FANTASY FOOTBALL GAME AND METHOD OF PLAYING SAME

Abstract

A fantasy football game, a method, an apparatus and an article of manufacture for playing fantasy football. The fantasy football game can be played by participants who select coaching staffs from actual football teams such that statistical results or related performance indicia achieved during on-field play by one or more respective actual football teams are used to represent each participant in a virtual football game against at least one other participant. Wins and losses for the fantasy football games occur by calculating a total of each individual fantasy player's points and comparing them either in head-to-head or total point total formats. Metrics of the actual weekly on-field performance by a corresponding team can be used to gauge participant success, where such metric is based generally on a quantified value of coaching contributions to that team's on-field success. A more particular form of the metric involves using an adjustment to yards per pass attempt to take into consideration coaching play designs.

Description

This application claims the benefit of the filing date of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/174,135, filed Apr. 30, 2009.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally relates to a method and apparatus for participating in a fantasy league of virtual football teams where participant success is determined by quantifying coaching attendant to the results of actual football games.

The popularity of collegiate and professional sports has led to a broad range of secondary competitions based on the outcome of particular games or related contests, as well as individual player performances within such game or contest. Fantasy sports leagues, especially those relating to football and baseball, are a common version of such secondary competition, where participants accrue points based on the actual on-field performance of such players. Fantasy leagues are typically made up of anywhere from a few to as many as dozens of teams. In fantasy football leagues, each of the participants (typically called managers, owners or the like) can organize teams, determine game strategies and test their skill at running a football team. Generally, one person is selected or volunteers to be the league commissioner; this person has responsibility for setting or administering the rules under which the league participants compete against each other, as well as providing or maintaining player statistics, league standings and related information to the participants. Some leagues are created solely for its participants' amusement, while others play for money or prizes in a pari-mutuel style system for the participant that accumulates the most points, highest score or some related indicia of success. In leagues where money or prizes are awarded, each commissioner is generally also tasked with collecting league fees (for example, registration fees, statistics service fees or the like) and disbursing such prizes or money.

In a typical fantasy football league, each participant selects, drafts or otherwise acquires a composite team with the names of actual football players to fill out his or her team roster. Points, money or other scoring indicia are awarded to each participant based on the statistical performance of selected actual players involved in actual games over the course of the football season. In this way, if a fantasy league participant has a certain actual player on his or her fantasy team roster, the statistical performance of that player in any given actual football game is imputed to the participant's fantasy team. Traditional indicia of a player's performance may (depending on the position played) include points, touchdowns, touchdown passes, touchdown catches, rushing yards, passing yards, tackles, interceptions or the like. These statistics may be tracked and used to award points to the participants' fantasy teams on a game-by-game basis. As such, a participant in a fantasy league typically accumulates a win-loss record by competing head to head against each of the other participants in the league, where in a virtual game between two fantasy teams, the participant whose players in the aggregate accumulated better statistical numbers in the corresponding actual on-field play from the previous game or games is declared the winner. Leagues are typically arranged in which the overall winner is the participant that compiles the best win-loss record over the course of the regular season, or the one who has accumulated the most total points by the end of the season. The fantasy participant or participants with the best record over the course of the season may additionally be involved in a playoff that mimics the attributes of a collegiate or professional football championship model.

While these conventional approaches to participating in a fantasy football game are being enjoyed by many, they do not take full advantage of all that an underlying actual football game has to offer. Specifically, by not appropriating the design edge that football coaches can bring to their team's on-field performance, the effectiveness of fantasy football games of the prior art is limited. Thus, what is needed is a way to play fantasy football where the participants can take into consideration the coaches' contributions (either with or instead of) the players' contributions as a measure of the participants' fantasy team success.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This need is met by the present invention where according to one aspect thereof, a fantasy football game is disclosed. The fantasy game can be played by two or more participants, and includes quantifying coaching based on results derived from one or more actual football games. Statistical metrics taken from the on-field play can be used to correlate coaching staff performance. As will be discussed in more detail below, the inventors have discovered that one metric in particular provides a strong correlation with how well a football team performs.

Optionally, a participant from among the numerous participants whose fantasy football team achieves a highest measure of the quantified coaching value is declared a winner of the game. In the present context, terms such as “value”, “measure”, “metric” and their variants are understood to provide some degree of objective indicia of success in general and a gauge for quantifying coaching in particular. Thus, when such a value, measure or metric associated with a particular fantasy or actual coaching staff is discussed, it is meant to provide some way to objectively compare such staff to others such that a staff achieving a superior (generally higher) value, measure or metric will be indicative of a winning fantasy league participant.

In a preferred optional form, the fantasy game can be structured as a competition between two participants that mimics the head-to-head competition in the one or more underlying actual football games, while in another form, the fantasy game can be structured as a competition between some or all of the participants in such a way that points are awarded to the participants commensurate with the quantified measure of performance achieved by each of their selected teams from any given week. In another option, each participant's fantasy football team is made up of at least a fantasy offensive or defensive coaching staff that corresponds to a coaching staff of an actual professional football team. The inventors have determined that using a metric attributable to a football team's offensive coaching staff can be particularly indicative of that team's on-field success. In such a circumstance, the fantasy team offensive coaching staff can have its performance quantified through the performance of a corresponding actual (i.e., on-field) football team to allow objective judging against other fantasy league participants. In a preferred form, this quantified performance is a measure of human capital engaged in play design (as will be discussed in more detail below), and that difference between various participant's performance metrics is a useful tool by which to quantify the coaching contribution to overall human capital for the purposes of determining a winner from among various participants in the fantasy football game.

In a more particular form, the measure of human capital engaged in play design is made up of adjusted yards per pass attempt (YPA) in general, and more specifically to a first adjusted YPA that is derived from a first participant's respective offensive unit performance in one or more actual underlying football games, as well as a second adjusted YPA that is derived from an opposing participant's fantasy offensive unit performance. In this way, not only are the efforts of the first participant's offensive coaching staff accounted for, but so are the efforts of his or her defensive coaching staff by virtue of how a second participant's own offensive unit was able to perform in on-field play against the first participant's defensive unit in the underlying game or games. Stated another way, a particular fantasy team measure of success can be derived (in a first team) solely from the difference between offensive coaching staff values of two participants engaged in a fantasy head-to-head play format, or in a second form by the highest score differential in each participant's offensive and defensive coaching staff values. The present inventors have determined that the adjustment mentioned above in conjunction with YPA would more accurately take into consideration the coaching contributions made through innovative play design. This adjusted YPA may be thought of as traditional YPA numbers that are augmented by touchdown passes and reduced by sack yards, as will be discussed in more detail below. The present inventors have determined that such augmentations and reductions are descriptive of coaching design innovation, while other factors, such as breakdowns in on-field play, can be used to further refine this quantified indicia of coaching contribution. Particular types of breakdowns that are especially disruptive of the coaching contribution include turnovers and special teams play. These too will be discussed in more detail below.

As stated above, participant scoring can be based on head-to-head comparisons of offensive coaching staffs. The participant coaching staff selection can likewise be for an entire team's coaching staff of a portion thereof, such as an offensive unit that corresponds to an offensive coaching staff of an actual football team, a defensive unit that corresponds to a defensive coaching staff of the same or another actual football team, a special teams unit, or the like. For example, in the case where one or more participants have selected fantasy offensive and defensive units that correspond to offensive and defensive coaching staffs from actual teams, such participant or participants may then correlate the aforementioned performance indicia of the offensive and defensive coaching staffs of the actual football team during their respective actual football game or games with one or more of the offensive and defensive units of the fantasy team of one or more participants. In this way, a strong offensive or defensive performance by a particular actual football team, which provides indicia of coaching staff play design, will tend to produce a higher score for a fantasy football participant's corresponding fantasy football team than would a weak performance by that same actual on-field football team. In the present context, an offensive coaching staff on an actual team may be made up of one or both of the head coach and the offensive coordinator, although other coaches (such as the line coach, receiver coach, running back coach or the like) may also be included. Likewise, a defensive coaching staff on an actual team may be made up of one or both of the head coach and the defensive coordinator, with the line coach, linebacker coach and defensive back coaches or the like optionally included. As with using a first and second adjusted YPA that are derived from a respective first and second participant's offensive unit performance in one or more actual underlying football games as discussed above, a strong quantifiable measure of coaching staff performance can be the difference between a given participant's offensive and defensive statistics, where the defensive coaching staff measure corresponds to that which is achieved by the on-field offense of the actual team that opposes the defense represented by that participant's chosen defensive coaching staff.

Because a fantasy football team used by a participant in any given week need not be made up of an offensive unit and a defensive unit from the same actual football team, the fantasy team coaching units may become a hybrid or composite of actual on-field coaching staffs, much in the same way as fantasy teams of players make up a composite team or roster in other fantasy sports leagues. Thus, for example, a fantasy participant in a game according to the present invention might “draft” or otherwise select the offensive coaching staff of the Indianapolis Colts to represent that fantasy participant in a particular fantasy game, while also selecting the defensive coaching staff of the Pittsburgh Steelers to represent him or her in the same or another fantasy football game. In such case where the participant's fantasy team corresponds to coaching staffs from two different National Football League (NFL) franchises such as the two mentioned above, the participant can be considered to be using a hybrid coaching staff. In this way, a hybrid (i.e., composite) team or coaching staff imputes to the fantasy participant only those performance measures that correspond to the respective coaching staff rather than the whole team. In that way, if the fantasy participant selects for use the Indianapolis Colts offensive coaching staff and the Pittsburgh Steelers defensive coaching staff for a particular fantasy game, and the actual Colts have a particularly bad defensive performance in the underlying actual football game, their poor performance won't adversely impact the participant's fantasy score, as it is only the Colts offensive coaching staff performance that concerns the participant for that given game. As discussed above, the fantasy coaching staff may be made up of just an offensive coaching staff. In such a variant, the fantasy team coaching staff need not be a hybrid, but can instead be represented by a single coaching staff from an actual (i.e., on-field) team.

Furthermore, the participant selection of the offensive and defensive units that will be used to represent such participant in any given week's fantasy football league competition can be made from numerous such units that have been previously drafted by the participant. Thus, in leagues that have more actual teams to choose from than there are number of participants, each participant will be able to have numerous offensive and defensive units from which to select. For example, if there are thirty two teams in an actual football league (such as in the NFL, as presently configured), then there will be thirty two offensive coaching staffs and thirty two defensive coaching staffs. Moreover, if there are eight participants in a given fantasy football league, each participant will be entitled to draft four offensive units and four defensive units such that all of the offensive and defensive coaching staffs of the actual football teams will be accounted for. Likewise, in a fantasy league with four participants, each will be able to draft eight offensive units and eight defensive units, and in a fantasy league with sixteen participants, each will be able to draft two offensive units and two defensive units. In situations where the fantasy league rules permit it, participants with multiple such units will be able to play more than one team in any given week.

According to another aspect of the invention, a method of playing a fantasy football game is disclosed. As discussed above, a fantasy football game is a simulated competition between fantasy teams (or portions thereof) selected by various fantasy league participants, where an actual game includes on-field (also referred to herein as on-the-field) performance by a collegiate or NFL football team that is used to provide the statistics for the fantasy league participants. Likewise, a fantasy football league may be a formal arrangement among a set number of member participants, or an ad hoc group with access to a common database, scoring system and ranking system or the like. The method includes selecting a coaching staff that corresponds to an actual football team coaching staff, then correlating performance indicia of the corresponding actual football team during their respective actual football game or games with the one or more participant's fantasy team coaching staff.

The method may further include comparing the fantasy team score for each of the participants whose respective fantasy team coaching staffs are matched up against each other in the actual underlying football game. In this way, a victory or win can be awarded to the participant with the higher fantasy team score. Because fantasy points are awarded based on an aggregate of certain performance indicia, such as individual statistics, group (i.e., linebackers, running backs or the like) statistics or the like, the on-field performance of the actual football team that the individual player or group of players represents may or may not be equated with the fantasy participant's team success.

Additional options include calculating a difference in performance indicia between a first participant's fantasy team offensive coaching staff and a second participant's fantasy team offensive coaching staff as a way to correlate performance indicia. One or both of the first and second participants' fantasy team offensive coaching staff performance indicia may be based on an adjusted YPA that is achieved by a respective offensive unit in the underlying actual football game or games. In a more particular form, the adjusted YPA is a combination of a particular offensive unit's passing yards accumulated during the actual football game, plus a weighted value of the number of touchdown passes accumulated by the particular offensive unit during the actual football game, less the number of yards lost by the particular offensive unit when its quarterback is sacked attempting to pass during the actual football game, all divided by the number of pass attempts by the particular offensive unit during the actual football game. Such an adjusted YPA (referred to herein as QCYPA) can be used as a way to quantify the coaching contribution to a team's success. This adjusted YPA can be offset by subtracting a value for at least one of (a) turnovers, (b) failed field goal attempts within a predetermined distance, (c) touchdowns allowed on any special teams play such as a punt or kickoff and (d) touchdowns scored by an opposing participant's defense. In the present context, the turnovers, field goal attempts and touchdowns may include both plural and singular such events.

The fantasy team coaching staff method may be made up of one or more of a fantasy team offensive staff that corresponds to an offensive coaching staff of an actual professional football team and a fantasy defensive coaching staff that corresponds to a defensive coaching staff of an actual professional football team. Further, the correlating performance indicia comprises correlating performance indicia of both the offensive and defensive coaching staffs, where the defensive coaching staff performance indicia comprises YPA achieved by a team opposing an actual team that is representative of the defensive coaching staff in the one or more actual football games. The method may additionally include comparing a fantasy team score for each of the various participants whose respective fantasy team coaching staffs are matched up against each other in the actual football game or games, and then awarding a victory to the participant with a higher the fantasy team score. Participating in a fantasy football league may include playing a virtual football game among participants in a fantasy football league. Such league may substantially mimic that of an actual league (such as the NFL) in terms of coaching staffs, players, or other parts of one or more actual teams upon which the various fantasy teams are based.

Moreover, each participant can operate on a computer network system, telephonic system (including mobile or cellular phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs)) or related communication interface. In this way, each participant uses a client or other remote communication means to access information to, or take action on, the participant's fantasy team. More particularly, the participant can use the system to play a fantasy (i.e., virtual) game run by a league commissioner or related administrator that is operating the controller on the network. The system may include a host or central computer-based controller, a data input, a data output, a communications link and a computer usable medium onto which software or a related algorithm pertaining to a fantasy football team or league can be placed or operated. A data storage medium (for example, a statistical database) can be accessed by the host computer, either by direct integral cooperation between them (in the case where the medium is memory that is part of the computer, for example), or by remote connection, such as between the host computer and a separate (for example, fee-based) data storage and retrieval service. In either case, the medium can store player, coaching staff and related game performance statistics that can then be used to correlate actual on-field performance to the score values used by the fantasy participant.

According to still another aspect of the invention, an article of manufacture comprising a computer usable medium having computer readable program code embodied therein for causing a processor-controlled system to perform a method for operating a fantasy football league is disclosed. Teams within the league are based upon actual professional football team coaching staffs, while relevant performance statistics are derived from the on-field execution of the plays that are designed by such actual coaching staffs. A virtual football game according to this aspect of the invention can be played by two or more participants (such as those participating in a common fantasy football league). Each participant is represented in the virtual football game by a fantasy coaching staff that is in turn representative of an actual coaching staff for an actual underlying football game such that statistics achieved by a football team playing for the actual coaching staff are imputed to the respective participant through the fantasy coaching staff. The computer readable program code in the article of manufacture is made up of computer readable program code portion for causing a computer to accept, read in, download or otherwise receive the achieved statistics for the participant. The computer readable program code also includes a portion for causing the computer to determine a fantasy team score for the participant.

Optionally, the computer readable program code further comprises a computer readable program code portion for notifying the participant who achieves the highest of the fantasy team scores. The computer readable program code in the article of manufacture further comprises a computer readable program code portion for calculating a quantifiable measure of the fantasy coaching staff's contribution to the statistics. As discussed above in conjunction with the previous aspects, the quantifiable measure of the fantasy coaching staff's contribution to the statistics comprises an adjusted YPA achieved by an offensive unit in the actual underlying football game. The computer usable medium may include one or more of a hard disk drive, compact disk, digital video disk, floppy disk and flash memory. The computer readable program code may be configured to access a database that includes statistics from one or more of the actual underlying football game or games.

Participants in the league can interact remotely through a terminal in the form of a client device that is connectable to a network. These remote client devices function in a manner well-known in the computer, internet and related electronic communications art. Thus, the host controller can, through the network to which it is coupled, solicit and accept from each participant an initial selection (i.e., drafting) of fantasy team coaching staffs and players, as well as be responsive to a participant request to access the database and report statistics, team and league status information or the like. Examples of such devices include conventional keyboards as well as graphical user interfaces (GUIs) that can accept user input and deliver user output directly through displays, icons or related active interfaces formed on a computer screen, personal digital assistant, cellular phone or related communication device.

In the article, the computer readable program code includes means for causing a computer or related automated processing device (either of which that may act as a server, host controller or even a remote client device connected to one another over the network) to perform the operations necessary to run the fantasy league. This in turn may include keeping individual or team statistics and fantasy league standings, correlating on-field player statistics to fantasy coaching staff performance, as well as other functions. The program code means may be in the form of code routines, subroutines, segments, portions or the like to ensure proper execution of the command contained in those means. The program code recorded on the medium can perform numerous functions, including (but not limited to) listing available participants, accepting participant input, keeping track of the various participants' teams, displaying information pertaining to current league status, money invested, prizes won or the like. In addition, the computer readable program code may include, or have access to, one or more databases that provide statistical information about actual teams and players. Such databases may be part of a fee-based subscriber service.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The following detailed description of the preferred embodiments of the present invention can be best understood when read in conjunction with the following drawings, where like structure is indicated with like reference numerals and in which:

FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a trading system according to an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 2 shows a welcome screen for an exchange corresponding to an embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 3 shows a login screen with fields for setting up a new member's account;

FIG. 4 shows a login screen for a previously-registered participant;

FIG. 5 shows the home screen of a registered trader that successfully logged-in from the screens of FIG. 3 or 4; and

FIG. 6 shows a screen of the standings of a notional league of eight participants according to an embodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Football involves the use of the athletic skill of the players engaged in play execution and coaches engaged in play design. The inventors have discovered that how well a team employs the aggregate of such execution and design in the pursuit of a victory on the field can be quantified. Specifically, the inventors have discovered that execution and design input (measured, for example, in the form of efficiency) can be correlated to the output (measured as productivity).

Because the relationship between execution and play design in football is direct, increases in efficiency in one contributes to increases in efficiency of the other in a symbiotic way. Thus, as the coaching staff acquires better players, those players contribute to increased efficiency through improved execution, which in turn causes the productivity of the plays to increase. Likewise, as the coaching staff designs better plays, those plays contribute to increased efficiency in the execution process and the productivity of the players. Using YPA as a starting place, the inventors have determined that their own synthetic metric, called QCYPA, which includes the contribution of both the players and coaching staff, is a particularly accurate way to predict football team productivity, which in turn is a strong indicator of team success. This metric is expressed by the following equation:

$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{QCYPA}=\frac{\mathrm{PY}+\left(\mathrm{TD}*10\right)-\mathrm{SY}}{\mathrm{PA}}& \left(1\right)\end{array}$

where PY equals the passing yards per game for a given team, TD equals the number of touchdowns thrown by that team per game, SY equals the number of yards lost by that team per game when attempting a pass, and PA equals the number of pass attempts by that team per game. Furthermore, QCYPA is a measure of playmaking efficiency, which is expressed as:

$\begin{array}{cc}\eta =\frac{\mathrm{QCYPA}-K}{K}& \left(2\right)\end{array}$

where K equals the historical, or expected, average YPA for professional football (specifically, the NFL) since 1960. It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the analysis used herein for professional football is equally applicable to collegiate football. Moreover, the total efficiency η is equal to the entirety of human capital H in the game:

η=H  (3)

which is the sum of human capital due to play design (i.e., coaching) H_A and human capital due to playmaking (i.e., execution) H_Y as follows:

H=H_A+H_Y  (4A)

which can be rewritten as:

H_A=H−H_Y  (4B)

Because the direct relationship between H_A and H_Y results in a simultaneity problem in that a single equation is asked to solve two unknowns, the inventors determined that in order to come up with a solution, analyzing football (particularly NFL) data was not, in and of itself, sufficient. To that end, the two contributions to the football production process shown in Eqns. (4A) and (4B) above must be isolated from one another in order to allow the contributions to be quantified. To do so, the inventors first identified a design that depends solely on H_Y. Specifically, the inventors determined that baseball provides just such a design.

To explain how H_Y can be derived for baseball and then equated to H_Y for football, the inventors discovered that a theory used in economics could be adapted to be used in a sports setting. A major premise of what is referred to in economics circles as New Growth Theory is that technological change arises in a large part because of intentional actions taken by people who respond to market incentives. This theory, which was first advanced in a 1990 paper entitled Endogenous Technological Change, found that the technological component of knowledge, A, corresponded to a new design, and that there is no conceptual problem in measuring it, as it is merely a count of the number of new designs. The present inventors are of the belief that there has been no prior attempt to use such a growth model to separate player human capital (which cannot be copied) from the human capital responsible for play designs (which can be copied) as a model for quantifying the contribution of coaching to the latter.

Thus, by extending this belief about the contribution of designs to success in the realm of sports, the present inventors have determined that baseball's design architecture is a constant, and as such, there are no new architectures to be designed into the game. It follows, the inventors have determined that the technological (i.e., design, or coaching) contribution to human capital (the aforementioned H_A in Eqns. (4A) and (4B)) is equal to zero in baseball, as any intentional effort to change the design architecture of the game would be a waste of a general manager's time. As such, no market incentive exists to create a new design architecture in baseball because the underlying two-on-one design architecture that defines baseball (the battery versus the hitter) is a constant. This conclusion does not mean that a baseball general manager or field manager cannot make changes to the team that will increase (or decrease) the team's efficiency and productivity. Rather, the conclusion merely recognizes that the baseball general manager and field manager do not possess as many tools for making changes to the team as an NFL coach possesses. Stated another way, because baseball's design is a constant, a baseball general manager or field manager can change the team's players, but cannot change the team's plays. In contrast, an NFL coach can change the team's players, plays or both. In economic terms, a manager is exogenously involved in a baseball game, while an NFL coaching staff is endogenously involved in a football game.

After identifying that the baseball design depends solely on H_Y, the present inventors translated this into an equivalent football metric by equating a limit that is common to both sports, viz., the need to advance a player toward the goal. For the present invention, such a common limit is the one point that a run is worth to a baseball team is the same as a first down is worth to a football team. At first, this seems counterintuitive, as a run in baseball has a value on the scoreboard, while a first down does not. Nevertheless, as Table 1 shows, on average, a first down in football is worth approximately one point.

TABLE 1
Points Per First Down Ratio
NFL Team Aggregate between 1960 through 2006
				Adjusted
Year	Points	PATS	Safeties	Points	1st downs	Ratio
1960	6049	701	26	5322	4648	1.145
1961	6926	820	22	6084	5291	1.150
1962	6944	806	30	6108	5309	1.150
1963	6888	815	28	6045	5295	1.142
1964	6902	793	22	6087	5287	1.151
1965	6907	805	24	6078	5208	1.167
1966	7381	839	14	6528	5674	1.151
1967	7733	909	26	6798	5872	1.158
1968	7682	877	28	6777	6019	1.126
1969	7635	872	28	6735	6136	1.098
1970	7010	772	22	6216	5749	1.081
1971	7048	786	22	6240	5891	1.059
1972	7372	811	24	6537	6100	1.072
1973	7081	754	24	6303	6032	1.045
1974	6618	733	20	5865	6211	.944
1975	7495	834	34	6627	6686	.991
1976	7508	816	32	6660	6924	.962
1977	6733	741	22	5970	6620	.902
1978	8213	914	36	7263	7908	.918
1979	8989	991	30	7968	8270	.963
1980	9178	1042	30	8106	8528	.951
1981	9262	1041	34	8187	8692	.942
1982	5080	557	20	4503	4772	.944
1983	9779	1104	38	8637	8702	.993
1984	9502	1075	30	8397	8657	.970
1985	9645	1073	34	8538	8593	.994
1986	9193	1026	28	8139	8492	.958
1987	9071	1010	36	8025	8149	.985
1988	9075	1004	52	8019	8474	.946
1989	9232	1024	44	8164	8409	.971
1990	9015	997	38	7980	7957	1.003
1991	8506	919	24	7563	7955	.951
1992	8391	936	24	7431	7747	.959
1993	8377	876	46	7455	8125	.918
1994	9075	1009	26	8040	8333	.965
1995	10,314	1110	24	9180	9284	.989
1996	9805	1065	40	8700	8959	.971
1997	9957	1087	26	8844	8770	1.008
1998	10,215	1113	36	9066	8738	1.038
1999	10,324	1113	46	9165	8991	1.019
2000	10,254	1123	32	9099	9139	.996
2001	10,024	1088	20	8916	8934	.998
2002	11,097	1242	24	9831	9727	1.011
2003	10,666	1168	42	9456	9367	1.010
2004	11,000	1253	30	9717	9613	1.011
2005	10.556	1153	22	9381	9426	.995
2006	10,577	1166	24	9387	9404	.998
total	402,284	44,763	1384	356,137	353,067	1.009

A first down's point value was determined for the period between 1960 and 2006 by dividing the difference between the total points scored in the NFL, points after touchdown (PATs) and safeties by the total number of first downs made:

Ratio=(Points−PATs−Safeties)/First Downs  (5)

When calculated over this entire period using this formula, it can be seen that a first down is worth one point. As such, advancing a player toward the goal, whether it is home plate for baseball or the end zone for football, is worth one point, and therefore a measure of a team's success in satisfying its need to advance a player toward the goal. PATs were excluded because points from PATs are not a function of the team advancing the ball toward the end zone, but instead a “bonus” that a team is virtually entitled to receive after the team has advanced the ball to the end zone Likewise, safeties were excluded because points from safeties are a function of a team pushing an opponent back into the end zone, not from advancing the ball toward the end zone. Field goals were included because they are a function of a team advancing the ball toward the end zone. Interception returns for touchdowns and other so-called “defensive” or “special teams” touchdowns (e.g., punt returns, fumble returns, blocked kicks) were included because points from such events are the result of a team advancing the ball toward the end zone after an instantaneous change of possession.

Based on the foregoing common limit and the knowledge that H_A in baseball is equal to zero, one can calculate the value of NFL player human capital H_Y by multiplying an NFL team's offensive efficiency, which is quantified as a particular team's QCYPA as indicated in Eqns. (2) and (3), divided by ten (i.e., the theoretical maximum needed to advance the ball down the field by achieving a first down) and then multiplying this by 0.400 and substituting the product for baseball's on base percentage (OBP) in the above calculation, which is shown as follows:

H_Y=[(0.400)(QCYPA)/10−0.333]/0.333  (6A)

This can be reconfigured as:

H_Y=[(120)(QCYPA)/10−100]/100  (6B)

to make the calculation consistent with the limit of the design space of a football field, which is 120 yards long with two scoring zones (end zones) separated by a 100-yard non-scoring zone (the field of play). The calculation in Eqn. (6B) indicates that the value of NFL player human capital H_Y is equal to the sum of the end zones and the non-scoring field of play multiplied by the aforementioned efficiency of the team for Eqn. (2), less the non-scoring field of play divided by the non-scoring field of play.

By way of a comparative example, if the San Francisco 49ers′ human capital H_Y uses its resources (downs) to meet its needs (10 YPA) at a 95% rate and the New York Yankees' human capital H_Y uses its resources (outs) to meet its needs (0.400 OBP) at a 95% rate as measured by reference to a common limit (i.e., one point), the 49ers′ use of their resources to meet their needs is equal to the Yankees' use of their resources to meet their needs. It follows that the 49ers′ efficiency η_49er and the Yankees' efficiency η_Yankee is the same. Under these circumstances, H_Y in football equals H_Y in baseball.

New Growth Theory assumes that anyone engaged in research had free access to the entire stock of available technological knowledge A. As such, all researchers could take advantage of A at the same time (assuming that access to such knowledge was not controlled in such a way as to limit its access). Accordingly, research output depended on the amount of human capital devoted to research H_A and the stock of technological knowledge A available to the person doing the research. The present inventors have determined that such assumptions can be applied to football play-designing architectures. More particularly, consistent with the constraint of Eqns. (4A) and (4B), the research that an NFL coaching staff contributes to how efficiently a team operates can be determined by subtracting player human capital H_Y from total human capital H.

Table 2 provides the value of total human capital H as the sum of the play design and playmaking contributions for six representative NFL teams since 1960:

TABLE 2
Player Human Capital (HY) plus
Coaching Design Human Capital (HA)
						HA + HY
	Team					contribution
Year	(Record)	YPA-YPAHA	÷	YPAHA	=	to efficiency
1989	San Francisco	2.678	÷	6.813	=	.3931
	(14-2)
2000	St. Louis	2.543	÷	6.813	=	.3733
	(10-6)
1961	Houston	2.461	÷	6.813	=	.3612
	(10-3-1)
1968	Kansas City	2.451	÷	6.813	=	.3598
	(12-2)
1988	Cincinnati	2.350	÷	6.813	=	.3449
	(12-4)
1960	Philadelphia	2.202	÷	6.813	=	.3232
	(10-2)

As Table 3 below demonstrates, at peak efficiency, a coaching staff's human capital H_A, in the form of research and play design, accounts for more than 25% of all efficiency in football, which exceeds the less than 15% contribution that a team can expect from player human capital H_Y that was derived from Eqn. (6B):

TABLE 3
Coaching Research and Design Contribution to
Offensive Efficiency
Team (Year)	H	−	HY	=	NFL HA
NY Yankees (1927)			.1441
San Francisco 49ers (1989)	.3931	−	.1389	=	.2542
NY Yankees (1936)			.1351
St. Louis Rams (2000)	.3733	−	.1227	=	.2506
NY Yankees (1932)			.1201
Houston Oilers (1961)	.3612	−	.1129	=	.2483
Kansas City Chiefs (1968)	.3598	−	.1117	=	.2481
NY Yankees (1939)			.1111
Cincinnati Bengals (1988)	.3449	−	.0996	=	.2453
NY Yankees (1937)			.0961
Philadelphia Eagles (1960)	.3232	−	.0818	=	.2414

It may be argued that the distinction between H_A and H_Y in the NFL context is an idealization, as there is some overlap about what constitutes human capital engaged in research or coaching and what constitutes human capital engaged in production or playing. In such circumstance, H_A and H_Y used in Eqns. (4A) and (4B) above can be supplied jointly by one person, such as a quarterback who uses a man in motion to research a defense. Regardless, such allocation of where research and design originates does not impact the fact that an NFL team's research and design contributes more to success than play-making contributes. To conclude otherwise would produce anomalous results when the efficiency of football players is compared to the efficiency of baseball players. In the examples cited in Tables 2 and 3 above, Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and their 1927 Yankees' teammates used their resources (outs) to meet their needs (runs) a little bit better (i.e., more efficiently) than Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, and their 1989 49ers′ teammates used their resources (downs) to meet their needs (first downs). Nevertheless, when compared to the average team within each team's respective sport, San Francisco was 39.3 percent more efficient than the average team whereas New York was only 14.4 percent more efficient than the average team. As both the 49ers′ and the Yankees' efficiency was measured by reference to a common limit (i.e., player human capital rather than coaching design) to account for the difference between the 49ers′ and Yankees' efficiency, Joe Montana, Jerry Rice and the rest of the team would had to have been 25 percent better than Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and their teammates even though the Yankees used their resources to meet their needs a little better than the 49ers did. This is not possible, as San Francisco's player human capital cannot simultaneously be both more efficient and less efficient in comparison to the Yankees' human capital and the common limit.

To this point, the equations have only identified an input component; what is needed is a way to determine output. By looking at professional football teams since 1960, the inventors have determined that these input components (in the form of efficiency) can be used to determine the player and coaching productivity (output). The inventors believe that if coaching in football contributes a disproportionately large share to the efficiency of a team, then identifying and quantifying such coaching contributions provides an accurate description of a team's on-field success. Moreover, the increase in knowledge gained by the players that follow the play designs can lead to even greater productivity. As such, the equations discussed above can be modified to determine the productivity of both player human capital engaged in production δH_Y and coaching human capital engaged in research and design δH_A. This output can be readily correlated to known indicia (in particular, the scores generated in an actual on-field game or games) that is a generally-acceptable measure of a team's success. Accordingly, the inventors believe that if coaching almost always contributes at least twice as much to the efficiency of a team as player human capital contributes, then more productive teams should defeat less productive teams. In addition, one would expect that the most efficient teams possess superior technological knowledge and a design edge on the field. In the aforementioned economics paper, an equation for determining the productivity of human capital engaged in production in an economics context was expressed as

$\begin{array}{cc}{H}_Y=\left(1/\delta \right)\left[\frac{\alpha }{\left(1-\alpha -\beta \right)\left(\alpha +\beta \right)}\right]& \left(7\right)\end{array}$

where the term δ defined a productivity parameter, and the terms α and β defined technology parameters. An additional factor to take into account interest rates is not included in the above equation. The present inventors have determined that a similar equation can be used in a football context, where there are two primary forms of offensive technology with which to achieve success: passing and running. Specifically, in a passing-oriented design architecture, α can be correlated to passing while β can be correlated to running, while in a running-oriented system (such as Vince Lombardi's option blocking design), the parameters are inverted.

As discussed above, the present inventors believe that YPA forms a particular valuable starting place for determining a team's offensive measure of success, making the passing technology component a more significant contributor to scoring success. To that end, we assigned the α parameter to QCYPA divided by 10 because the objective of the corresponding a technology is to make a first down, which in the first instance requires a gain of 10 yards. Likewise, the β parameter in is equal to a team's average yards per rushing attempt (YRA) divided by one hundred because in the second instance, the objective of the β technology is still to make the first down, but the required yardage is unknown. Such assignment of the technology parameters is consistent with both the limits of the design space (a first down is 10 yards and a football field is 100 yards) and the fundamental nature of a designed structure, where the fundamental units of such design are the decisions used to create the final product. Based on the foregoing, Eqn. (7) can be modified to determine the productivity of football player human capital:

$\begin{array}{cc}\delta H_Y=\frac{\left(\mathrm{QCYPA}/10\right)}{\begin{array}{c}\left(1-\mathrm{QCYPA}/10-\mathrm{YRA}/100\right)\\ \left(\mathrm{QCYPA}/10+\mathrm{YRA}/100\right)\end{array}}& \left(8\right)\end{array}$

A comparison of a passing-oriented team, the 1989 San Francisco 49ers (9.491 YPA), and a running-oriented team, the 1961 Green Bay Packers (4.983 YRA), demonstrates that an α passing design (such as Walsh's rhythm passing design) is more productive. As the comparison in Table 4 below demonstrates, San Francisco's α passing design (i.e., where a corresponds to QCYPA and β corresponds to YRA) was approximately 43.5 times more productive than Green Bay's a running design (where a corresponds to YRA and β corresponds to QCYPA). Based on the foregoing, Eqn. (8) is used to determine the productivity of football player human capital in a passing-oriented system, as shown in Table 4:

TABLE 4
Comparison of Passing-oriented and Running-oriented offenses
α Passing                        α Running
.1α/(1 − .1α − .01β)(.1α + .01β) .1α/(1 − .1α − .01β)(.1α + .01β
SF89δHY = .9491/(.0110)(.9895) = 87.07% GB61δHY = .4983/(.4197)(.5803) = 2.05%

In fact, as Table 5 below demonstrates, all of the NFL's most efficient teams from 1960-2006 were alpha passing teams except the 1968 Kansas City Chiefs, who ran the ball 1.98 times for every time they attempted a pass. Consistently, Kansas City's player productivity was significantly less than the player productivity of the other most efficient teams.

TABLE 5
Player Productivity (δHY) for Select NFL Teams
	Team	Points/1st
Year	(Record)	Down	α	β	δHY (%)
1989	San Francisco	1.123	9.491	3.99	87.07
	(14-2)
2000	St. Louis	1.247	9.356	4.81	57.99
	(10-6)
1961	Houston	1.515	9.274	4.20	31/26
	(10-3-1)
1968	Kansas City	1.480	4.147	9.26	1.66
	(12-2)
1988	Cincinnati	1.111	9.163	4.81	26.69
	(12-4)
1960	Philadelphia	1.484	9.015	3.24	16.91
	(10-2)

In the above table, the α and β for the 1968 Kansas City Chiefs was YRA and QCYPA; for all of the remaining teams, these technology parameters were reversed. As mentioned above, differences between offensive and defensive coaching staff performance (where the latter can be measured by how an opponent's offense performed in on-field play) are a good measure of coaching contributions to a football team's success. Also as discussed above, such measure can be refined by taking into consideration breakdowns, particularly those in the form of turnovers and special teams play. Using Super Bowl performance as an indicator, overall the more productive team winning record is 36-5. Three teams who were more productive but lost the Super Bowl turned the ball over more than their winning opponents did (Cincinnati in 1982, Green Bay in 1998 and St. Louis in 2002. Clearly, turnovers can waste productivity in football. Special teams play can likewise impact productivity, where only two times has a team been more productive in the Super Bowl and been even in turnover margin and still lost the Super Bowl: Buffalo in 1991 and Carolina in 2004. In both games, the outcome was decided by a field goal. In 1991, the more productive team (Buffalo) missed a 47-yard field goal with 0:08 to play. In 2004, the less productive team (New England) made a 41-yard field goal with 0:04 to play. Both turnovers and special teams play can reduce the impact of innovative play designs, and (if severe enough) can entirely negate such innovation by turning what should have been a victory into a loss. Viewed in this way, turnovers are by-products of production (i.e., play making (H_Y)) and are therefore not derived from coaching design (H_A). As such, their occurrence (while potentially devastating to a team's on-field success) do not impact the coaching contribution H_A discussed herein.

Like baseball, a field goal attempt depends entirely on player human capital to the exclusion of any new designs. For at least the past 20 years, every team in the NFL lines up substantially the same, substantially blocks the same, substantially snaps the ball the same, substantially holds the ball the same and substantially kicks the ball the same. Stated in the vernacular of the present disclosure, H_A equals zero.

Ultimately, it is the productivity associated by the design provided by the coaching staff that is of interest, and particularly how a competition (such fantasy football game) based on quantified values of such coaching contribution can be played. For a fixed value of H_A (which is equal to the difference between total human capital and playmaking human capital as shown in Eqns. (4A) and (4B)), the implied exponential growth rate for A, the stock of technological knowledge, is δH_A. Thus, over time, A grows at the exponential rate of δH_A. In the NFL context, this means a coaching staff's technological knowledge grows at the exponential rate of the productivity of the staff's research. Representative values of such research productivity for the teams shown in Tables 2 and 5 are shown in Table 6.

TABLE 6
NFL Research Productivity and Growth Rate
	Team
Year	(Record)	δHY (%)	÷	HY	=	δ (%)	×	HA	=	δHA (%)
1989	San Francisco	87.07	÷	.1389	=	626.85	×	.2542	=	159
	(14-2)
2000	St. Louis	57.99	÷	.1227	=	472.62	×	.2506	=	118
	(10-6)
1961	Houston	31/26	÷	.1129	=	276.88	×	.2483	=	68
	(10-3-1)
1968	Kansas City	1.66	÷	.1117	=	14.86	×	.2481	=	3
	(12-2)
1988	Cincinnati	26.69	÷	.0996	=	267.17	×	.2453	=	65
	(12-4)
1960	Philadelphia	16.91	÷	.0828	=	206.72	×	.2414	=	49
	(10-2)

As shown above, the productivity of a staffs research δH_A can be calculated by dividing player human capital productivity δH_Y by the efficiency that player human capital H_Y contributes to the production process to identify a team's productivity parameter δ. This productivity parameter is then multiplied by the research H_A that a coaching staff contributes to the process. In 1989, as a result of the San Francisco coaching staff's research, the 49ers′ technical football knowledge grew at the exponential rate of approximately 159%, giving them a significant design edge over the opposing team.

Because the coaching staff is not involved in contributing to H_Y, it must derive its measurement of statistical performance H_A from the on-field statistics provided by the playmakers. For example, a quarterback's statistical measures such as passing yards, pass completions, completion percentage, interceptions and touchdown passes can be used in various weightings to determine a score that can be ranked against others, as can rushing yards and touchdowns for running backs, receiving yards and touchdowns for wide receivers and tight ends, field goals and extra points for kickers may be included as part of the scoring formulae for those positions. While any or all of these measures can be used to quantify the coaching contribution H_A, the inventors believe that YPA, especially an adjusted version that gives equivalent yardage credit for passing touchdowns while subtracting for sack yardage (and possibly a value for breakdowns, is particularly correlative to team victories. As such, an H_A that is measured by the adjusted YPA (such as QCYPA mentioned in Eqn. (1)) can form the basis for quantifying the coaching contribution to a team's ability to produce victories. Moreover, variants of playing a fantasy football game depending on whether the H_A contains solely offensive coaching staff metrics or is a combination of (i.e., difference between) offensive and defensive coaching staff metrics are both within the scope of the present invention.

Referring first to FIG. 1, a device 1 (shown preferably in block form as a computer, or related automated data processing device, system or apparatus) for operating a fantasy football league or playing a fantasy football game is shown, as well as equipment designed to connect the device 1 to various fantasy football participants 200, 300 through N. Although shown notionally with the device 1 acting as a host, those skilled in the art will appreciate that alternative hardware environments (such as a more distributed system) may be used without departing from the scope of the present invention, and as such, the precise configuration of the device 1 presently depicted in FIG. 1 is not intended to limit the present invention. In addition to keeping track of league participants 10 and what fantasy coaching staffs 20 the various participants mimic the ownership of, the device 1 can also store statistical data or receive such data from a database 30 (such as that available from a subscription source or related third-party vendor) that is related to the actual on-field statistics generated by players and teams of the corresponding league (such as the NFL), calculate and store fantasy player indicia 40, keep records of fantasy league standings 50 or the like. Device 1 is made up of one or more processing units (also known as central processing units (CPUs)) 60, while one or more memory storage units 70, 80 (typically in the form of volatile random access memory (RAM) and non-volatile read-only memory (ROM)) store programs, calculations and information pertaining to football team rosters, individual player statistics or the like. A controller 90 is included to orchestrate operations, while input/output (also referred to as I/O or data input and output) 100 allows communication between device 1 and remote client devices 110. As stated above, these can be a computer keyboard, touch screen or related terminal, telephonic system (including mobile or cellular phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs)), mouse, voice recognition system or other such communication device capable of sending and receiving data and instructions, some of which are shown in the figure. In this regard, the device 1 accepts structured input, processes it according to prescribed rules and produces the results of that processed input as output. Such interpretation is consistent with the von Neumann architecture of a computer, which includes an input, output, memory, arithmetic logic unit (for example, the aforementioned microprocessor) and a central control unit to orchestrate operations. In this context, the PDA, telephone, pager or related devices discussed above could be configured to operate as a rudimentary computer, and as such would be within the scope of that term's present definition.

Either the device 1 or the various fantasy football participants 200, 300 through N have access to the statistical database 30 of information relating to performance of players in actual games. Device 1 may function as a server, where high throughput and processing speeds, larger data storage, durability and online availability would be desirable attributes. As will be further understood by those skilled in the art, device 1 may operate as part of a network, which may encompass various forms of connectivity between two or more machines, including point-to-point, shared, dedicated, intermittent or the like. In one form, device 1 may operate as part of the internet (also referred to as web) 120 that relies upon hypertext protocols and language to facilitate communication between a server and a client. Hypertext markup language (HTML) can be used by web servers to create and connect documents that contain network addresses called hyperlinks, which allow a user to navigate through a web site. For example, HTML functions as a mark-up language that breaks the document into syntactic portions that specify layout and content.

Resident in one or more of the memory storage units 70, 80 is executable software, typically including interface code, algorithmic code, database code, and other code that is readable by the computer and contains all the functions needed to operate the computer. As discussed above, there are numerous optional configurations for the computer usable medium, including hard disk drive, compact disk (CD), digital video disk (DVD), floppy disk and flash memory that can be used as, or deliver code content to, memory storage units 70, 80. As such, the computer usable medium can be resident in or otherwise cooperative with the device 1, while means for sending, receiving and storing fantasy league-related information may be embodied in computer software, firmware or hardware, and includes instructions that, in conjunction with the aforementioned computational componentry, can be used to coordinate the activities associated with running a fantasy football league or facilitating the play of a fantasy football game.

The device 1 may also include security and data integrity features 140 that control access to the device 1, protect personal information relating to participants 200, 300 through N, as well as perform authentication and verification of transactions conducted by participant 200, 300 through N. Encryption protocols and software, for example, secure shell (SSH), secure sockets layer (SSL) and transport layer security (TLS) can be used to promote security between the device 1 and the communications interfaces or remote client devices 110 of the participants 200, 300 through N. Additional security (such as through password-protected login sequencing or the like) may also be utilized.

Connection between the remote client devices 110 and the device 1 within the network 120 may be made using any suitable network interconnection rules, a commonly-used example of which is the TCP/IP protocol for transmitting packets of data over a wide or local area network. TCP is often used in conjunction with a file transfer protocol (FTP) to transfer files between computers linked together by the internet. In one configuration, a fantasy football league used to allow various fantasy football participants 200, 300 through N to play one or more fantasy football games in accordance with the present invention is set up as a website with links between the participants 200, 300 through N and the device 1 that is acting as a host. The participants 200, 300 through N can use their remote client devices 110 to select coaching staffs, as well as to receive updated statistics or other relevant information regarding the performance of their fantasy team.

Software (such as that which can be stored on the computer usable medium discussed above) may come in various forms, including operating system software and application-specific software. An example of the former (such as Microsoft Windows) is that which allows the latter to make use of the I/O 100 and other hardware components within a computer such as device 1. Application specific software can run on top of the operating system software, performing functions based on user input. Examples of application specific software include word processing and software for use in tracking the rankings of fantasy football participants in a fantasy football league, the latter of which is of particular interest in the present context. Application specific software used for receiving and transmitting data can be loaded into one or both of the device 1 as well as the remote client devices 110 of the fantasy participants 200, 300 through N. Such software may include well-known web-browsing capability (called browser software) as either operating system software or application specific software.

Programs such as that used to facilitate participation in one or more fantasy football games according to the present invention may be provided by the device 1 upon an appropriate login sequence by a user of the remote client device 110 or as part of a downloadable package that is provided to the user once that user becomes a member of a corresponding fantasy football league (such as through subscription or the like). Such programs can be written in any well-known internet-compatible language, such as Java, Dynamic HTML, Active X, or the like. These languages allow internet publishers to create multimedia web pages of text, graphics, tables, buttons, images, sounds and videos each identified by an HTML tag that define one or more of the above-mentioned functions. Possible trader interfaces may include HTML pages, Java applets and servlets, Java or Active Server pages, or other forms of network-based GUIs known to those of skill in the art. In one example, traders connected through the internet can submit HTML requests via Java Remote Method Invocation (RMI), a Java application programming interface for performing remote procedure calls, or Internet Inter-Orb Protocol (HOP), an implementation of the more abstract Global Internet Inter-Orb Protocol (GIOP). Both RMI and IIOP can run on top of the standard TCP/IP protocol.

Referring now to FIG. 2, in the remote client devices 110, the participants 200, 300 through N are provided with a window or screen 1100 for logging into a particular league or (in cases where the league does not provide its own) to a statistical database in order to participate in one or more fantasy football games of the present invention. The window 1100 may include a header 1100A indicating a welcome banner or related greetings. Advertising may also be included in an appropriate field 1100E or related location in window 1100. Window 1100 may also include an HTML login button 1100B for returning members, as well as other features, such as a contact button 1100C. A user (such as participants 200, 300 through N) may log in through login button 1100B only if that user has previously registered and has established an identity within the fantasy league (i.e., is a member). An additional button 1100F can be clicked to access information relating to how the fantasy football site is structured, including a discussion of how coaching is quantified according to the present invention and how such coaching knowledge and play design contributes to the success or growth of a football organization. Button 1100F may also lead to a tutorial or related instruction or information link (not shown) that connects a user to an information page (not shown) that explains how to play the game, including how to equate certain on-field player performance statistics with play designs and quantifiable coaching contributions. If the individual participant is a member, once he or she clicks on the login button 1100B, such user is then routed to a window 3100 such as that shown in FIG. 4 and asked to enter an appropriate username and password in the appropriate fields 3100A and 3100B, as well as an enter or login button 3100C. Additional links 3100D and 3100E can be clicked to assist a participant who may have forgotten a username or password. Likewise, a password verification button (not shown) may be included to ask the user to repeat the password to ensure that the user did not mistype it the first time.

If the user clicks on button 1100D, that user is routed to a new user login screen 2100, such as that shown in FIG. 3. As a threshold matter, the new user may first be asked to read terms and conditions of use. Such button (not shown) can be made to have a gatekeeper status such that further entry into the system is not permitted absent a “yes” answer to the user's agreement to the terms and conditions. Various fields used to identify a new league member are shown, including first name 2100A, last name 2100B, e-mail address 2100C, residence (i.e., street) address 2100D, city 2100E, state 2100F, zip code 2100G (if resident within the USA), country 2100H and telephone number 2100I. It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that screen 2100 may include additional or other information, and that such variations are within the scope of the present invention. Once all of the appropriate categories are entered in, the user can click the login button 2100J to have the information entered into the participant database 10 of device 1. The Registration page 2100 also includes a link for “Terms and Conditions” through button 2100K which sends a user to rules, rights and obligations (not shown). Acceptance of these terms may be made a prerequisite for completing the new member section depicted in FIG. 3, and concomitantly for membership in the fantasy league.

Referring next to FIG. 5, a homepage screen 4100 for active participants in a fantasy football game or league of the present invention is shown. Various buttons may be used to provide information to the participant so that he or she can manage his or her team in one or more fantasy football leagues or games. Button 4100A can be used to identify the status of a participant's account, including (in situations where the participants competes against one another for cash or other prizes) how much the participant has won, lost or has remaining of his or her initial investment. Another button 4100B allows the participant to navigate to a league standings screen 5100, such as that shown in FIG. 6 and discussed in more detail below. In operation, screen 4100, which forms part of the remote client device 110, in response to instruction from participant input, can perform numerous functions in order to allow a participant to take part in a fantasy football game or league of the present invention. For example, the participant (such as participant 200) may decide which of the coaching staffs from within coaching staff database 20 (which can be accessed by clicking on button 4100C of FIG. 5) or player/roster database 40 (which can be accessed by clicking on button 4100D of FIG. 5) that the participant 200 will choose to have represent him or her in an upcoming fantasy game. Button 4100C provides a link to the participant's coaching staff (or staffs, if the participant has control over two or more fantasy staffs), which may include the offensive coaching staff, defensive coaching staff, head coach, special teams coaching staff or the like. Likewise, participant 200 may be able to execute a trade, check fantasy league standings or perform other functions by communicating with device 1. The information provided to the participant that clicks on button 4100D may include updated data from statistical database 30 that is provided to the participant in graphical or related user-friendly format. As stated above, statistical database 30 may be situated in RAM 70 (such as for use in a general-purpose computer) or ROM 80 (such as for use in a special-purpose computer), or may be intermittently fed to device 1 or remote client device 110 through periodic updates from a data and information service. The list that is accessed by button 4100D may also be used to keep track of individual players or groups of players (such as wide receivers, defensive line, running backs or the like). The device 1 also includes the ability to send, receive and operate on information contained in statistical database 30; such information may include contract identifier information (for security-related logon data), news or other such information that a fantasy participant may find useful. Examples of these can be found from various news and database sources for schedules (button 4100E), a college football database (button 4100F) and a professional football (such as the NFL) database (button 4100G). The list that is accessed by button 4100H may also be used to trade individual players or groups of players (such as wide receivers, defensive line, running backs or the like) with other participants. A comparable button 4100I may also be used to trade coaches or coaching staffs. An additional button 4100J can be used to allow the participant to create a unique nickname that he or she can be identified by with other participants in the fantasy league. The software resident on or otherwise used by device 1 may be similar to, or have different features from that of the remote client device 110, so long as communication and related execution between the device 1 and remote client device 110 is not adversely impacted.

Referring next to FIG. 6, a running tally of the records of the various participants in a given fantasy league can be presented by clicking on button 4100B in FIG. 5, thereby enabling at quick glance where the various participants making up the league stand relative to one another at any given time. This screen 5100 can show a list 5100A of the various participants, such as by the aforementioned nickname, for example. The number of participants is preferably (although not necessarily) such that each of the actual teams in the underlying league (such as the NFL, with its current thirty two teams) is fully represented evenly by participants in the fantasy league. In the example shown in column or list 5100A, there are eight nicknamed participants, while each participant's won-loss record is shown in column 5100B and a running total of their corresponding coaching staff human capital H_A in column 5100C. If the NFL is used as the representative or underlying actual league, then each of the participants may own four fantasy teams corresponding to four of the actual NFL teams (in cases where ownership if of an entire team or an entire team's coaching staff), or may own eight partial teams, such as those that are represented by offensive or defensive coaching staffs (in cases where fantasy league is broken down into just those two coaching staffs) or any other subset of players or coaching staffs, such as line coaches, special teams coaches, head coaches or the like. This is discussed in more detail below. It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that these and other groupings may be made for the mutual convenience or interest of the various fantasy league participants, and all such approaches are within the scope of the present invention. Likewise, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the fantasy football art that other lists, reporting or related indicia may be presented in screen 5100 for the use or enjoyment of the participants.

In a preferred form, the fantasy football league, the number of participants is an even number, and more particularly, divisible by four. While such a number is not critical for proper operation of the league, situations where the underlying actual football league (for example, the NFL with thirty two teams) has a number divisible by four make it simpler to allow the coaching staffs (or portions thereof) of each actual team to be represented by each participant. For example, the league may have eight participants; in this way, each participant would mimic the ownership of four fantasy coaching staffs. More particularly, each participant would mimic ownership of four offensive coaching staffs and four fantasy defensive coaching staffs that would correspond to the actual team offensive or defensive coaching staff. Drafting of such fantasy coaching staffs may take place at the beginning of each actual football season, using a serpentine or other suitable drafting format.

In one form, each participant plays at least one fantasy offensive coaching staff per week, while in another, each participant plays one fantasy offensive staff per week and one fantasy defensive staff per week. In yet another form, each participant may also draft a coaching staff representative of one or both of a kicking team and special teams. In the case where the game is played by only comparing opposing fantasy participants' offensive coaching staffs in a given week, each participant's claimed metric will be a comparison of that participant's selected offensive unit's H_A to that of the opposing participant's selected offensive unit H_A, where the higher of the two causes the respective participant to be declared the winner for that particular fantasy game. Likewise, in the case where each participant's fantasy team is based on both offensive and defensive coaching staffs, each participant's claimed metric will be the mathematical difference between the selected offensive unit's H_A and the selected defensive unit's H_A; thus each participant's H_A (offense) minus H_A (defense) gives the participant an overall H_A score for the week. As mentioned above, each participant's H_A (defense) can be determined by the offensive performance of a team opposing that participant's selected defensive unit. In one form, this score is compared against one other participant to determine a win and a loss for the week. In a preferred embodiment, each participant's wins and losses would be tallied up over the course of the season, while tiebreakers among participants could be determined by the higher aggregate H_A over the season (or some related indicia of overall performance). Such performance could be modified to accommodate the playoffs or bowl games, where provisions would need to be made to account for teams that did not qualify for post-season play. In such circumstance, the fantasy league could have a competition that mimics post-season tournament play similar to that which takes place in the NFL, where an elimination-style game format is adopted. In one form, the post-season competition could be between the two participants with the best record over the regular season (possibly subject to the limitation discussed above if one participant's coaching staffs are not available because the actual underlying football team didn't make it into the post-season play.

Selecting a kicking team can only hurt the participant, as kicks are expected to be made (at least those within 50 yards). Likewise, coverage teams can only hurt the participant by giving up an unexpected score (but only if the opposing team scores); however, a 50 yard kick return that does not result in a touchdown is of no consequence.

Example

The foregoing is further elucidated by a particular example, employing actual statistics from the first week (Week 1) of the 2009-2010 NFL season. In one form of playing the game between two participants P1 and P2, P1 has selected the Indianapolis Colts offensive coaching staff and the Pittsburgh Steelers defensive coaching staff to form P1's fantasy coaching staff for the week. In addition, P1 selected the Jacksonville Jaguar kicking team and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers coverage team. The actual statistics from Week 1 of the 2009-2010 NFL season are shown below in Table 7.

TABLE 7
2009-2010 NFL Season Week 1 Selected Statistics
	TOs	YRA	ATT	YDS	TDx10	YPA	(QCAPY)	QCYPA	H	HY	HA	∂HY	∂	∂HA
Pittsburgh 13	3	1.56	43	363	10	8.442	(.977)	7.697	.1502	(.0763)	.2266	4.57	(59.835)	<0
Tennessee 10	2	3.44	35	244	10	6.971	(.286)	6.971	.0417	(.1635)	.2052	3.55	(21.714)	<0
Indianapolis 14	2	2.29	38	301	10	7.921	(.184)	8.000	.1955	(.0400)	.2355	5.49	(138.338)	<0
Jacksonville 12	0	4.38	28	122	0	4.357	(.286)	4.071	(.3916)	(.5115)	.1198	1.64	(3.215)	<0
New Orleans 45	3	4.49	34	358	60	10.529	0	12.294	.8371	.4753	.3618	$	$	$
Detroit 27	3	1.65	37	205	0	5.541	.189	5.352	(.2003)	(.3578)	.1575	2.16	(6.047)	<0
Dallas 34	0	4.92	27	353	30	13.074	.333	13.852	1.070	.6623	.4077	$	$	$
Tampa Bay 21	0	5.61	42	276	10	6.571	0	6.810	.0176	(.1829)	.2004	3.51	(19.215)	<0
Denver 12	0	3.75	28	243	10	8.679	(.571)	8.465	.2649	.0158	.2491	8.25	523.474	130.397
Cincinnati 7	2	3.19	33	247	0	7.485	(.788)	6.697	.0007	(.1964)	.1971	3.20	(16.288)	<0
Baltimore 38	1	4.83	43	303	30	7.047	(.093)	7.651	.1433	(.0819)	.2252	5.04	(61.587)	<0
Kansas City 24	0	1.71	24	177	20	7.375	(.750)	7.458	.1145	(.1050)	.2195	4.12	(39.273)	<0
NY Jets 24	1	4.52	31	272	10	8.774	0	9.097	.3594	.0916	.2677	21.11	230.457	61.693
Houston 7	2	2.92	33	166	0	5.030	(.636)	4.394	(.3433)	(.4727)	.1293	1.76	(3.733)	<0
Minnesota 34	0	6.08	22	110	10	5.000	(1.136)	4.319	(.3547)	(.4818)	.1271		(3.586)	<0
Cleveland 20	2	4.45	35	205	10	5.857	(.743)	5.400	(.1931)	(.3520)	.1589		(6.316)	<0
Atlanta 19	0	2.52	36	213	20	5.917	(.444)	6.028	(.0992)	(.2766)	.1774	2.58	(9.329)	<0
Miami 7	4	4.36	30	176	10	5.867	(.433)	5.767	(.1382)	(.3080)	.1697	2.45	(7.951)	<0
Philadelphia 38	2	5.78	29	102	20	3.517	(.690)	3.517	(.4745)	(.5780)	.1035	1.45	(2.516)	<0
Carolina 10	7	2.87	34	138	0	4.059	1.618	2.441	(.6353)	(.7071)	.0718	1.23	(1.740)	<0
NY Giants 23	2	3.32	29	256	10	8.828	(.276)	8.896	.3294	.0676	.2618	9.85	145.827	38.178
Washington 17	2	4.05	26	211	10	8.115	(.923)	7.577	.1322	(.0908)	.2230	4.70	(51.829)	<0
Seattle 28	3	4.91	36	279	30	7.750	0	8.583	.2826	.0300	.2526	10.22	340.616	86.040
St. Louis 0	1	4.28	36	191	0	5.306	(.583)	4.723	(.2943)	(.4333)	.1390	1.89	(4.364)	<0
San Francisco 20	1	0.84	31	209	10	6.742	(.871)	6.194	(.0745)	(.2568)	.1823	2.65	(10.322)	<0
Arizona 16	2	2.35	44	288	10	6.545	(.659)	6.114	(.0864)	(.2664)	.1799	2.64	(9.902)	<0
Green Bay 21		3.45	28	184	10	6.571	(1.214)	5.715	(.1461)	(.3143)	.1682		(7.616)	<0
Chicago 15		2.77	36	277	10	7.694	(.306)	7.666	.1456	(.0801)	.2256		(58.616)	<0
New England 25	1	3.17	53	378	20	7.132	(.189)	7.320	.0939	(.1215)	.2155		33.378	<0
Buffalo 24	1	4.74	25	212	20	8.480	(1.04)	8.240	.2313	(.0112)	.2425		(656.524)	<0
San Diego 24		3.35	36	252	10	7.000	(.333)	6.945	.0378	(.1666)	.2044		(21.047)	<0
Oakland 20		4.63	32	225	10	7.031	.219	7.125	.0647	(.1450)	.2097		(26.840)	<0

From the table, it can be seen that the actual (i.e., on-field) offensive H_A for the Colts was 0.2355, while the actual defensive H_A for the Steelers was 0.2052, where this latter number is taken from the offensive H_A value from Steelers' on-field opponent that week, which was the Tennessee Titans. Participant P1's net H_A (the difference between the offensive and defensive values) is 0.0303. Participant P1's offensive coaching staff is also burdened by the two turnovers that the Colts had in their Week 1 actual game. Likewise, Special Teams breakdowns (i.e., failures of the play of the kicking unit and the coverage unit) was zero, as the Tampa Bay opponent did not return a kickoff or punt for a touchdown, nor did the Jacksonville place kicker miss a field goal attempt from inside of 50 yards. As such, participant P1 suffered two total breakdowns that can (but need not) be used against the net H_A. Even if the breakdowns are not used to adjust the net H_A, they provide a valuable tool in explaining why a team with superior play design (i.e., coaching) did not achieve an on-field outcome commensurate with such play design advantage. Likewise P2 has selected the New Orleans Saints offensive coaching staff, the Tennessee Titans defensive coaching staff, the Denver Broncos kicking team and the Dallas Cowboys coverage team to form P2's fantasy coaching staff for the week. Referring again to the actual statistics from Week 1, participant P2's net H_A is 0.3618 minus 0.2266, for a net H_A of 0.1352. Because New Orleans committed three turnovers in Week 1, and there were no other breakdowns from the kicking or coverage teams, P2's total breakdowns in Week2 were three. As such, P2 enjoyed a 0.1049 edge in H_A over P1, while being negative one in breakdowns, which may or may not have been sufficient to overcome his or her H_A advantage. In any event, it is the design edge (which, for the reasons discussed throughout, are attributable to the coaching) that is of overarching concern. As such, in a fantasy football game that pitted P1 versus P2, P2 would have prevailed in Week 1 and been awarded a win for that week. Such head-to-head competition can be repeated throughout each week of the NFL season.

The foregoing detailed description and preferred embodiments therein are being given by way of illustration and example only; additional variations in form or detail will readily suggest themselves to those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit of the invention. Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be understood to be limited only by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A fantasy football game adapted to be played by a plurality of participants, said game comprising quantifying coaching based on results derived from at least one actual football game.

2. The fantasy football game of claim 1, wherein a participant from among said plurality of participants who achieves a highest measure of said quantifying coaching is declared a winner of said game.

3. The fantasy football game of claim 2, wherein each of said plurality of participants participates in said fantasy football game with a fantasy football team that comprises at least one of a fantasy offensive coaching staff that corresponds to an offensive coaching staff of an actual professional football team and a fantasy defensive coaching staff that corresponds to a defensive coaching staff of an actual professional football team.

4. The fantasy football game of claim 3, wherein a measure of said quantifying coaching comprises a difference in a fantasy offensive coaching staff metric representative of said participant's fantasy offensive coaching staff and a fantasy defensive coaching staff metric representative of said participant's fantasy defensive coaching staff.

5. The fantasy football game of claim 4, wherein said difference comprises a difference between an adjusted yards per pass attempt that is achieved by an offensive unit performance that corresponds to said first participant's fantasy offensive coaching staff in said at least one actual football game and an adjusted yards per pass attempt that is achieved by a defensive unit performance that corresponds to said first participant's fantasy defensive coaching staff in said at least one actual game against an offensive unit in said at least one actual football game that is represented by an opposing participant's fantasy offensive coaching staff.

6. The fantasy football game of claim 5, wherein each of said adjusted yards per pass attempt are determined according to the formula: QCYPA = PY + ( 10 × PT ) - SY PA where QCYPA represents adjusted yards per pass attempt, PY is a particular offensive unit's passing yards accumulated during said actual football game, PT is a number of touchdown passes accumulated by said particular offensive unit during said actual football game, SY is a number of yards lost by said particular offensive unit when its quarterback is sacked attempting to pass during said actual football game, and PA is a number of pass attempts by said particular offensive unit during said actual football game.

7. The fantasy football game of claim 6, wherein said difference that makes up said measure of said quantifying coaching for each of said fantasy offensive coaching staffs is further adjusted to account for at least one of (a) turnovers, (b) failed field goal attempts within a predetermined distance, (c) touchdowns allowed on any special teams play such as a punt or kickoff and (d) touchdowns scored by an opposing participant's defense.

8. The fantasy football game of claim 1, wherein a score for a particular participant from among said plurality of participants is determined by subtracting an opposing participant's achieved fantasy offensive coaching staff value from a value attained by said particular participant's fantasy offensive coaching staff.

9. The fantasy football game of claim 3, wherein a combination of said fantasy offensive and defensive coaching staffs may correspond to a respective coaching staff of a single actual professional football franchise or a composite coaching staff made up of respective offensive and defensive coaching staffs of two or more actual professional football franchises.

10. A method of participating in a fantasy football game, said method comprising:

selecting a fantasy team coaching staff that corresponds to at least a portion of an actual football team coaching staff; and

determining a participant's fantasy team score by correlating performance indicia of said at least a portion of an actual football team coaching staff involved in its respective at least one actual football game with a score value of a respective fantasy team coaching staff.

11. The method of claim 10, wherein said correlating performance indicia comprises calculating a difference in performance indicia between a first participant's fantasy team offensive coaching staff and a second participant's fantasy team offensive coaching staff.

12. The method of claim 11, wherein at least one of said first and second participants' fantasy team offensive coaching staff performance indicia comprises an adjusted yards per pass attempt that is achieved by a respective offensive unit in said at least one actual football game, wherein said adjusted yards per pass attempt is determined according to the formula: QCYPA = PY + ( 10 × PT ) - SY PA where QCYPA is a respective one of said first and second adjusted yards per pass attempt, PY is a particular offensive unit's passing yards accumulated during said actual football game, PT is a number of touchdown passes accumulated by said particular offensive unit during said actual football game, SY is a number of yards lost by said particular offensive unit when its quarterback is sacked attempting to pass during said actual football game, and PA is a number of pass attempts by said particular offensive unit during said actual football game.

13. The method of claim 12, wherein said adjusted yards per pass attempt is offset by subtracting a value for at least one of turnovers, failed field goal attempts within a predetermined distance, touchdowns allowed on any special teams play such as a punt or kickoff and touchdowns scored by an opposing participant's defense.

14. The method of claim 10, wherein said fantasy team coaching staff comprises at least one of a fantasy team offensive staff that corresponds to an offensive coaching staff of an actual professional football team and a fantasy defensive coaching staff that corresponds to a defensive coaching staff of an actual professional football team.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein said correlating performance indicia comprises correlating performance indicia of both said offensive and defensive coaching staffs, where said offensive coaching staff performance indicia comprises adjusted yards per pass attempt achieved by an actual team that is representative of said offensive coaching staff in said at least one actual football game, and where said defensive coaching staff performance indicia comprises adjusted yards per pass attempt achieved by a team opposing an actual team that is representative of said defensive coaching staff in said at least one actual football game.

16. The method of claim 10, further comprising:

comparing a fantasy team score for each of said plurality of participants whose respective fantasy team coaching staffs are matched up against each other in said actual football game; and

awarding a victory to said participant with a higher said fantasy team score.

17. The method of claim 10, further comprising configuring a computer-based system to automate at least one of said selecting a fantasy team coaching staff and determining a participant's fantasy team score, said computer-based network system comprising a computer configured to access data corresponding to at least one of said fantasy team coaching staff performance indicia and said score values on a storage medium and perform said determining such that said computer can communicate to a remote client device accessible by said participant over a communication link.

18. The method of claim 10, wherein said participating in a fantasy football game comprises comparing said determined fantasy team scores among participants in a fantasy football league.

19. An article of manufacture comprising a computer usable medium having computer readable program code embodied therein for providing a virtual football game to a plurality of participants in a fantasy football league where each participant represented in said virtual football game by a fantasy coaching staff that is in turn representative of an actual coaching staff for an actual underlying football game such that statistics achieved by a football team playing for said actual coaching staff are imputed to said each participant through said fantasy coaching staff, said computer readable program code in said article of manufacture comprising:

computer readable program code portion for causing a computer to accept said achieved statistics for said each participant; and

computer readable program code portion for causing said computer to determine a fantasy team score for said each participant.

20. The article of manufacture of claim 19, wherein said computer readable program code further comprises computer readable program code portion for notifying a participant from among said participants who achieves a highest fantasy team score.

21. The article of manufacture of claim 20, wherein said computer readable program code in said article of manufacture further comprises computer readable program code portion for calculating a quantifiable measure of said fantasy coaching staff's contribution to said statistics.

22. The article of manufacture of claim 21, wherein said quantifiable measure of said fantasy coaching staff's contribution to said statistics comprises an adjusted yards per pass attempt achieved by an offensive unit in said actual underlying football game.

23. The article of manufacture of claim 22, wherein said adjusted yards per pass attempt is determined according to the formula: QCYPA = PY + ( 10 × PT ) - SY PA where QCYPA represents adjusted yards per pass attempt, PY is a particular offensive unit's passing yards accumulated during said actual football game, PT is a number of touchdown passes accumulated by said particular offensive unit during said actual football game, SY is a number of yards lost by said particular offensive unit when its quarterback is sacked attempting to pass during said actual football game, and PA is a number of pass attempts by said particular offensive unit during said actual football game.

24. The article of manufacture of claim 19, wherein said computer usable medium comprises at least one of a hard disk drive, compact disk, digital video disk, floppy disk and flash.

25. The article of manufacture of claim 19, wherein said computer readable program code is configured to access a database that includes statistics from at least one of said actual underlying football game.