Slugs3511 Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Ok., I have been running a league for years now and now, because a team is in 5th place, he is screaming that we should take the top 8 teams to make the playoffs instead of, we have two divisions, and we have always taken the top 4 from each division. We then pit 1 against 8, 2 against 7 and so on.....to make an 8 man bracket and play that out.... I have offered 3 divisions of 4 teams, no one wants it, so we have stuck to two...now a problem again.... Suggestions please.... Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) top 2 in wins and the next two in points. This is for the playoffs and only the best teams should be allowed. Why would the middle or average teams deserve to be in the playoffs for being 'average'? The playoffs are only for the elite. Tell your buddy to win more games or score more points if he wants to be in the playoffs. His idea would be like letting the Reds or Marlins or Blue Jays into the World Series Edited October 19, 2011 by Scooby's Hubby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lkirc Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Top four teams in a 12 teamer should make the playoffs. 8 out of 12 is silly and makes the regular season meaningless. Divisions are silly too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) You should never have more than half of the teams making the playoffs. If you have at least 12 teams, my favourite is a 3 week playoff (weeks 14,15,16) with top 6 making the playoffs. 1 and 2 get first round byes, with 3v6 and 4v5 in the first round. The bye creates a genuine incentive/reward for having an excellent regular season -- otherwise there's really no difference between finishing 1st and squeaking into the last playoff spot. At the same time, having 6 playoff spots gives the teams that start 0-3 something to keep playing for. Edited October 19, 2011 by nelsosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) 1) No way you should have 8 teams make the play-offs in a 12 team league. 4 seems perfect 2) Dude should not be b!tching about this half-way through the season. 3) I agree with top two teams by record followed by next two best points scored. Edited October 19, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 You're going to get a ton of different opinions, some will conflict with others. Some will say "this is perfect" others will respond with "no way". I do agree with one simple point, you should not have more than half the teams in the playoffs. That being said, if you're set on having 8 out of 12 make it, I don't see anything wrong with the top 4 in each division. You could do something like top 3 in each division, then the highest score of the remaining 3 teams from each division which did not make the playoffs. But no matter what you do, that should not be changed midseason. I know that the change probably wouldn't impact who people draft or how they've managed their team up to this point, but it sets a bad precedent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 You're going to get a ton of different opinions, some will conflict with others. Some will say "this is perfect" others will respond with "no way". I do agree with one simple point, you should not have more than half the teams in the playoffs. That being said, if you're set on having 8 out of 12 make it, I don't see anything wrong with the top 4 in each division. You could do something like top 3 in each division, then the highest score of the remaining 3 teams from each division which did not make the playoffs. But no matter what you do, that should not be changed midseason. I know that the change probably wouldn't impact who people draft or how they've managed their team up to this point, but it sets a bad precedent. then you have to hear "he is in an easy division and/or his schedule is too easy" no divisions, everyone play everyone the same and take top w in wins and the next 2 in points - that way scheduling and bye weeks are less of a factor b/c of total points admission and the "he had a good week" people are satisfied with wins and losses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.I.P kickoffs Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 My league has divisions but just for show meaning at the end of the year no matter what division your in the top 6 make the playoffs. Also 6 out of 10 make it. I understand why some of you wouldn't want more than half to make but I been in leagues that teams start 0-3 n then manage like idiots because they know there nor making it. With 6 of 10 making it makes those managers stay on top of there teams. Our format is top 2 teams get byes 3vs6 n 4vs5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 then you have to hear "he is in an easy division and/or his schedule is too easy" no divisions, everyone play everyone the same and take top w in wins and the next 2 in points - that way scheduling and bye weeks are less of a factor b/c of total points admission and the "he had a good week" people are satisfied with wins and losses I've never understood the point of divisions in FF. They make sense in real football because you're selling the product to spectators, so you need to develop regional rivalries and such. I suppose if your league has been going on for a long time, you might develop division rivalries, but I've never known anyone to take pride in anything more than bringing home the money at the end of the year. I guess I just can't see getting all that excited about being "Division Champs" in FF. I remember the seasons I've won it all... barely. So, in essence, they're nothing but arbitrary groupings that do little besides contribute to the chance of the wrong teams making the play-offs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 then you have to hear "he is in an easy division and/or his schedule is too easy" no divisions, everyone play everyone the same and take top w in wins and the next 2 in points - that way scheduling and bye weeks are less of a factor b/c of total points admission and the "he had a good week" people are satisfied with wins and losses Does everybody play the same teams the same week? If not then when you play people matters and it can still be seen as unfair. And if everybody plays every team every week, aren't the results pretty much the same as a total points (not head-to-head) league. Whatever, I won't get into a pissing match about this, as many leagues use divisions. And the OP isn't asking for feedback on whether to use divisions or not. PS In our league, the division winner gets a bye the first week, and win their entry fee back. Wild card teams play the first week, get half their fee back, the winner gets the other half back (so wild card winner and division winner get the same money, but the WC has to win a game.) Winning the division does count for something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Does everybody play the same teams the same week? If not then when you play people matters and it can still be seen as unfair. And if everybody plays every team every week, aren't the results pretty much the same as a total points (not head-to-head) league. First off, you're never going to remove "unfairness" from the equation. Maybe you got to play the team with Tom Brady, Jackson, and Gore in week 7. Whatever. That said, there's little reason to increase the chances of teams lucking their way in to the play-offs. And, no, all play is not the same as a total pts league. All play rewards teams that consistently score well and total points may reward a team that puts up staggering numbers one week and not so great numbers the next. Honestly, the next time I set up a league, I'm going to do it basically like a track meet (or sort of like NASCAR without the extra stuff). Every week, everyone plays the field. First place team gets something like 20 pts, 2nd place gets 15, and so on down until the last place team gets a point. In this case, you get the excitement of watching the late games, hoping to jump a few spots, only everyone is worried about everyone, so those late games matter to the whole league. If you start out the season crappy, you can really gain ground by putting up huge numbers down the stretch and finishing 1st or 2nd every week, so more teams are in the mix longer. As far as play-offs, you can either just scoop off the top 4 or so and do it head to head or treat it sort of like NASCAR again, take the last few weeks of the season and have a chase where the top teams are in a similar deal that they've been in the whole season, rewarding seeds with a little head-start points wise. I really think this would be a blast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 one division, 4 teams...weeks 15 and 16....get'er done... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawofmurphy Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 I use divisions in my league and like taking a set number of teams per division. The main advantage here is that it keeps the most # of teams involved and competitive as possible. Of course, I would acknowledge that it doesn't always result in the "best" teams making the playoffs. But as a commissioner, I've always wanted as many people to have fun for as long as possible. Maybe it's not the best method, but it's what I prefer. If I trade some "fairness" for keeping every team alive for 12 weeks as opposed to having a few teams basically eliminated by Week 10...oh well. Regarding the discussion of having divisions at all...I think another cool aspect to divisions is that in my dynasty league, when you play your division rivals twice and your non-division rivals once, it adds to the idea of forming real rivalries with same-division teams. This of course works for 10 team leagues better than 12 team leagues...but it's another bonus all the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lkirc Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 I am a big proponent of all-play scoring systems. In one league I am in we have a head to head matchup which is worth 3 points and then you play every other team for 1 point. This makes 11 points avaiable each week. I think this is a great hybrid head to head system and has really been a lot of fun. Lots of side bets and smack, but also a true measure of who has the best team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 You should never have more than half of the teams making the playoffs. If you have at least 12 teams, my favourite is a 3 week playoff (weeks 14,15,16) with top 6 making the playoffs. 1 and 2 get first round byes, with 3v6 and 4v5 in the first round. The bye creates a genuine incentive/reward for having an excellent regular season -- otherwise there's really no difference between finishing 1st and squeaking into the last playoff spot. At the same time, having 6 playoff spots gives the teams that start 0-3 something to keep playing for. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinger Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 We also have 8 out of 12 teams make the playoffs....gasp! So hopefully this will be of some help, or at least a different idea for you to implement. We have three divisions, four teams each division obviously. The three division winners get the top three seeds. The next five best teams, regardless of division, make the playoffs. I've been in this format for six years in the league I run and 13 years prior to starting my league, it's made for some interesting playoff match ups some of the years, but typically it's about as normal as can be. Is eight teams to many, sure, could be and perhaps six is a better number. Personally, I don't care for a team to have BYE week in the playoffs. You want to win, earn it. It's all for entertainment in the end. Everyone in my league is happy with the eight team playoff format, so it works for our group. It keeps some of the bubble teams interested in the season longer, since they know their season isn't hopeless after six weeks. Besides, how many times have you seen a team get off to a strong start, then falter in the last half of the season or a team get off to a slow start and get hot in the latter half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) Regarding the discussion of having divisions at all...I think another cool aspect to divisions is that in my dynasty league, when you play your division rivals twice and your non-division rivals once, it adds to the idea of forming real rivalries with same-division teams. This of course works for 10 team leagues better than 12 team leagues...but it's another bonus all the same. I agree that it's something more suited for dynasty/keepers leagues, to establish rivalries with teams who retain a good bit of their rosters from year to year.... Redraft leagues, not so much... But why do you think 10 teams works better than 12 teams for divisions? With 12 teams (3 divisions), you can have each team play eachother twice (6 games), but still play all but one in the league for 7 games (unless you throw in a double-header one week or only have 4 playoff spots/2 playoff weeks to play every one). With 10 teams, you're limited to 2 divisions and end up playing 8 of your games in division, and only 5 out of division. Not nearly as balanced between division games and non-division opponents. As per playoffs, this is how we do it in my local, and how I prefer to do it: 4 teams, 3 divisions, 6 playoff spots. Yes, it'd be nice to make the season more meaningful with only 4 making the playoffs, but it does retain interest to be in that top half... The 3 division winners are the top seeds, with the top 2 getting 1st round byes. Then we have a points-leader spot to help make sure a team doesn't get screwed by hitting teams on their hot weeks, and finally 2 wild cards... This tends to do a pretty good job of putting the msot deserving teams in the playoffs. Also, this year I'm taking a suggestion from this forum and we'll be doing a toilet bowl with the bottom 6 teams, to compete for the 1st pick next year. This should hopefully help to keep even the bottom dwellers motivated. Edited October 19, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 top 6 teams in every league i've ever played in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 top 6 teams in every league i've ever played in Pretty sure the Ladder is four, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 For those of you who are opposed to divisions in FF, please tell me you are also opposed to the head-to-head tie-breaker in FF (which makes even less sense). Actually, most of my leagues use divisions. I don't have a problem with is, if divisions are used to maintain a balanced schedule (play your division x times, and non-division y times). Playing an uneven schedule can have just as much of an impact on who makes the playoffs as what division you're in, etc. That said, there is no right/wrong answer... It's a matter of preference. One thing is for sure, though... having more than half of the teams make the playoffs seems kind of silly (even though the NBA and NHL do it). What's the point of a 13 or 14-game regular season (or in their case, 82 or 84), if it only elmiinates roughly 40 percent of the teams from possibly winning it all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 There is no right or wrong way, only preference involved. In friendlier leagues, I am a big proponent of keeping as many teams involved as long as possible. To that end, with a 12 team league, I like to see 6 teams make the playoffs and have the remaining 6 teams go into a separate "Toilet Bowl" bracket that has a prize attached to it as well. This way every team is incentivized to continue trying to win and/or build as strong a team as possible for the entire season. Top 2 teams get byes in the first week of playoffs then play out from there. In ten team leagues, I like to do the same, but the first round losers of the playoff bracket advance as the "bye teams" of the toilet bowl. In more competitive leagues, either 4 or 6 make the playoffs. If you use 2 divisions, I like having the playoffs separated by division so that you get a division vs. division championship. If no divisions or 3 divisions, it doesn't work out. As far as division/no division, I admit it makes no sense to have in FF in terms of strategy/set up, but, depending on how it is implemented, it can be a good tool to build rivalries etc. if that is an aspect your owners enjoy. It all comes down to your owners' personal preference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowsFall Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) I have found that the best way for a 12 team league to set up it's schedule is one that is never recommended or talked about. 4 Divisions of 3 Teams. You play division rivals twice and get to play the other 9 teams once. The conventional way has you playing everyone except one team, which seems weird. Why even have head to head if you aren't going to play everyone. Also having the division games within weeks 1-3 and then again weeks 11-13. For the playoffs, 4 division winners make the playoffs with 2 best records getting byes. 5th spot goes to the team with the best record of a non division winner. 6th spot goes to the team with the most points of the 7 teams remaining not already in the playoffs. Also a Toilet Bowl Playoff is run for the teams that don't make the playoffs. The winner gets the right to pick his division rivals for the next season. Edited October 19, 2011 by ShadowsFall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 I have found that the best way for a 12 team league to set up it's schedule is one that is never recommended or talked about. 4 Divisions of 3 Teams. You play division rivals twice and get to play the other 9 teams once. The conventional way has you playing everyone except one team, which seems weird. Why even have head to head if you aren't going to play everyone. Also having the division games within weeks 1-3 and then again weeks 11-13. For the playoffs, 4 division winners make the playoffs with 2 best records getting byes. 5th spot goes to the team with the best record of a non division winner. 6th spot goes to the team with the most points of the 7 teams remaining not already in the playoffs. I have heard of the 4 divisions of 3 teams setup, but one thing I really don't like about that is only 4 of your 13 games are against division foes which just seems pretty low. As far as why bother having head to head if you don't play everybody, well because the only way to do that is your 4 divisions, or having double headers. And not eveybody wants to do that. As big country said, there is no right or wrong, or best way to do things, just different preferences. Its like saying PPR is best, or IDP, or 6PT QB TDs, or any number of scoring options. Imagine if every fantasy league had the same rules, how boring would that be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 (edited) We also have 8 out of 12 teams make the playoffs....gasp! To me this takes all the 'skill' out of crowning a champ. You're basically saying "unless your team really sucks, you'll make the playoffs", and then all bets are off. It just feels wrong to have a 5-8 team get a shot at the title by having a lucky 3 week run at the end of the season. Edited October 19, 2011 by nelsosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripleshot Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 The best playoff format I have ever seen was one that was played during the playoffs. STATS Fantasy Football used this setup. STATS would give each player on playoff teams a value(in points), the better players having higher values. Every playoff week you comprised a new team of the players playing that weekend. You had a set amount of points to spend, and had to fill every position in your lineup while not exceeding your total allowed. If you had that player on your roster at the end of the year, you got a 50% discount. It was conceivable that two teams could be exactly alike, but not likely. This system eliminated all the studs playing a half game in week 17 due to having their playiff spots already wrapped up, etc. Hands down this was the best playoff format I've ever played in. Oh, and in a 12 team league, the top four made it. Three division winners and one wildcard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.