Making Fantasy Football Replicate Real-Life Football

I want to apologize before you read this article. To many in the fantasy community, some ideas may be considered BLASHMPOUS. In my daytime job as a speech and debate teacher, I often ask the question any debater would:

Why? Why do we do it this way?

If the answer is, "Well, we've always done it this way…" your eyes should make The Yeah Yeah Yeahs heads and roll. *cricket chirps*

For context, I also run many tournaments throughout the year, so I have an up-close look into competition and different formats. Competitions as a concept are things I think about a lot. You probably don't, and that's healthy. But me? This guy? I have thoughts.

So put on your vibranium underpants and find the nearest religious institution you can pray in because I'm going to suggest some heinous things.

Where Fantasy Football Falls Short

There's a problem with the way fantasy football reflects real-life football. We frequently see this in a player's contract versus their fantasy draft capital. The most well-paid players are quarterbacks. However, in fantasy football, your quarterback is usually an afterthought. Some leagues will be Superflex to increase the number of quarterbacks or have two quarterback leagues to make quarterbacks more valuable.

To make the quarterback position more important in fantasy football, we create artificial scarcity. To make the quarterback, the most valuable position in sports, more important, we create more starting roles than a real-life NFL team would have. To me, that's backward.

Position scarcity in fantasy means players' value comes from no other players like him in football, so we should be scared of the drop in talent and draft that position RIGHT NOW. The value doesn't come from the player itself, but because few like that player exist. 

However, if you were starting a franchise from scratch, chances are running back may be one of your later options. If today you were given an expansion franchise, your first concern would be:

Who is the quarterback?

Since there are so few game-breaking running backs in real-life football, having a cheap running back is not a competitive disadvantage, so you can put your money elsewhere. Your first-round or second-round running back fantasy draft pick is making much less contractually in the NFL than your fantasy draft capital would imply. I understand we can't perfectly mirror the game of football. However, if we are general managers of our fake team… can't this own fake team at least mirror the decisions those would make in the league… just a little better?

With this framing in mind, here are some of my ideas for fantasy scoring. Positions should be proportional to their value. I want to discuss different ways to score positions and then suggest new ways to implement points into leagues.

Disclaimer:

Of course, these numbers I throw out there can be adjusted to your league. So if you read this and think, "Well, that's dumb. It should be .5 for every first down, not a whole point." Know what I say, buddy?! Good! Do that. This is a recipe, and this is how I like to make it but adjust it to your tastes and preferences. At the very least, this is a thought experiment, and welcome to the perverted thoughts from the creeper behind the bush. (He's only creepy about fantasy football, I promise)

Positional Ideas About Fantasy Football

Quarterbacks - We Undervalue Pocket Passing

Accuracy is the most important thing a quarterback has in his toolkit, yet fantasy does nothing to address this. Sure, you can argue that interceptions hurting quarterbacks count, but A) interceptions are not always on the quarterback, and B) this is only punitive; there are no benefits to being an accurate passer.

You should get half a point for every completion and lose half for every incompletion. Go 55% (which would be pretty terrible. Looking at you, Zack Wilson) and still get some positives, but not enough to change your week. Go 25/30? Now, we've added 10 points to your performance.

Most leagues have yards to be 1 point for every 25 yards, which undervalues their work (I'm not arguing it needs to be the same as other positions, but even 1 point for every 20 yards feels like a positive and easy change). You can embrace stats like game-winning drives or yards per attempt. There are so many creative options we can add to quarterback scoring. If we did so, it could mirror the NFL slightly better.

Look at the last decade of Superbowl champion quarterbacks; how many would we consider running quarterbacks? Sure, Mahomes CAN beat you on the ground, but you're more scared of his arm. Yet, in fantasy, we want all of those beautiful running quarterbacks because they provide more "value" for their yards on the ground versus through the air. The point behind this is that there is real success in the NFL in being a pocket passer, but if Gorr, The God Butcher from Thor: God of Thunder, descended to Earth and looked at our fantasy scoring, he'd think the opposite before murdering your puny Earth Gods. (Rude Gorr… Very rude)

Running Backs - Where being a vital part of the game plan can hurt

Running back in a PPR League getting a 1-yard completion

HELL YEAH BROTHER!!!

3rd down running back is getting 1 yard, but the first down?

HELLO... POLICE?

For all positions, but running back especially, there should be points for USAGE.

Yes, this will sound unbelievable, but give a running back .5 points per carry. 

Efficiency is a crucial component in any sport. The problem is, and this is true in realms beyond sports, that most efficiency stats typically will go down with most usage. This is why, in basketball, the people with the highest three-point percentages are people you haven't heard much about. They're good enough to be used in certain spots, but the scheme is not dependent on them. Grayson Allen was the best 3-point shooter this year by percentage… GRAYSON ALLEN. The Suns scheme is not focused on Grayson Allen. It works because you have around him Kevin Durant, Bradley Beal, and Devin Booker. Grayson is successful because of those around him and because he’s used when appropriate. There should be value in fantasy sports if you are an important part of the game plan.  I think the same is true for football. If your offense is run first, there should be ways to find value in those positions.

There could be .25 per carry and .5 on 3rd or 4th down carries. Get funky and add broken tackles. You could also do the same thing for first downs where first downs, maybe on 3rd down, are more valuable, or time of the game. You could argue that a first down is a first down no matter when it happens in a game, but if you want to add ways to make football mirror real life, that's another option. We remember the big plays in the 4th quarter or overtime much more than we remember what happened with 10 minutes left in the 1st, and there isn't anything inherently wrong with choosing to value that as a league.

Tight ends and Wide Receivers - Please, sir…

I don't have any other thoughts on tight ends or WRs than:

"Please, sir… can I have some more?"

You could find a way to incorporate some blocking stats into their points if you wanted to. Or find a way to convert catch percentage, yards per route run, targets, or any other category you wish into points. Again, each doesn't have to be for a lot, but things can add up when you have a lot of little stats. All the points above for running backs about first downs can also apply here.

Kickers - Have too much impact in most formats

Kickers have a place in fantasy football, but not in the way it is currently designed. I think kickers have too much power in a lower-scoring format (I’ll explain later my ideas for a high scoring format). With how fantasy football is currently scored, I support elimination of kickers (not in real life, because murder is wrong. Though as a Rams fan, I've had some questionable thoughts around Adam Ventari… who proved to 8 year-old me that NO, SOMETIMES, THE BAD GUYS DO WIN.)

But kicking the game-winning field goal is one of the most impactful plays in football. It's our game-winning homerun (I hope mentioning baseball is not grounds for disqualification), yet it could be worth less than a 45-yarder in a blowout. When you have other positions score more, you can give kickers more ways to evaluate them with different points while keeping their relative impact not as high as that of other positions.

Defense - We need to rethink how we score it entirely

I understand and support not having defenses in fantasy; defense as a position struggles because of lack of variance. Defenses often feel like this scoring: +15, +10, 0, -5. There are so few outcomes for defense that it feels random, but they are often far apart.

With defense, it feels like "when it rains, it pours."

Meaning when a defense takes over, they are great, and when they suck, they really suck. And if you are on the side of sucking, and your opponent is on the side of greatness, it feels all the more stupid that this is even a position to begin with. If you incorporate more stats but for fewer points, put more defensive performances closer to better, and find ways the bad defenses don't actively hurt, you can help.

Rarely will a position player give you negative points. But in many formats, defenses can. So defenses feel weird because the scoring mechanics are so different, are more challenging to predict, and you're choosing a whole unit versus a different player.

Like kickers, my defense ideas work better in high-scoring formats, which I will discuss next. In those formats, yards are allowed as separate sacks, pressures, incompletions versus completions, three-and-outs, and forced punts.

General Ideas About Fantasy Football

Scoring should be higher in fantasy football

Last year, I started a fantasy basketball points league with my friends. With the way we scored, players with top-tier 1% level games could score 100 points in fantasy. Ending-week scores would be 1670 to 1450. At first glance, having that many points devalues each point. On the contrary, we have better evaluated a player's actual game impact to be better distinguished in fantasy points. Plus, who doesn't like big numbers?

I think we should be willing to let scores be higher in fantasy football. Why make it 1 point per 10 yards? Why not 1 per 5? 1 per 2? 1 FOR 1?

Conceptually, let us give points for more things. More stats, more points, more fun, and probably more fair!

More positive relationships with players.

Not all 0-point performances are the same. And frankly, in the real NFL, how often is a professional putting out a 0-point game?

Probably rarely.

If you had more ways to earn points, you would rarely get 0-point performances. ,

If, for example, this is a way to give points for a WR for being double-teamed against (maybe .25 points for every double-teamed cover they face), it's not their fault the defense chose to make it impossible for them. Their impact goes beyond what they've scored. They're so impactful and they were schemed out. 

What if someone is targeted every time they run a route, but they're usually blocking versus running a route? A red zone target is worth more than a regular target. I don't have all the answers, but there are many more stats we could consider incorporating into leagues.

2. The outlier performances will feel less improbable to overcome.

It's great to be one with the player who scored more points than the other team combined. But fantasy shouldn't come down to, “oh, you didn't have (insert player here) this week, so you lost.”

 Let's say you have a player who scores 40 fantasy points weekly, one of those genuinely dominant performances. It feels so painful because this person is likely worth 5 to 10  times one in this position. If you have an average player, they are four times less valuable than the opponent's WR. Let's say we have more things to quantify (even if it means there is a more significant GAP in points), which makes relative value more apparent.

For example, if we compare the previous example of a present-day 40-point game to a 10-point game, maybe the 40-point player was facing a defense that had three blown coverages, but the player in the 10-point game had to really earn their yards, and they did so on four broken tackles on short third-down passes that became important first downs.

And, for sure, the player who got 40 points also got one of those big catches on a third down. Sure, but let's say we add first downs as a stat for points. And both got exactly five first downs. Relative value dramatically shifts from 40:10 (4 to 1) to 45:15 (3 to 1)

Even if player one got more first downs because a few more points are given to the low end of the spectrum, it allows us to understand relative value differently. This means it's less likely to have that team that won just because of one player. Since there will be fewer times, a player is four times more valuable than anyone else in the first place. They still have value. Even though it could score more points, the spectrum allows for fairer relative value.

3. Allows for More Nuanced Discussions

If you keep track of more things, there are more new and exciting ways to engage with the game, which will increase appreciation for the sport and its players. I'm not suggesting this is something all leagues should do, but maybe every year, add a little bit until you get to what feels right.

Nuance is helpful for discerning value.

In theory, it's possible to have more rushing yards than your opponent, but you'll get fewer points for it.

It's true that many leagues do so .1 point per yard. But as we get more nuanced, we learn more about what happened in the game. If we have more points and scoring, it allows us to have more tiers of players. This allows more players to be valuable and allows us to see more of a difference between guys in the same tier level.

For example, if you have two players who average 10 points per game, but we are using a scoring system that gives players points for more statistics, suddenly one is scoring 22 points, and the other is scoring 25 because we can see the differences better.

Embrace Chaos

Sports should be fun, so have fun! What does this mean? Feel free to make any custom rules you want. If your player gets the game-winning touchdown, give them 20 points! Who cares? When you're high-scoring formats, you can do more things like that without it being game-breaking.

It's okay to embrace the silly side of sports. What we do is silly, but fun.

I'm a big fan of points for big plays and the real-life Hail Marys that exist but don't exist in fantasy. Sports are crazy and unpredictable, and it's okay if fantasy sports are that way too. Ninety-nine-yard plays rarely happen; what if there's a crazy bonus for getting one? Catching a game winning hail mary is a twelve point touchdown. Onside kick recoveries earn a kicker ten points. Goal line stops in the 4th quarter are the same as a touch down. You could implement so many ideas, so feel free to be creative. Maybe each year, the winner adds a new way to earn points.

My point is that fantasy sports don't have to be a monolith where you follow the default settings on the website or what most people do: do what's more fun for your league. So have fun, QUESTION EVERYTHING, and figure out what's best for you and your buddies (enemies).