Fluctuating player prices are here to stay, of that I am pretty certain. There’s no doubt in my mind that the Fantasy Premier League (FPL) game benefits from the extra dimension they bring, helping to separate the game from its rivals. Others seem to lack a significant layer of strategy without such a feature and, when Fantasy managers are able to construct replica squads, with fixed player prices, this simply adds to mid-season and end of season templates which frustrate and kill the enthusiasm in a mini-league chase.
Having said all this, like most elements of our Fantasy games and the FPL game in particular, there is merit in examining how efficiently the system works – how it governs the decisions of Fantasy managers and consider that, perhaps, there are flaws to be ironed out or improvements that can be made.
My greatest bugbear with the current system in the FPL is that I’ve always felt that insight – the forward thinking involved in acquiring a player that hits form – is punished due to the loss of funds associated with selling that player on at a later date. For my mind, the 50% lost as a result of selling a player that has risen a million or so, becomes a huge factor that can pray on the mind of a Fantasy manager. This can cause hesitation and deliberation that ultimately hands an advantage to those who are able to be more agile in their thinking because a loss of funds is not such an issue to them.
The current situation with Michu is a prime example. Currently priced at 8.4, those Fantasy managers who bought him in early around his initial valuation of 6.5 will now be faced with losing over a million as a result of shipping him out. Arguably, Michu’s form has warranted action for some time but, undoubtedly, the funds lost will have played on the minds of those who have held him for a good while; perhaps not so much at this stage in the season but it may have been a factor in weeks gone by.
Those who had more flexibility because they got Michu later, or perhaps have a smaller sum to lose, have had the advantage here. They can make their decision on the Spaniard without a significant loss of funds being an issue and react quicker to another player in form.
The counter argument is often “well you earned his points early on – that’s your reward”. The problem here is that I don’t see any reason why I shouldn’t be rewarded without being handed any disadvantage later down the line. Of course I should earn the points benefit for getting Michu early but why should this be partially balanced out by the issue of inflexibility caused by a severe loss of funds later in the season? Why should I be punished at all? My foresight surely should have gained me a win-win situation.
It’s very easy to isolate such potential flaws without putting forward solutions and, while it seems likely that this situation will remain unaddressed, it doesn’t stop me considering a number of routes that could be explored that would remove this penalty for far-sighted Fantasy managers. For starters, there could be a ruling that 100% of the price increase is gained back on players sold that were in your initial squad lineup. This would suitably reward Fantasy managers for identifying players that would go on to become leading assets over the course of the season.
This may, of course, throw the balance of the game out considerably, so how about the option to lock down a limited number of players? Perhaps contracts that could be assigned to a player in each position that you select that will always reward 100% value when you next sell them on. This would introduce a new strategic element – allowing Fantasy managers to back a handful of their squad selections, making them immune to the 50% drop.
Admittedly, I’m a Fantasy manager that often deliberates and procrastinates, a flaw that holds me back. However, the potential loss of funds from selling a player becomes a factor that only compounds this chink in my armour. While I recognise that I should be braver as a Fantasy manager and it’s perhaps this that is preventing me from breaking into the very top ranks, I’m convinced that the game mechanics associated with price rises exacerbates my problem. Maybe if I could make 100% back on Michu, I’d have sold him weeks ago and brought in Moussa Sissoko earlier and caught his points. In fact, that’s probably highly likely.
At times over the season, I feel punished for having made the right decision on a player early and have to sit back and watch other Fantasy managers enjoy more freedom with their squads – freedom which often leads to them make up the points I originally gained from my early foresight. With the points in the bag, I should be as free as them, as flexible, to make the same decisions. Basically, I should have my cake and eat it: I’ve earned it.
Price rises are surely here to stay and will continue to enrich our Fantasy experience but, for this Fantasy manager, there remains an injustice at play.
