Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Actually, it is correct according to their rules. Of course the division should be settled first, but if they aren't going to do that, you don't just nullify the win because they lost another game. You advance in a three-way tie if you beat BOTH other teams, which they did. . . 595941[/snapback] You only have a H2H advantage if you have swept all games against your opponents in a tie. The rules say you have a H2H advantage over both opponents ... please explain exactly how they ahve a H2H advantage over team B? You are going to tell me that the introduction of another team that team A defeated miracleously gives team A the H2H advantage he previously did NOT have over team B? Your intrepretation could only be considered if the rules said a better "winning percentage" against the other teams in the tie ... it does NOT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down Goes Frazia Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 rock, paper, scissors should solve yer problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 rajn ... let us know how you rule ... I'm curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh-mongus Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 This doesn't happen often, but I agree with Blitz on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 (edited) Three or More Clubs2. Head-to-head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others.) 595934[/snapback] Although it should be settled as a divisional tie-breaker between the Teams A & B, that is not how they are interpreting the rule. The rule you quoted says it is applicable if one club has defeated each of the others. Team A has done that, beating teams B and C. Even though B also beat A in a divisional game, it does not matter. That would matter in the divisional standings, which I'm assuming by the other posts by rajn, they are not applying. Edited December 6, 2004 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted December 6, 2004 Author Share Posted December 6, 2004 rajn ... let us know how you rule ... I'm curious. 595969[/snapback] I'm starting to lean towards just using points to break the tie. Even though that is technically not what our rules state, since our rule doesn't actually provide for this scenario I'm willing to make a judgement call as long as the majority agrees upon it. It does seem like the fairest & easiest way to determine the winner and would also place the Division winner as the #3 seed by happenstance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh-mongus Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Although it should be settled as a divisional tie-breaker between the Teams A & B, that is not how they are interpreting the rule. The rule you quoted says it is applicable if one club has defeated each of the others. Team A has done that, beating teams B and C. Even though B also beat A in a divisional game, it does not matter. 595993[/snapback] Actually, I think the fact that they also lost to the same team does matter. It is clearly not a sweep if they lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 I'm starting to lean towards just using points to break the tie. Even though that is technically not what our rules state, since our rule doesn't actually provide for this scenario I'm willing to make a judgement call as long as the majority agrees upon it. It does seem like the fairest & easiest way to determine the winner and would also place the Division winner as the #3 seed by happenstance. 595995[/snapback] Unfortunately, everyone else will be able to figure out what the seeds will end up as, and may well vote to their own advantage......this might be one of those cases where a commish needs to just be a commish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 (edited) I never said I agreed with their rule. But that's how you'd have to interpret it since they aren't applying the divisional tie-breaker first. The rule provided in Blitz's link DOES NOT SAY YOU HAVE TO SWEEP. Only that you have to have beaten both other teams, which Team A has clearly done. Edited December 6, 2004 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 I never said I agreed with their rule. But that's how you'd have to interpret it since they aren't applying the divisional tie-breaker first. The rule provided in Blitz's link DOES NOT SAY YOU HAVE TO SWEEP. Only that you have to have beaten both other teams, which Team A has clearly done. 596003[/snapback] You didn't look very close ... IT'S CALLED HEAD TO HEAD SWEEP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Actually, I think the fact that they also lost to the same team does matter. It is clearly not a sweep if they lost. 596000[/snapback] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted December 6, 2004 Author Share Posted December 6, 2004 (edited) OK, I think I've come up with the right scenario & so far I have agreement from most (Team A & B ). First we will decide the tiebreaker between A & B. B wins so to decide the top seed we go to HTH B vs C. Both are div champs & C wins HTH making C the top seed. Now since B still owns the tiebreaker over A then B becomes the 2nd seed & A is the 3rd. Edited December 6, 2004 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 OK, I think I've come up with the right scenario & so far I have agreement from most (Team A & B ). First we will decide the tiebreaker between A & B. B wins so to decide the top seed we go to HTH B vs C. Both are div champs & C wins HTH making C the top seed. Now since A still owns the tiebreaker over B then A becomes the 2nd seed & B is the 3rd. 596059[/snapback] Okay ... can't possibly see how you got there and dropped B from the top seed to the bottom seed ... but it's your call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 (edited) Yes, that is the way to do it. Decide the divisional winner first between A and B. Since they split, B wins on total points. Then take B against C for top seed. Since C beat B, they are the top seed. B is #2. A is #3. Piece of cake. . . Edited December 6, 2004 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted December 6, 2004 Author Share Posted December 6, 2004 Okay ... can't possibly see how you got there and dropped B from the top seed to the bottom seed ... but it's your call. 596065[/snapback] Re-read it. You replied before I could edit my screw up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Re-read it. You replied before I could edit my screw up. 596069[/snapback] You are the commissioner and it's obviously your call ... but I don't see where the rules allow you to make the intrepretation that you did ... but if the other teams in your league agree with what the hay. If you are going to bring the fact that the teams are division champs into it ... then shouldn't B be the 2nd seed? You gave C the top seed because they were a division champ AND they defeated B ... also a division champ. Then you decided to drop the division champ thing and go straight to H2H. It looks to me like you are trying to find a way to make B the bottom seed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 (edited) He applied it just like the NFL would. It is completely legit. Divisional tiebreakers first, and then decide between divisional winners for top seeding. Edited December 6, 2004 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Just my take on it. I still don't understand why you don't do it the first way I showed: No clear H2H winner, total points makes B the top seed ... revert to H2H makes A the 2nd seed and C is the 3rd seed. Seems to me like that is what your rules call for ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Divisional tie-breakers should always be applied first before seeding. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 He applied it just like the NFL would. It is completely legit. Divisional tiebreakers first, and then decide between divisional winners for top seeding. 596082[/snapback] He did NOT. The NFL would have looked at Team A (8-5) Team B (8-5) Division Champ Team C (8-5) Division Champ Team C is top seed having defeated Team B Team B is 2nd seed being a division champ Team A is 3rd seed being a wild card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal Mania Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 In our league, overall points is the first (and usually only) tiebreaker. Head to head is very misleading, because the guys on your team aren't actually playing against the other team on the field, just on the computer. It isn't the same thing as a head-to-head tiebreaker in real football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 Divisional tie-breakers should always be applied first before seeding. . . 596094[/snapback] In a 3-way tie between teams NOT in the same division divisional tie-breaks can not be used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 No Blitz. Team A would be out of the equation because they lost their division. There is no 3 way tie. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 From the NFL Record and Fact Book THREE OR MORE CLUBS 1. Apply division tie-breakers to eliminate all but highest ranked club in each division. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 No Blitz. Team A would be out of the equation because they lost their division. There is no 3 way tie. . . 596102[/snapback] Yes in the NFL that is true ... meaning A would be the 3rd seed NOT the second seed like rajn is going to do. In anycase rajn said that their rules specifically don't allow for divisional winners to be seeded based on the fact that they won their division. 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.