Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Playoff spot drama


scottyjets
 Share

Recommended Posts

Please see below -- the Commissioner (TEAM A) is involved which is making this ruling tricky. 7 out of 16 teams make the playoffs in our league, and TEAM A was put in the playoffs. An unrelated team objected to this and thinks TEAM B should actually be in the playoffs. I do not want to say anymore to influence the opinion but this is what is posted on our league message board -- names protected to protect the innocent -- any thoughts greatly appreciated:

 

---

 

TEAM Z has brought up to me a discrepancy regarding a playoff ruling. Now this is a little tricky in that I am one of the teams involved so I am going to leave this up to the league to determine. Please read the rule and respond accordingly.

 

Official Rule: "There are 7 total playoff teams consisting of 4 division winners and 3 Wild-Card teams. There will be 4 divisions and each division will have a winner; also 2 (3 total) Wild-Card teams to be decided solely by record (Ties refer to Head to Head Match-up then Points) and the 3rd Wild Card team will be either the League Points Winner (if they are NOT already inline to make the playoffs) or the #7 best record. If the point’s winner is currently in the playoffs then the #7 seed will make the playoffs due to record and will be ranked #7 overall However if Points Winner makes the playoffs he will be ranked #5 seed. The Bye is only given during the Wild-Card Round to the top ranked division winner with the best regular season record; wild-card teams are not eligible for any byes under any circumstances."

 

The #7 seed was created to get the best team NOT in the playoffs to make the playoffs. Therefore an 0-13 team with the most points in the league will get in. If the league total point winner gets into the playoffs then it will go to record and back to points as the tiebreaker. TEAM Z is arguing that regular rules should apply to this because I didn't exactly articulate the rule accurately either way. I do NOT want any issues with the league therefore I will let the league decide. TEAM B nor I will have any say in the final ruling.

 

This ruling is important so if you have any questions or comments please leave it on the message board for all to see.

 

-----------

 

I am voting in favor of TEAM B in the playoffs over TEAM A. My explanation for this vote is below:

 

the 3rd Wild Card team will be either the League Points Winner (if they are NOT already inline to make the playoffs) or the #7 best record. If the point’s winner is currently in the playoffs then the #7 seed will make the playoffs due to record and will be ranked #7 overall

 

My interpretation of the above rule is that if the LEAGUE POINT WINNER (TEAM Y) is not in the playoffs, he would get the #7 seed rather than TEAM B.

 

TEAM B is NOT the league point winner, TEAM Y is, therefore this rule as written should not apply.

 

If the intent of the rule was as Commish stated, it failed to articulate that.

 

The rules clearly state that head to head is the first tiebreaker, league points is the second tiebreaker. TEAM B defeated TEAM A in the regular season.

 

-------------------

 

How is the "best record" calculated? Is it by points, or is the tie-breaker head to head matchups?

 

--------------------

 

The standard league tiebreakers which determine the league rankings are Head-to-head, and then points.

 

--------------------

 

When I created the #7 seed 2 years ago it was based on points hence I didn't see a need to define the tie breaker's because I thought it was implied based on the focal point of the rule stating a points winner or league points winner. For Challenger to be so direct in his interpretation is ridiculous to me. I absolutely believe that I am in the playoffs but to not address this would be wrong.

 

-------------------------

 

My team sucked this year but I'd like to add my two cents in. In the official rules that I just read it doesn't state either way if the tie breaker for the 7th seed should be points or head to head. Fot the 5&6 seeds it's says the tie breaker is head-to-head. Being that this wild card spot was created for the team with points I would think of it as a point based seeding. Eitherway it doesn't affect me, but I have always felt tie breakers for all situations should be points. Head to head basis is bush in my opinion, because if you play a team once and you have guys on a bye and he's on full strength it's an unfair tiebreaker.

 

---------------------------

 

From my interpretation of the rule the 7th spot is for the points winner, TEAM Y in this case. Since he is already in, the spot defaults to a regular wild card spot, which the tiebraker is head to head matchup if applicable then points. Since the two teams played each other and TEAM B won, I think the spot belongs to him. Also, under the current settings the site even has TEAM B listed as 7/16 and TEAM A at 8/16. I do agree that head to head is a bs tiebraker, but the tiebraker for teams based on record was stated at the onset as head to head matchup.

 

---------------------------

 

Here's my $.02 -

 

Nobody knows the original intent of the rule in place except for the commissioner who wrote the rules. It's a tough spot to weigh in on as a) The commissioner's playoff run is determined by this, and :wacko: I get to choose who I play in the first playoff round. That notwithstanding, Commish is the commissioner for a reason, and therefore it is ultimately his decision. I will offer my opinion, but I am not the league commissioner, and therefore do not want this to count as a 'vote.' We put our trust in the commissioner to run the league as he sees fit, and though this is a tough choice I'm sure the decision that he comes to will be made with good reason - either way.

 

As I read the rules to the letter, it seems like the rules say that the tie breaker is head to head, not points. The same set of rules charged me $50 per waiver move, and I've probably put in an extra $500ish for this since (which I am obviously not a fan of) as I was not aware of this rule before making roster moves early in the season. As such, it seems important now that the rules are stuck to as they are written!

 

Based on this, TEAM A did lose to TEAM B in the H2H matchup, and based on the rules, TEAM B won the tiebreak. Therefore, it seems as it TEAM B should be correctly awarded the 7 seed. In reading the rule as it stands, I wouldn't know that the 7 seed was to be awarded based on points, and if I were in Commish's position, I wouldn't have known to challenge this for my benefit.

 

I think that this is something that is easily clarified moving forward, and I happen to agree with taco in that the points are really the measure that should be used, not H2H. However, as the rules are written, the spot belongs to TEAM B. If there is a well reasoned argument for the contrary, I also would not be upset to see the ruling go the other way as long as it makes sense.

 

------------------------------

 

As far as the league ESPN standings, its never accurate. We have a custom made league, in 2009 the #9 seed made the playoffs. PLEASE REVIEW THAT

 

--------------------------------

 

I was under the impression that it was points. While this scenario has head to head matchup as a viable solution there are so many scenarios where h2h complicates things, what if 3 teams had come in with the same record? What if they hadn't played each other? The bye week scenario is also a very good argument.

 

Having said that, it isn't clear and I don't want to vote, but the rule should be clear next year.

 

-----------------------------------

 

Look, I am completely letting the teams speak here. I will gladly take myself out of the playoffs if people think I am wrong. I should have explained the rule better, I try to write everything as detailed as possible. I really wish I was not the team in dispute here as I feel that anyway I rule will be effecting someone elses position. Damned if I do and damned if I don't situation

 

-------------------------------------

 

For this season, I've always read that rule to mean that the overall high points winner, in this case TEAM Y, would get in if he has not already qualified for the playoffs (.....but then again what are the actual chances of the high points winner not being in the top 7 seeds, did we really need that rule?) Other than that the regular tiebraker rules would apply. I never was fully sure what the regular tiebraker rules were, but if you guys are telling me head to head takes first priority over higher points, than TEAM B I would think should be the #7 seed. No losers here as the #8 seed if I remember gets choice of draft pick in some form next year, correct?

 

-------------------------------------

 

The rules are not clearly defined, I am apart of the ruling therefore either choice I make is a wrong choice. TEAM B will be in the playoffs, Done & done. Also, this will be the last year that I am the commissioner of the league. If anyone wants to take over next year let me know as I will forward you all the info. I am sick of the work....

 

------------------------------------

 

The Only fair way would be to have TEAM A and TEAM B go head to head.

 

Who ever wins takes the slot.

 

The lower score of the 2 is what is matched up against TEAM X.

 

So if TEAM A get 150 and TEAM B get 165. TEAM B gets the slot. The 150 is matched against TEAM X. If TEAM X beats that he moves on. If not TEAM B would move on.

 

--------------------------------------

 

In any event nobody thinks that this is an open and shut case but TEAM Z. There is no obvious answer and I am put into an awkward position. What JAMES suggested is NOT crazy. I wish I could appoint one person with a level head to make the final decision. I caved before because I am in a lose/lose position. If I stay in the playoff spot then I am a dictator. If I let him simply have the spot then I am only doing myself an injustice. I have run this league issue free for 8 years and it sucks that it came to this. No matter what the conclusion I am uneasy about the entire situation.

 

--------------------------------------

 

Again I do believe this is a cut and dry situation. I agree we should revisit the rule next year and most points is probably the way to go. But we're not talking about next year. We're talking about how to interpret the rule that was on paper prior to this season. The rule is:

 

the 3rd Wild Card team will be either the League Points Winner (if they are NOT already inline to make the playoffs) or the #7 best record. If the point’s winner is currently in the playoffs then the #7 seed will make the playoffs due to record and will be ranked #7 overall

 

This rule IS clear. It states that since TEAM Y is currently in the playoffs, the status quo stands as is and the #7 seed is good. It does not indicate anywhere that the #7 seed tiebreakers are different than the #5 and #6 seed.

 

There is only one way to interpret this rule.

 

We should not be inventing wacky scenarios. This is cut and dry.

 

----------------------------------------

 

Excuse my language, but this is complete bulltaco. Team TEAM A finished with more points, and therefore is the better team. I know at 5-8 my opinion means taco, but TEAM Z words should have about the same amont of bearing as Me cuz this has nothing to do with his situation, meaning this outcome affects him in zero way. I paid my $500 buck, therefore I should at least have an opinion. Team TEAM A should have that 7th seed, plain and simple, no drama.

 

-----------------------------------

 

Its obviouslu not cut and dry as nobody else thinks that. Its clear that the #7 wild card had an exception to the rule regarding points, if this was as cut and dry as you make it out to be then league members who are neutral to the issue would stand 100% with you. I dont know why you are scared to let league members form thier own opinion. I dont know what vested interest you have in this ruling but it concerns me. There will be no next year. If someone takes control of the league that is fine. I will not let you bully Teams from this speaking in this forum. I hope teams will continue to post as this ruling is NOT final yet

 

----------------------------------------

 

I wouldn't invite this enchilada back into your league next year anyway. 7th seed is yours dude. I vote TEAM A. Any one else agree say "I".

 

----------------------------------------

 

If I had read the rule without hearing Commish's intentions, I would have read it as very clearly saying that the #7 seed can go to either one of two teams (it says EITHER in the rule):

 

-League point winner if they aren't in the playoffs (TEAM Y)

-#7 seed which is determined by standings, where the tiebreaker is head-to-head record (TEAM :tup:

 

Now having heard Commish's description I don't think he's lying. But the only reason the rule takes on any complication, IMO, is because I've now heard what the intentions were. If I was TEAM B and had noticed it, I would have raised the issue myself. This is my favorite league to play in, but I personally think there's too many rules, etc... and combine that with the fact there's 16 teams, it doesn't surprise me something like this happened.

 

And I'm yet to read where anyone is saying their opinion is greater than someone else's so cool your jets over there, cellar dweller. Then again, tie-breaker is head to head so your awful points total doesn't matter too much in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry but this is too much to read for someting that should be simple. Why is it so hard to determine your playoff teams? Your qualifications "rule" should be in list form and as simply put as possible. Example: Playoffs will consist of the top two teams in wins and the next two teams with the most points. Simple. So that all one has to do is look at the standings. Then list the tiebreakers, if you really need them since total points are rarely tied.

Edited by Scooby's Hubby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TEAM A and TEAM B are tied for the final playoff spot (#7 seed) with a 7-6 record. No other team has a 7-6 record.

 

TEAM A has more points on the season than TEAM B

 

TEAM B defeated TEAM A in their one regular season meeting

 

In your rules it doesn't really say how a tie for the 7th seed should be decided. However, if a tie for the 5/6 seed is based on head to head, why would the tie for the 7th seed be different? The point of the rule about the highest total point winner getting in is so that if someone just has really bad luck but still outscore the whole league they get in. Once the highest point getter is in, the rules should go back to the standard rules which says head to head is the tie breaker.

 

So imo, team B should be the one in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the point’s winner is currently in the playoffs then the #7 seed will make the playoffs due to record and will be ranked #7 overall

 

 

As I read it team B should be in. The "rules" that are posted say the "League Points Winner" gets the 7 seed, not "the highest scoring team not in the playoffs". So it comes down to record, both teams are 7-6, B beat A head to head, unless team A is the "League Points Winner", B is in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck getting any help, I stopped reading after a few minues and not seeing any reference to the actual standings, points, etc.

 

Way to complicated of a post to decide.

 

Maybe the Huddle could provide a pay service to resolve FFB disputes (like a mediator or something).

 

Reading your more concise post helps a little but it sounds like your rules need more clarification on that #7 slot and how ties are broken. Or maybe just change it to "highest scoring team that didn't make the playoffs" since it seems to be trying to do that.

 

When the rule change was done (#7 for league points winner) did you actually have a time when that happened (highest points scored didn't make the playoffs). I've read where some leagues do something like "last wild card team is the highest points scored amongst teams that didn't make the playoffs" which is very simple.

 

Also seems weird to add a 7th team and have an odd number.

 

Hope you can resolve it peacefully :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree that it's B. The rule states that if the top overall points winner is already in the #7 spot goes to the #7 record. Since that is reverting to the standard for the rest of the positions I would say that implies that the tiebreakers are the same as the rest of the positions. The only way it would go to A IMO is if there were a specific rule written that says "total points is the first tiebreaker for the #7 spot for teams with the same record." Otherwise, like I and others have said, once the points winner is already in #7 becomes a regular playoff spot.

 

Tough break for the commish who sounds a little like "I'm gonna take my ball and go home." If his intentions were to have the #7 spot be about points then he should have written the rule that way... as it's written it defaults to a regular playoff spot IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule seems pretty clear. But, to amke sure I am rading that gigiantic hot mess in the OP correctly, please answer the following question:

 

Is the league points leader already in the playoffs?

 

I believe from my interpretation that they already are, which means that the 7th spot comes down to record. Your rules also state that record is determined first by overall record, then head to head and then points scored. Given this, since Team A and B both have a 7-6 record, you would go to head to head record. Since Team B beat Team A in head to head play, Team B would get the #7 seed.

 

Now, if the league points winner is not already in the playoff, they get in and are seeded #5 and the above paragraph is moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule seems pretty clear. But, to amke sure I am rading that gigiantic hot mess in the OP correctly, please answer the following question:

 

Is the league points leader already in the playoffs?

 

I believe from my interpretation that they already are, which means that the 7th spot comes down to record. Your rules also state that record is determined first by overall record, then head to head and then points scored. Given this, since Team A and B both have a 7-6 record, you would go to head to head record. Since Team B beat Team A in head to head play, Team B would get the #7 seed.

 

Now, if the league points winner is not already in the playoff, they get in and are seeded #5 and the above paragraph is moot.

Definitely this.

 

As i skimmed through it to see what the argument was, some seem to be claiming that since this wildcard was "different" that it could allow the total-points winner in, that it should be based on total points... But it's clear from the rule book that "total points" only applies if the points leader isn't already in the playoffs (it appears he is)... Since that's the case, it then becomes a regular wildcard spot where the written wildcard tie-breakers apply.

 

The people trying to claim what "should" happen, have absolutely no leg to stand on. You have to follow the tie-breakers you have in place unless expressly written otherwise. Team B gets the #7 seed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In your rules it doesn't really say how a tie for the 7th seed should be decided. However, if a tie for the 5/6 seed is based on head to head, why would the tie for the 7th seed be different? The point of the rule about the highest total point winner getting in is so that if someone just has really bad luck but still outscore the whole league they get in. Once the highest point getter is in, the rules should go back to the standard rules which says head to head is the tie breaker.

 

So imo, team B should be the one in the playoffs.

 

this. any of the total points verbiage for the last playoff spot goes out the window here, because the points leader is already in the playoffs. the only relevant rule is this:

 

Wild-Card teams to be decided solely by record (Ties refer to Head to Head Match-up then Points)

 

the exception listed (for total overall points leader) is one that does not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and by the way, to put it bluntly....if the commish puts his own team, team A, in the playoffs here he is quite simply a crook IMO. anyone taking his side in this dispute is doing so because they are closer friends with him than team B, pure and simple.

Edited by Azazello1313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Official Rule: "There are 7 total playoff teams consisting of 4 division winners and 3 Wild-Card teams. There will be 4 divisions and each division will have a winner; also 2 (3 total) Wild-Card teams to be decided solely by record (Ties refer to Head to Head Match-up then Points) and the 3rd Wild Card team will be either the League Points Winner (if they are NOT already inline to make the playoffs) or the #7 best record. If the point’s winner is currently in the playoffs then the #7 seed will make the playoffs due to record and will be ranked #7 overall However if Points Winner makes the playoffs he will be ranked #5 seed. The Bye is only given during the Wild-Card Round to the top ranked division winner with the best regular season record; wild-card teams are not eligible for any byes under any circumstances."

 

You made the right call....seems pretty clear that wild-card ties are decided via head-to-head first, then total points. That was the intent of the league when determining the 5/6 seeds....there isn't a logical reason for it not to be used if determining the 6/7 seeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely this.

 

As i skimmed through it to see what the argument was, some seem to be claiming that since this wildcard was "different" that it could allow the total-points winner in, that it should be based on total points... But it's clear from the rule book that "total points" only applies if the points leader isn't already in the playoffs (it appears he is)... Since that's the case, it then becomes a regular wildcard spot where the written wildcard tie-breakers apply.

 

The people trying to claim what "should" happen, have absolutely no leg to stand on. You have to follow the tie-breakers you have in place unless expressly written otherwise. Team B gets the #7 seed.

This for sure.

In your rules it doesn't really say how a tie for the 7th seed should be decided. However, if a tie for the 5/6 seed is based on head to head, why would the tie for the 7th seed be different? The point of the rule about the highest total point winner getting in is so that if someone just has really bad luck but still outscore the whole league they get in. Once the highest point getter is in, the rules should go back to the standard rules which says head to head is the tie breaker.

 

So imo, team B should be the one in the playoffs.

And this.

 

And I read the entire post even though I suffer from AAD, I still remember a time when people read newspapers and books. I guess this Twitter generation is limited in how much they can read in one sitting.

 

The rules are not unclear at all. It's Team B all the way.

 

When I created the #7 seed 2 years ago it was based on points hence I didn't see a need to define the tie breaker's because I thought it was implied based on the focal point of the rule stating a points winner or league points winner. For Challenger to be so direct in his interpretation is ridiculous to me. I absolutely believe that I am in the playoffs but to not address this would be wrong.

It's also in really poor taste for the commissioner to criticize the challenger for being "so direct in his interpretation." Well, what else is he supposed to do? He read the rules and interpreted them exactly as they were written. isn't that why you have a rule book? It's supposed to be a clear and concise record of the rules. No one's perfect, so the rule book should constantly be updated to make sure discrepancies found are corrected. The commissioner's job is to interpret these discrepancies and make rulings based on the spirit and the intention of the rule.

 

In this case, I think that the commissioner's creative interpretation of his own written rule is hard to swallow. The commissioner absolutely should have conceded because if his intentions were different than what was written, then it's his own fault. I also don't believe the commissioner. I think his role in this matter has clearly clouded his memory, and he's forgotten what his intentions were when he wrote the rule because the actual written words do not support his current interpretation whatsoever.

 

I will give the commish props for doing the right thing and conceding. Furthermore, you have a bunch of jackwads in that league, who throw out their personal opinions of what they think the rule should be rather than discuss what is actually written. Was it the commissioner who wrote, "I will not let you bully Teams from this speaking in this forum."? If so, good for him. Is this the Tea Party League? Just kidding. Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck. Still, it must be frustrating. I hate bullies. Perhaps, you should raise the entry fees, so you can Josh Gordon out the riffraff. $500 is too low an entry fee. All this drama for that little bit of chump change? Puh-leeze. :wacko:

Edited by electricrelish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gimme a break. Team A should be in the playoffs. With the fluky nature of FF, total points should always trump head to head.

 

Also, #7 seed should go to the team with the highest point total not in the playoffs. Not sure if that's what the commish meant to do, and just got his verbage messed up, but the way it's articulated right now doesn't make much sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I read it team B should be in. The "rules" that are posted say the "League Points Winner" gets the 7 seed, not "the highest scoring team not in the playoffs". So it comes down to record, both teams are 7-6, B beat A head to head, unless team A is the "League Points Winner", B is in.

that's exactly my interpretation of the rules too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gimme a break. Team A should be in the playoffs. With the fluky nature of FF, total points should always trump head to head.

 

Also, #7 seed should go to the team with the highest point total not in the playoffs. Not sure if that's what the commish meant to do, and just got his verbage messed up, but the way it's articulated right now doesn't make much sense to me.

 

 

No, this would only be true if this particular league used total points as a higher tiebreaker than head to head. So, while I agree that total points is a better tiebreaker (at least in my opinion), I am capable of separating my personal preferences from the stated rules in providing input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gimme a break commish should be able to change the rules wheneve they like. Team A should be in the playoffs. With the fluky nature of FF, total points should always trump head to head.

 

Also, #7 seed should go to the team with the highest point total not in the playoffs. Not sure if that's what the commish meant to do, and just got his verbage messed up, but the way it's articulated right now doesn't make much sense to me.

 

fixed :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gimme a break. Team A should be in the playoffs. With the fluky nature of FF, total points should always trump head to head.

 

I agree that total points is a better tiebreaker than head-to-head. they should change that next year.

 

but the rules as written clearly lay out how any "best record" ties are broken. are you seriously suggesting that the commish should be able to change rules at a whim to benefit his own team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information