2008 NFL FOFC High/Low - Week 1

[JAG]

With TLK's blessing (he's too pressed for time), I'm going to give it a shot running the NFL high/low for this season.




The Rules:

-Pick one team for the High and one team for the Low. You may only use each team once for the High and once for the Low per season.

Ex.

High: Dallas
Low: Washington

-Scoring: High score minus Low score

Ex.

High: Dallas 35
Low: Washington 13

Score for the week: 22

If your Low outscores the High, you are eliminated for the rest of the season. Also, if you miss a week, you are also eliminated.

The remaining participant with the highest score at the end of the season, or the last man standing wins the contest.

Please make your picks in this thread.....

WEEK 1
Thursday, Sep. 4
GAME	TIME
Washington at NY Giants	8:30 p.m.
Sunday, Sep. 7
GAME	TIME
Detroit at Atlanta	1:00 p.m.
Seattle at Buffalo	1:00 p.m.
Kansas City at New England	1:00 p.m.
Jacksonville at Tennessee	1:00 p.m.
St. Louis at Philadelphia	1:00 p.m.
Tampa Bay at New Orleans	1:00 p.m.
N.Y. Jets at Miami	1:00 p.m.
Houston at Pittsburgh	1:00 p.m.
Cincinnati at Baltimore	1:00 p.m.
Carolina at San Diego	4:15 p.m.
Arizona at San Francisco	4:15 p.m.
Dallas at Cleveland	4:15 p.m.
Chicago at Indianapolis	8:15 p.m.
Monday, Sep. 11
GAME	TIME
Minnesota at Green Bay	7:00 p.m.
Denver at Oakland	10:15 p.m

[Alan T]

High: Pittsburgh
Low: Carolina

[Butter]

Hi: New England
Lo: Green Bay

[johnnyshaka]

High: San Fran
Low: Houston

[hoopsguy]

High: San Diego
Low: St. Louis

Also, can the picks be changed up to game time for the selected teams, or are they locked in at kickoff of the first game (Thursday night this week)?

[JAG]

High: New England
Low: Chicago

[Jas_lov]

High: San Diego
Low: Kansas City

[TLK]

Rough week.

High: Seattle
Low: Carolina

[JAG]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

can the picks be changed up to game time for the selected teams, or are they locked in at kickoff of the first game (Thursday night this week)?

According to TLK, in the past picks could be changed up to game time for the selected teams so long as you delete your original post and make a new one.

EDIT: Well obviously with the forum change you will have to edit your original post, so long as the edit is not past the start of the games.

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by JAG

The remaining participant with the highest score at the end of the season, or the last man OR WOMAN standing wins the contest.

Ahem, fixed

High: Indianapolis
Low: Kansas City

[fantastic flying froggies]

High: Indy
Low: KC

[PackerFanatic]

High: Philadelphia
Low: Kansas City

[Radii]

High: New England
Low: Carolina

[ntndeacon]

Hi: INDY
Low: St. Louis

[Coffee Warlord]

High: San Diego
Low: Houston

[Commo_Soldier]

High: Arizona
Low: Chicago

[Lathum]

High Pittsburg
Low Chicago

[Ryche]

Hi: Philadelphia
Lo: Chicago

[Tasan]

High: New Orleans
Low: Chicago

[RendeR]

High: New England
Low: Carolina

[Thomkal]

thanks for picking this game up JAG, always a lot of fun each season.

High: Philadelphia
Low: Kansas City

Really wanted to go with my beloved Cards as the High here, but on the road and well its the Cards.

good luck everybody!

[eiskrap]

High: Dallas
Low: Kansas City

[sterlingice]

Hi: SF
Low: KC

SI

[Masked]

High: Dallas
Low: Atlanta

[TazFTW]

H: Philadelphia
L: Houston

[QuikSand]

If it's not too late, I'd like to lobby for a change in rules. I think the scoring here is really cool, and it's fun to watch it week by week... but in the end, there's only a really remote chance that it means anything at all. This is essentially just a survivor contest, and the scoring is a pointless sideshow unless, somehow, multiple people run the table for 17 weeks, where the points become a tiebreaker.

How about just making a miss a big penalty instead of an elimination? Something like you score triple the difference that week if your high fails to outscore your low? (And set a flat negative score like a -25 for a non-submission) That way, a loss still can really hurt you, but the scores would really make the contest.

[hoopsguy]

Some folks who have reason to worry after the Pats only put up 17 in the opener ...

[cougarfreak]

I know I'm late, but I'll pick a game that hasn't been picked.

Hi: Indy
Low: Oakland

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

If it's not too late, I'd like to lobby for a change in rules. I think the scoring here is really cool, and it's fun to watch it week by week... but in the end, there's only a really remote chance that it means anything at all. This is essentially just a survivor contest, and the scoring is a pointless sideshow unless, somehow, multiple people run the table for 17 weeks, where the points become a tiebreaker.

How about just making a miss a big penalty instead of an elimination? Something like you score triple the difference that week if your high fails to outscore your low? (And set a flat negative score like a -25 for a non-submission) That way, a loss still can really hurt you, but the scores would really make the contest.

I like the idea, personally, because, as you said- it's basically a survivor contest as is. That said, it looks like it's going to have to wait until next year

Also, I would suggest a -50 for forgetting to pick. A loss can easily be -25 but -50 would mean losing by more than 16 which is fairly unlikely.

SI

[hoopsguy]

I'm all for the alternate format as well, either modifying this one on the fly or creating a new contest starting with Week 2.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'm all for the alternate format as well, either modifying this one on the fly or creating a new contest starting with Week 2.

I'm ok with modifying this contest with that alternate format.

[Lathum]

I say modify as well, some people are already screwed

[Jas_lov]

If I'm screwed, modify. If I'm not, don't modify. Right now I'm tied and SD has 10:00 left to score. I assume that a tie goes to the picker so maybe I'm safe.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

If I'm screwed, modify. If I'm not, don't modify.

That is something that my 8 year old would say (with slightly different wording obviously)

[JAG]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

If it's not too late, I'd like to lobby for a change in rules. I think the scoring here is really cool, and it's fun to watch it week by week... but in the end, there's only a really remote chance that it means anything at all. This is essentially just a survivor contest, and the scoring is a pointless sideshow unless, somehow, multiple people run the table for 17 weeks, where the points become a tiebreaker.

How about just making a miss a big penalty instead of an elimination? Something like you score triple the difference that week if your high fails to outscore your low? (And set a flat negative score like a -25 for a non-submission) That way, a loss still can really hurt you, but the scores would really make the contest.

That sounds more fun to me as well. I'd rather see a slightly higher penalty for low outscoring high though. How does something like this sound to people:


1. If your low scores more than your high, you lose (3 x point differential) + 10 points.

2. -60 per skipped week.


Let me know, if there's enough support, I'll score the first and subsequent weeks with that format.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by JAG

That sounds more fun to me as well. I'd rather see a slightly higher penalty for low outscoring high though. How does something like this sound to people:


1. If your low scores more than your high, you lose (3 x point differential) + 10 points.

2. -60 per skipped week.


Let me know, if there's enough support, I'll score the first and subsequent weeks with that format.

I'm not sure that 3x point differential + 10 is going to be enough of a penalty for actually blowing the week. There is a good chance you only miss by say 1 - 5 points, meaning your penalty is only 25 which isn't a huge deal.

I would think it would be a bit more punitive but a fixed level so it is really bad to "lose" the week, but at least you aren't out of the game. Say at least something close to the penalty for missing the week all together.

[sterlingice]

I like the 3x -5. If you're in a close loss, losing 25 points stinks. Not only did you lose but all the other teams around you gained and you lost 1 of 17 valuable weeks.

I vote for the changes.

SI

[hoopsguy]

Chicago is also causing problems.

[Tasan]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Chicago is also causing problems.

Frickin Bears. It was a great one week while it lasted. Unless we change the rules.

Can we change the rules? I vote we DO change the rules.

[Coffee Warlord]

Any chance if it switches to a scoring style setup, we keep a seperate tally of the "winners"? I always liked the survivor aspect of this one.

[Commo_Soldier]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Any chance if it switches to a scoring style setup, we keep a seperate tally of the "winners"? I always liked the survivor aspect of this one.

+1

I think it would be possible to change the rules and still keep track of who would have won the old way.

[PackerFanatic]

I am cool with the changes. I had a good week

[sterlingice]

Bump- getting to be time for Week 2 High/Low

SI

[tucker rocky]

Anyone willing to run this again?