidence, to have a shot at 50/50.

Good luck to.all. And nice job, Paradigm and wudged! I haven't managed a 6-0 yet this year.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Good luck to.all. And nice job, Paradigm and wudged! I haven't managed a 6-0 yet this year.

Thanks BBB...23-6 over the last 5 weeks have made my overall record a bit more respectable. I was really bad through Week 11! Hoping to crack the top 5 by the end of it, but undoubtedly I will go 0-6 this week :-/

So I really was hoping to go 0-6 this week so I could contend for the "you suck" prize, but had I gone 6-0 I would've been a contender for "most average"

So, if there was any doubt about my ineptitude I managed to go 3-3 right when it was the least helpful!

Quote: Ayecarumba

Please confirm: A partial or incorrectly structured set of picks results in losses for the missing or incorrect picks, but does not disqualify the player as long as at least one pick is valid?

Quote: Mission on page 10

…In summary, everyone must make five total picks, every week, regardless of whether or not a Confidence Pick is made.

Any further instances of anyone making less than five Picks shall result in all unmade Picks counting as a loss…

Good question.

As administrator, Mission needs to answer this. (I THINK this was addressed already, but maybe I'm thinking of something else.)

I myself don't believe it should be allowed to "back your way into" the "Most Average" or the "You Suck" prize. It's not in the spirit of the game.

It's only this year that we've had the Most Average and You Suck prizes. So in past years it did you no good to submit a set of incorrect or missing picks, ever. I recall being penalized myself, two (or three?) years ago, because I accidentally submitted opposing picks. It was early in the season and unintentional (of course) and as I recall, I was given a loss for each.

But this year, because we have these additional prizes (which IS nice... it keeps more players interested who otherwise wouldn't be), a player shouldn't be able to do that, if it helps them. (In my opinion.) For example, take someone who is in serious contention for the You Suck prize. You shouldn't be able to submit 5 opposing or invalid picks, as sneaky as that might be, and be given an 0-5 result because of it... which would be exactly what you wanted, of course!

I think any set of invalid picks should invalidate you for anything but the top prize. I hope I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Note that we haven't had ANY set of invalid or missing picks all year long this year.

Quote: EdCollins

...
Note that we haven't had ANY set of invalid or missing picks all year long this year.

Actually, there was one in week 1 which generated Mission's ruling on page 10.

I am in position to benefit from this clarification, so I will refrain from taking a position, but am willing to go either way as long as everyone is playing by the same rules.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I'm loving the heated battle for mediocrity. My favorite horse, however, is Miplet, to offset the sidebets he's going to have to make good. 4-2 next week would do it.

Also interesting is a couple of folks who are.better off not betting the confidence, to have a shot at 50/50.

Good luck to.all. And nice job, Paradigm and wudged! I haven't managed a 6-0 yet this year.

Too bad my aim was for 4-2 :(

I did some math and find that if I get at least two out five, with no confidence pick, then Scottimus1 can't catch me. If I get one only right, he can catch with me five winning points. If I get none right, then he will need only three winning points.

Assuming S1 makes a confidence pick and I don't, no pushes, and a 50% independent probability of each pick winning, then S1 has a 4.4% chance of winning.

Quote: Ayecarumba

Actually, there was one in week 1 which generated Mission's ruling on page 10.

I am in position to benefit from this clarification, so I will refrain from taking a position, but am willing to go either way as long as everyone is playing by the same rules.

I am with you. I likewise could benefit from this but I think it should not be allowed. I think a set of invalid picks should count as a missed week but whatever Mission decides I am ok with.

I can't speak for anyone else who would benefit from "invalid picks," but I'll be putting in my picks like normal.

No one has any integrity around here?!?!

Since I'm not in the running for the Fiddle in the Middle or Goat prizes, I can speak to this topic without bias.

As I understand the issue, some people are deliberately not submitting picks, or only submitting one valid one, or have the intent to, so that the other picks will be automatic losers, in an effort to sandbag their way to the Fiddle in the Middle or Goat prizes.

In my opinion, this should not be allowed and is abusing the intent of the rules. I think the first week of invalid/missing picks should count as the bye week and the second as being automatically disqualified from all prizes. If there is some difficult case where somebody put in picks 5 minutes late or something, then that can be looked at on a case by case basis, but be decided on a case by case basis, depending on the reason for the lateness.

Ultimately, this is Mission's thing and all should respect his decision, even if not agreeing with it. Just saying what I would do.

Quote: Wizard

Since I'm not in the running for the Fiddle in the Middle or Goat prizes, I can speak to this topic without bias.

As I understand the issue, some people are deliberately not submitting picks, or only submitting one valid one, or have the intent to, so that the other picks will be automatic losers, in an effort to sandbag their way to the Fiddle in the Middle or Goat prizes.

In my opinion, this should not be allowed and is abusing the intent of the rules. I think the first week of invalid/missing picks should count as the bye week and the second as being automatically disqualified from all prizes. If there is some difficult case where somebody put in picks 5 minutes late or something, then that can be looked at on a case by case basis, but be decided on a case by case basis, depending on the reason for the lateness.

Ultimately, this is Mission's thing and all should respect his decision, even if not agreeing with it. Just saying what I would do.

Not involved but isn't this making a good bet? Unless the rules clearly stated otherwise.

Quote: Boz

Not involved but isn't this making a good bet? Unless the rules clearly stated otherwise.

It violates the spirit of the rules at best--I was under the impression this was discussed somewhere in this thread and it was pretty clear that if people didn't submit a complete valid set of picks they would be allowed that one "skip week" and then that person would not be eligible to win anything but the top prize.

Unless there are many more people at the bottom of the standings doing this than I am aware of it won't affect my (nonexistent) chances of winning anything but if people are able to win prizes that way I will not be participating in the future.

I really appreciate Mission taking the time to do this.

Quote: Wizard

As I understand the issue, some people are deliberately not submitting picks, or only submitting one valid one, or have the intent to, so that the other picks will be automatic losers, in an effort to sandbag their way to the Fiddle in the Middle or Goat prizes.

No, no one has done it yet. It is being considered as an idea/strategy, for this final weekend, if it is allowed within the rules.

Because this is our first year with the Middle and Goat prizes, I don't believe there is a specific rule against it.

Again, my vote is to also not allow this. As I said before, it's not within the spirit of the game. But I will accept whatever the final decision is.

Good luck with your picks this weekend!

Go Lions! Smack the Pack!

Quote: EdCollins

No, no one has done it yet. It is being considered as an idea/strategy, for this final weekend, if it is allowed within the rules.

Because this is our first year with the Middle and Goat prizes, I don't believe there is a specific rule against it.

To me that is the answer. If there is no rule against it, it is a good play.

What would Dan say? Should make the decision easy to most of us. And make you smile at the same time.

Quote: Zourah

It violates the spirit of the rules at best--I was under the impression this was discussed somewhere in this thread and it was pretty clear that if people didn't submit a complete valid set of picks they would be allowed that one "skip week" and then that person would not be eligible to win anything but the top prize.

Unless there are many more people at the bottom of the standings doing this than I am aware of it won't affect my (nonexistent) chances of winning anything but if people are able to win prizes that way I will not be participating in the future.

I really appreciate Mission taking the time to do this.

Never hate and threaten those who take advantage of the rules. But if it was determined those people could not be eligible for a prize, then there is nothing to debate.

Quote: Boz

If there is no rule against it, it is a good play.

That philosophy may be the order of the day as an advantage player, but I think this of this as a friendly competition where both the intent and letter of the rules should be considered.

I would say rule 5 covers it, although not directly.

Quote:

5.) If a player fails to make picks for more than one week, he/she forfeits any right to a consolation prize, but may continue to play.

Failing to make correct picks could be construed as failing to make picks in general.

Quote: Wizard

That philosophy may be the order of the day as an advantage player, but I think this of this as a friendly competition where both the intent and letter of the rules should be considered.

I was considering it as a gambler. But I see your point, so at what point does friendly wager override profit potential?

Quote: Boz

Never hate and threaten those who take advantage of the rules. But if it was determined those people could not be eligible for a prize, then there is nothing to debate.

No hate involved on my part and I don't think my $20 entry threatens the existence of this contest in the future so I don't think I'm threatening anyone.

This was presented to me as a fun, friendly contest when I was invited to participate. If things are allowed in this way I just won't participate in the future- lesson learned. I'm just not interested in participating in something that seems to be that cutthroat over a few bucks.

I've read a few trip reports or something about get-togethers that people in this group of participated in with silly games that sounded like fun. In some cases there a strategy involved but everyone seemed to play within the spirit of the rules. I don't get to Vegas that often so I thought this would be a fun way to interact with some folks.

The concept was make five valid picks or it would count as a skip week. I thought this was addressed after someone didn't do that in week 1.

I am in contention for the Suck prize and no one should be able to take losses by not making valid picks.

Quote: PlayYourCardsRight

I am in contention for the Suck prize and no one should be able to take losses by not making valid picks.

One possible solution is to randomize the outcome for non-valid picks. i.e. 50/50 chance of winning and losing.

Quote: Boz

I was considering it as a gambler. But I see your point, so at what point does friendly wager override profit potential?

In life there are often no easy answers. I think one could write a whole book in answer to that question. For whatever reason, most of us are more inclined to make sacrifices for a friend or close relative and the more degrees of separation between you and stranger, the more inclined you are to screw them if you can benefit from it. Just human nature.

The object of the game was to make five unique picks each week, with one skip week available without penalty The best, most average and worst pickers win.

I'm in contention for the Suck prize and a,few weeks ago there was a problem with Mission deleting the word Over (or was it Under) from my selection. Everyone said that if I had screwed up, it should not benefit me and I agreed then and now.

If what is being suggested is allowed, I'll take one game and four automatic losses for the Suck prize right now.

Make picks or take a legal skip week and let the results happen fair and square.

I think less than 5 legitimate picks is a violation of both the spirit of the game and the precedent set when Joe had erroneous picks week 1 and Mission ruled on that.

People should be required to submit a set of valid picks. What they pick, tailored to their objective, is up to them.

JMHO.

Sorry for the duplicate post. My phone didn't update or I suck at that too ;)

Already in the rules,

Quote: posted rules

5.) If a player fails to make picks for more than one week, he/she forfeits any right to a consolation prize, but may continue to play

that player can still win the main prize I guess, although that would be quite a feat

Quote: odiousgambit

Already in the rules,



that player can still win the main prize I guess, although that would be quite a feat

I think everyone is aware of that rule.

But what isn't clear is what happens if I do make picks, they're just not valid? Say I accidentally only make three picks? Or I pick Redskins -7.5 three times? I think that's the confusion. I "made" picks, they're just not the standard five different selections.

Allowing Joel Deeze to get away with this in week 1, set an awful precedent for this situation.

Quote: SM777

I think everyone is aware of that rule.

But what isn't clear is what happens if I do make picks, they're just not valid? Say I accidentally only make three picks? Or I pick Redskins -7.5 three times? I think that's the confusion. I "made" picks, they're just not the standard five different selections.

Allowing Joel Deeze to get away with this in week 1, set an awful precedent for this situation.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "awful", as Mission did make it clear that it was a one time Commissioner decision. However, a clarification is required since the second part of the statement seems to allow invalid picks.

Quote: SM777

I think everyone is aware of that rule.

But what isn't clear is what happens if I do make picks, they're just not valid? Say I accidentally only make three picks? Or I pick Redskins -7.5 three times? I think that's the confusion. I "made" picks, they're just not the standard five different selections.

Allowing Joel Deeze to get away with this in week 1, set an awful precedent for this situation.

Mission clearly outlined this in the post about JoelDeze's week 1 picks.

Quote: Mission146

everyone must make five total picks, every week, regardless of whether or not a Confidence Pick is made.

Any further instances of anyone making less than five Picks shall result in all unmade Picks counting as a loss

Also rule 3, while not explicitly declaring "different," already specifies you must make exactly 5 picks before the season even started.

This is why we can't have nice things. Assuming we have this contest again next year, I'd be surprised if there are any consolation prizes after all the scrutiny of what 5 picks means.

Greetings!

I was just about to post the Lines for this week and have noticed the need for me to make an Official ruling as relates the matter of intentionally tanking a set of Picks in order to have a better chance of winning one of the consolation prizes.

My Ruling is as follows:

Purpose and Intent

The purpose and intent of the two consolation prizes is to ensure that players remain interested in the game throughout the season while (as happened) generally making their best efforts to WIN the competition in the early stages. In previous seasons, we have had players who have been all but mathematically eliminated from winning anything at a point that I would consider, 'Too early,' for what is meant to be a season-long competition.

In order to ensure continued interest in the game, I developed the two consolation prizes with the intent that, for a player that uses only one Skip Week (or none), that it would be quite late in the season, if ever, before said player is completely mathematically eliminated from winning any prize whatsoever. If you had a player who was currently at .500, or near enough to .500 that the player would prefer not to pick and that player had not used his/her Skip Week, then to use the Skip Week would be a fully above-the-board move, in my opinion.

The intent of the original set of Rules, which we are mostly using, was to ensure that players could not use an invalid set of picks (particularly in the final week) in a manner that helps that player WIN the contest, it was not written with consolation prizes in mind. In fact, it would take complicated languages and, perhaps, pages of rules in order to cover every possible contingency as relates consolation prizes and, 'Gamesmanship,' in the pursuit thereof.

For example, if the Rules concerning invalid or off-setting picks did not exist, then Wizard could take two different O/U's (as an example) and take each side of each of the two O/U's for four of his picks, win or lose on the fifth pick and Wizard has the two wins he needs for this to be over right now. The Rules are designed to avoid something like that, and again, were not written with consolation prizes in mind.

Other Strategies

Furthermore, by way of the language of the Rules, a player could theoretically have made invalid Picks the entire time thereby causing a terrible record and all but locking up the, 'You Suck,' prize. A player could theoretically have made every Pick invalid all season and would be guaranteed a profit as the prize exceeds the Entry Fee. Again, that's not what the prize is for, the, 'You Suck,' prize is designed to keep players interested in the game when it has become impossible or all-butt-impossible for that player to win with a few weeks left.

I would suggest that the spirit of any such gamesmanship as relates that prize would be antithetical not just to the spirit of the game, but specifically antithetical to the reason I created the prize to begin with.

The Rules as Written

The purpose of the Rules as written is to penalize players who fail to submit a proper set of five unique Picks, not to aid players who would deliberately fail to do so. I believe everyone knows what a proper set of five unique picks is supposed to look like as Week 1 was the only occasion in which I was submitted an improper set of Picks, as I recall. I made a one-time ruling that week because it did not appear to me to be any type of gamesmanship in play, as it was too early to know how the failure to make the fifth pick would effect the outcome.

Final Ruling

Therefore, my Ruling for Week 17 is as follows:

A.) All players who do not wish to use a Skip Week must submit a set of five unique Picks which may or may not include a Confidence Pick at the discretion of the player.

B.) Any players who fail to submit a proper set of five unique Picks that have not used their Skip Week will have the improper set of Picks automatically constitute a Skip Week instead.

C.) Any players who have used a Skip Week and submit an improper set of Picks will be immediately disqualified from the competition and any and all prizes.

Greetings!

The Week 17 Lines are as follows:

Texans (+3) @ Titans (-3) O/U 40
Bills (-3.5) @ Jets (+3.5) O/U 42.5
Ravens (PK) @ Bengals (PK) O/U 41.5
Giants (+7.5) @ Redskins (-7.5) O/U 45
Packers (-3) @ Lions (+3) O/U 49.5
Jaguars (+4.5) @ Colts (-4.5) O/U 47
Cowboys (+4.5) @ Eagles (-4.5) O/U 43
Bears (+6) @ Vikings (-6) O/U 42.5
Panthers (+4.5) @ Buccaneers (-4.5) O/U 46
Browns (+6) @ Steelers (-6) O/U 43
Saints (+7) @ Falcons (-7) O/U 56.5
Patriots (-9.5) @ Dolphins (+9.5) O/U 44.5
Cardinals (-6.5) @ Rams (+6.5) O/U 40.5
Chiefs (-5.5) @ Chargers (+5.5) O/U 44.5
Seahawks (-9.5) @ 49ers (+9.5) O/U 43
Raiders (+1.5) @ Broncos (-1.5) O/U 40.5

Very clear. Thank you Mission!

No problem!

Thanks again for all of your work on this Mission.

Actually, now that I think about it, we'll address this for next season early. The Rules actually don't need to become any more complicated as two Skip Weeks results in an automatic forfeit.

Therefore, for next season the Rules will be changed as follows:

Change 1: Any player who fails to submit a set of five unique Picks consisting of five regular Picks with no Confidence Pick, or four regular Picks with one Confidence Pick, shall have that week constitute the optional, 'Skip Week,' if that player has not yet used his/her Skip Week.

Change 2: Any player who fails to submit a set of five unique Picks consisting of five regular Picks with no Confidence Pick, or four regular Picks with one Confidence Pick, and who has used his/her Skip Week, shall automatically receive an 0-5 record for that week and shall forfeit the opportunity to win any consolation prizes, but may still play to win the contest outright.

Quote: Zourah

Thanks again for all of your work on this Mission.

You're welcome, and thanks again for playing!