2.12
Expansion just happened again in the league, and the ISFL has grown to 14 teams. I have faith in the new general managers of the Berlin Fire Salamanders and New York Silverbacks that they will be successful in this league. Instead of team-specific discussion, I want to talk about the logistics involved in adding two more teams: namely, scheduling and playoff seeding. Fourteen teams is such a difficult number. We had finally figured out a great schedule for twelve teams that I believe was fair: each team plays the other five teams in their conference twice (10 games), once at home and once on the road, and plays every team in the opposite conference once. This means that everyone plays essentially the same schedule as their conference opponents in terms of difficulty level, if one excludes home field advantage in non-conference games from the discussion. How will the new schedule work with fourteen teams?
Option 1: We could revert to a thirteen game season and have every team play every other team once. This would be competitively fair but essentially negates any sort of meaningful concept of conferences apart from playoff standings. In fact, a team would play more non-conference foes that conference rivals in this layout (7-6). The other part of this proposal I do not care for is the reduction of games. I think sixteen games is just the right number for our league and most people would not be happy about reducing that number.
Option 2: Each team plays sixteen games, one against every team, and three additional conference games. This option is a little better than the previous one. A team would play nine conference games and seven non-conference games. I like that every team gets to play all the other teams in this option. However, figuring out which conference teams to play twice might be a headache.
Option 3: Each team plays sixteen games, twice against each conference rival and four non-conference games based on standings from prior seasons. This is my favorite option of the three since it emphasizes the conference rivalries the most. Each team gets to show that they are better than the other teams in the conference by playing every team twice and playing 75% of their schedule within the conference. Here is how I would set up non-conference games.
ASFC seed # - Four NSFC seed # opponents - Sum of seeds of opponents
1 - 1,2,3,4 - 10
2 - 1,2,5,6 - 14
3 - 1,3,4,6 - 14
4 - 1,3,5,7 - 16
5 - 2,4,5,7 - 18
6 - 2,3,6,7 - 18
7 - 4,5,6,7 - 22
This is a balanced and fair way to promote both conference rivalries and league parity by giving the best teams the most difficult schedules. I have reached my word count, so I will just say, the main two options of playoff format is just keeping the current three team format with byes for one seeds, or to expand to eight total playoff teams and run a typical eight team bracket.
3.14
After three seasons of mediocrity, I believe that my player, Andrew Witten, finally deserves some recognition, including a trip to the Pro Bowl and a nomination for cornerback of the year. In his first season as a starting cornerback in the ISFL (he played his first two seasons at strong safety) Witten showed that he can be an elite player at the position. Playing across from David Rector, one of the best defensive players in the league, Witten had lots of opportunity to make plays as quarterbacks targeted the easier side of the field. This season Witten intercepted five passes, had sixteen passes defended, seventy five tackles, and even recorded a pick six, his first career touchdown. Here are the other candidates who might be in competition with Witten for a nomination:
Dermot Lavelle Jr. – 6 INT, 20 PD, 1 TD
Brandon Booker – 5 INT, 10 PD, 2 TD, 3 sacks, 2 FF, 1 TFL
Jim Waters – 4 INT, 23 PD
Louisiana Purchase – 3 INT, 22 PD
Kehla, Rector, Knight, Scarlett – 3 INT, between 16-18 PDs, and 1 or 2 FF/FR
I think these are the nine most likely candidates for the award. In my opinion, interceptions are king, and touchdowns also go a long way for Pro Bowls and awards. Passes defended are the third most CB stat. I believe that Lavelle will win the award, but Booker and Witten’s interceptions and touchdowns will put them over the top to place top three in CBoY voting.
3.26
Wide Receiver Mark Walker had to wait a long time of DSFL draft day. He was the tenth wide receiver taken and did not hear his name called until the 78th pick of the draft, the sixth pick of the tenth round in an eighteen-round draft. Let’s talk about how he has performed relative to his peers. In total TPE earned, he is in 7th place, already passing players selected above him in the draft. In terms of production, he was sixth in receiving yards among rookie wide receivers, with 29 catches for 345 receiving yards and three touchdowns. This production is amazing considering he was the third wide receiver option on the team playing behind the Kiwi duo of Doug Howlett and Friedrich Vequain, who are perhaps the best wide receiver duo in the history of the Developmental Simulation Football League. Consider this: Vequain and Howlett combined for three hundred and ninety six catches, over five thousand yards, and 29 touchdowns in three seasons together. They also combined for four nominations for wide receiver of the year and one victory at that award. Both will be leaving Tijuana to join their ISFL teams next season, so given the huge volume of production that will be available, I expect Walker to have a huge season next year as the number one option.
Expansion just happened again in the league, and the ISFL has grown to 14 teams. I have faith in the new general managers of the Berlin Fire Salamanders and New York Silverbacks that they will be successful in this league. Instead of team-specific discussion, I want to talk about the logistics involved in adding two more teams: namely, scheduling and playoff seeding. Fourteen teams is such a difficult number. We had finally figured out a great schedule for twelve teams that I believe was fair: each team plays the other five teams in their conference twice (10 games), once at home and once on the road, and plays every team in the opposite conference once. This means that everyone plays essentially the same schedule as their conference opponents in terms of difficulty level, if one excludes home field advantage in non-conference games from the discussion. How will the new schedule work with fourteen teams?
Option 1: We could revert to a thirteen game season and have every team play every other team once. This would be competitively fair but essentially negates any sort of meaningful concept of conferences apart from playoff standings. In fact, a team would play more non-conference foes that conference rivals in this layout (7-6). The other part of this proposal I do not care for is the reduction of games. I think sixteen games is just the right number for our league and most people would not be happy about reducing that number.
Option 2: Each team plays sixteen games, one against every team, and three additional conference games. This option is a little better than the previous one. A team would play nine conference games and seven non-conference games. I like that every team gets to play all the other teams in this option. However, figuring out which conference teams to play twice might be a headache.
Option 3: Each team plays sixteen games, twice against each conference rival and four non-conference games based on standings from prior seasons. This is my favorite option of the three since it emphasizes the conference rivalries the most. Each team gets to show that they are better than the other teams in the conference by playing every team twice and playing 75% of their schedule within the conference. Here is how I would set up non-conference games.
ASFC seed # - Four NSFC seed # opponents - Sum of seeds of opponents
1 - 1,2,3,4 - 10
2 - 1,2,5,6 - 14
3 - 1,3,4,6 - 14
4 - 1,3,5,7 - 16
5 - 2,4,5,7 - 18
6 - 2,3,6,7 - 18
7 - 4,5,6,7 - 22
This is a balanced and fair way to promote both conference rivalries and league parity by giving the best teams the most difficult schedules. I have reached my word count, so I will just say, the main two options of playoff format is just keeping the current three team format with byes for one seeds, or to expand to eight total playoff teams and run a typical eight team bracket.
3.14
After three seasons of mediocrity, I believe that my player, Andrew Witten, finally deserves some recognition, including a trip to the Pro Bowl and a nomination for cornerback of the year. In his first season as a starting cornerback in the ISFL (he played his first two seasons at strong safety) Witten showed that he can be an elite player at the position. Playing across from David Rector, one of the best defensive players in the league, Witten had lots of opportunity to make plays as quarterbacks targeted the easier side of the field. This season Witten intercepted five passes, had sixteen passes defended, seventy five tackles, and even recorded a pick six, his first career touchdown. Here are the other candidates who might be in competition with Witten for a nomination:
Dermot Lavelle Jr. – 6 INT, 20 PD, 1 TD
Brandon Booker – 5 INT, 10 PD, 2 TD, 3 sacks, 2 FF, 1 TFL
Jim Waters – 4 INT, 23 PD
Louisiana Purchase – 3 INT, 22 PD
Kehla, Rector, Knight, Scarlett – 3 INT, between 16-18 PDs, and 1 or 2 FF/FR
I think these are the nine most likely candidates for the award. In my opinion, interceptions are king, and touchdowns also go a long way for Pro Bowls and awards. Passes defended are the third most CB stat. I believe that Lavelle will win the award, but Booker and Witten’s interceptions and touchdowns will put them over the top to place top three in CBoY voting.
3.26
Wide Receiver Mark Walker had to wait a long time of DSFL draft day. He was the tenth wide receiver taken and did not hear his name called until the 78th pick of the draft, the sixth pick of the tenth round in an eighteen-round draft. Let’s talk about how he has performed relative to his peers. In total TPE earned, he is in 7th place, already passing players selected above him in the draft. In terms of production, he was sixth in receiving yards among rookie wide receivers, with 29 catches for 345 receiving yards and three touchdowns. This production is amazing considering he was the third wide receiver option on the team playing behind the Kiwi duo of Doug Howlett and Friedrich Vequain, who are perhaps the best wide receiver duo in the history of the Developmental Simulation Football League. Consider this: Vequain and Howlett combined for three hundred and ninety six catches, over five thousand yards, and 29 touchdowns in three seasons together. They also combined for four nominations for wide receiver of the year and one victory at that award. Both will be leaving Tijuana to join their ISFL teams next season, so given the huge volume of production that will be available, I expect Walker to have a huge season next year as the number one option.