I am starting this poll because of what I just realized. Of the 32 participants that started the 2008 contest, One has missed all 8 weeks, one has missed 7, one has missed 5, three have missed 2, and three have missed 1 week. It is the three that have missed one week that most concerns me. We are going to have a week toward the end that has very few games. That one week missed will mean that those three people will have to count that low scoring week. My thoughts are that we actually drop two lowest scores next year so that all that are still in contention can drop that lower week score plus one that they miss. Who is for this change for next year and who is against it?
Since we don't have to worry about beating the spread this contest isn't really that hard, dropping 1 score is more than enough. I understand what you are saying, but really that's part of the contest ...Remembering to make your picks!!!
I started it off with a yes vote. Although I don't remember missing a single week in the history of the contest, I hate the last week that is added by Yahoo which has very few games. That is the score that I and most people dropped since we went to Yahoo. I am in favor of dropping two weeks to allow the person that actually does miss one week to not have to count that last week as well. It will also allow anyone that has not missed a week to take some chances with some long shots on the final weeks.
I hear you Terry. I guess that the very few brain cells that I have that think in a way that leans toward the democrats wants to "rob from the rich to give to the poor" in this way, and this way only! :wink: I can understand having to miss one week but in the present system, when you miss one week, you automatically have to count that short week as well.
You never know... we might have an alternative to the Yahoo contest next year. Now that my job is more or less back to normal, I'm thinking I'll look into finding something we have more control of. On Agtimes I make sure there are 15 games EVERY week, so that last week isn't an issue because I don't use it. If I can find a way to bring something similar over here - problem solved. I probably won't know for sure until next summer, but I'll keep you posted.
I see your point Tom, I forgot about that last week. Also I really think Yahoo should have the same number of games each week. I change my vote then. 2 would take care of the last week and allow for 1 oops I forgot to pick my teams moment.
That's a generous rule change, Tom. As you kow, I screwed up recently by not saving my picks and did not get my score counted. The rule change would allow me to stay competitive despite my stupidity.I'm all for it. :lol:
Contest <r>Hey Sid,<br/> <br/> Don't feel bad, I forgot to save my pics twice.<br/> <br/> <E>:cry:</E></r>
The thing about dropping low scores is almost mute as if you enter every week you will automatically drop one of the weeks with the fewest games even if you happen to pick them all right and have a week with a larger number of games where you didn't pick very well. I wish there was a way to make it the same number of games every week. However do not take this as a criticism of our Skybox contest. I enjoy it a lot. I'm not voting just yet and will ponder long and hard on this important vote! 8) 8)
I found some software that I think will solve our problems for next year. I still have to figure out how to run it from my website... I'm sure Kes will help me figure it out...
I think Scott has the solution. When he and Kes were running the show all of the Skybox teams were represented in the contest each week. Not only did it make it more interesting, it was more difficult because they also held down the number of games with large spreads. The mulligan rule is fine, and having the same number of games each week would make it more equitable. If we start allowing ourselves to drop more than one week the contest would be more like the Gary than the Andy.
If the system is automated where the picks are up early each week and the results are automatically tabulated, I would personally have no problem with the change. I just remember issues with a manual system where we fielded complaints from every direction: Why are picks not available until as late as Thursday? Why was my team not selected? Why are results not posted until after the next week's game was under way? We all understood because the manual system takes time... time that most of us do not have to give. I am having difficulty thinking of how a system would work that could pick games based off of low point spread, and all skybox teams every week, without manual intervention. I am not picking on Scott. We had these issues when Neil Voiland ran the contest as well. It is a problem related to any manual system used.
Don't worry Tom, it will be automated (assuming it works as I think it will). It will be about like what we are doing with Yahoo, but we will have control of all the variables.