Fantasy Playoff seeding question

[Bengal Mania]

I have no problem w/ the seeding/playoff format based on division winners and not records. If you didn't do this, what is the point of divisions at all? Just have one big list of teams w/ the top __ in the playoffs (this is ok too IMO. Kind of like NCAA)

 

However, I don't really like the tie-breakers being "like the NFL" (head-to-head, division record, etc). Head-to-head stuff is ok if my team were actually on a field to try and stop (and beat) your team. But in the fantasy world that is Fantasy Football, we are never really on the field together. I accept the rules that way (don't complain in league), I just don't like it. The better teams are the teams that score the most points over a season. Just 'cause your fantasy team scored more than mine in week 2 (and rarely any other week) doesn't mean you have a better FFL team.

Edited December 8, 2006 by Bengal Mania

[Ursa Majoris]

I have no problem w/ the seeding/playoff format based on division winners and not records. If you didn't do this, what is the point of divisions at all? Just have one big list of teams w/ the top __ in the playoffs (this is ok too IMO. Kind of like NCAA)

 

However, I don't really like the tie-breakers being "like the NFL" (head-to-head, division record, etc). Head-to-head stuff is ok if my team were actually on a field to try and stop (and beat) your team. But in the fantasy world that is Fantasy Football, we are never really on the field together. I accept the rules that way (don't complain in league), I just don't like it. The better teams are the teams that score the most points over a season. Just 'cause your fantasy team scored more than mine in week 2 (and rarely any other week) doesn't mean you have a better FFL team.

 

This is why a lot of leagues use total points as the first tiebreaker for the playoffs. I agree it's better.

[Bier Meister]

This is why a lot of leagues use total points as the first tiebreaker for the playoffs. I agree it's better.

 

 

 

ah...something we disagree about this week....

 

 

i am of the mindset that if a league is going to be htd, and split into divisions, that those wins and losses have to mean something when it is time to determine who makes playoffs. if you and i play each other and you win... you should have the edge on me if our records are the same at season's end. if wins/loses are used to determine "rank," then it should be used throughout the tiebreaking process.

 

i really don't like points for as the 1st tie breaker...........

let's say that you and i have the same record and have not played (or split if in same division) during the season. let's say you have more points for, and i have more points against........ i have "overcome" more to reach the same record based on who i have played.

[Bengal Mania]

let's say you have more points for, and i have more points against........ i have "overcome" more to reach the same record based on who i have played.

 

 

this would be relevant if the quality of your team had an affect on the "points against", but alas, you never made a single tackle.

[xMRogers]

 

 

However, I don't really like the tie-breakers being "like the NFL" (head-to-head, division record, etc). Head-to-head stuff is ok if my team were actually on a field to try and stop (and beat) your team. But in the fantasy world that is Fantasy Football, we are never really on the field together. I accept the rules that way (don't complain in league), I just don't like it. The better teams are the teams that score the most points over a season. Just 'cause your fantasy team scored more than mine in week 2 (and rarely any other week) doesn't mean you have a better FFL team.

 

 

 

Interesting - every third year or so, this comes up as a "sore" point for someone (may happen to me this year - i could end up in a tie for the wildcard -we'll both make the playoffs, but the other team will be the 3 seed, and i'll be 4 although I'll hav emore points cause he beat me mid-season in our only game. Difference is who we face, as the 1 seed is ridiculously strong this year). Then, when we go to vote on rule changes the following year (right before the season) everyone is in smacktalking mode and wants the head to head to really count, so we don't change.

 

Even though I'm possibly going to get screwed (and could be talking a $1500+ screwjob this year) over this, I still like the Head to Head tiebreaker - yea, we're not actually playing the game, but the whole point is "I'm better than you at this" so when we play each other, it matters.

[Ursa Majoris]

ah...something we disagree about this week....

i am of the mindset that if a league is going to be htd, and split into divisions, that those wins and losses have to mean something when it is time to determine who makes playoffs. if you and i play each other and you win... you should have the edge on me if our records are the same at season's end. if wins/loses are used to determine "rank," then it should be used throughout the tiebreaking process.

 

i really don't like points for as the 1st tie breaker...........

let's say that you and i have the same record and have not played (or split if in same division) during the season. let's say you have more points for, and i have more points against........ i have "overcome" more to reach the same record based on who i have played.

 

I see your point (pun intended) and I have some leagues that take H2H and Div Record into account first. However, PF is within your power to change, PA is not. Many people have terrible PAs and there's nothing they can do about it, likewise the lucky people that face everyone on down weeks. IMO, using a stat you have no control over whatsoever isn't right. PF can at least be maximized by the effort that goes into selecting players from your squad based on matchups etc.

[Bier Meister]

this would be relevant if the quality of your team had an affect on the "points against", but alas, you never made a single tackle.

 

 

 

point is i may have had a better record if not for luck of schedule working against me.

[Bengal Mania]

Interesting - every third year or so, this comes up as a "sore" point for someone (may happen to me this year - i could end up in a tie for the wildcard -we'll both make the playoffs, but the other team will be the 3 seed, and i'll be 4 although I'll hav emore points cause he beat me mid-season in our only game. Difference is who we face, as the 1 seed is ridiculously strong this year). Then, when we go to vote on rule changes the following year (right before the season) everyone is in smacktalking mode and wants the head to head to really count, so we don't change.

 

Even though I'm possibly going to get screwed (and could be talking a $1500+ screwjob this year) over this, I still like the Head to Head tiebreaker - yea, we're not actually playing the game, but the whole point is "I'm better than you at this" so when we play each other, it matters.

 

 

Good point. Maybe total points being a tie-breaker if head-to-head does not produce the winner.

 

It is true that the joy (smacktalk) of FFL is in head-to-head competition. To have that deemed pointless at playoff time, does take away another element. Something to think about....

[Bier Meister]

I see your point (pun intended) and I have some leagues that take H2H and Div Record into account first. However, PF is within your power to change, PA is not. Many people have terrible PAs and there's nothing they can do about it, likewise the lucky people that face everyone on down weeks. IMO, using a stat you have no control over whatsoever isn't right. PF can at least be maximized by the effort that goes into selecting players from your squad based on matchups etc.

 

 

 

yes, but when i lose kj or mcnabb or colston early in a week...we don't get points for players on our bench.

 

 

i recently lost a tie breaker by 6 points and am a mcnabb owner.... even if he had just completed that game i likely would have taken it...... just don't believe that overall points is the best indicator of team quality (in breaking ties) when you are using htd as the format. in other words, if you would like to use points as the criteria.... why go htd at all? to me, in a htd format.. you go through the year playing each other... then in trying to take a division or wildcard...we magically evaluate using points. it seem incongruent to me.

 

edit: it was a team that if we played head to head evey week i would have won 9-4... so his high points were sporadic

Edited December 8, 2006 by Bier Meister

[Bier Meister]

ah...something we disagree about this week....

i am of the mindset that if a league is going to be htd, and split into divisions, that those wins and losses have to mean something when it is time to determine who makes playoffs. if you and i play each other and you win... you should have the edge on me if our records are the same at season's end. if wins/loses are used to determine "rank," then it should be used throughout the tiebreaking process.

 

 

 

 

 

Good point. Maybe total points being a tie-breaker if head-to-head does not produce the winner.

 

It is true that the joy (smacktalk) of FFL is in head-to-head competition. To have that deemed pointless at playoff time, does take away another element. Something to think about....

 

 

 

that is par tof what i was alluding to.

[Dobber]

We have three division winners and one wild card winner make the playoff. Once they have made the playoffs, the teams are re-seeded based on record and then points.

[Bengal Mania]

I have an announcement: I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND!

 

My first post in this topic was calling for total points as a tie-breaker, but a few have restated the benefit of head-to-head as a tie-breaker.

 

Carry on.

 

I have never had that happen at the Tailgate.......

[Bier Meister]

I have an announcement: I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND!

 

My first post in this topic was calling for total points as a tie-breaker, but a few have restated the benefit of head-to-head as a tie-breaker.

 

Carry on.

 

I have never had that happen at the Tailgate.......

 

 

 

[Scourge]

Personally, I have never been a fan of leagues with divisions. In my two main leagues, we do a random schedule. It is also completely random who you will end up playing twice. Top 4-6* records go to the playoffs with total points being the tiebreaker.

 

4-6 meaning number of teams going to the playoffs depending on weather it is my 10 team or 12 team league.

[Pope Flick]

We run Norris as H2H, with 3 division winners and one WC team. We've adopted the H2H tie-breaker method the NFL used to use before they went to 4 divisions, but get to total fantasy points if the H2H tie-breaker gets locked up.

 

I'm of the opinion that if you're doing H2H, then those games need to count for something, otherwise why play head to head at all?

 

FYI - as leading point scorer (after 13 weeks) I'm likely to find myself OUT of the playoffs.

[Azazello1313]

point is i may have had a better record if not for luck of schedule working against me.

 

 

if the other guy has more points than you and the same record, i'd say luck of schedule is likely working more against him than against you.

 

the main reason i'm in favor of points as a tiebreaker, ESPECIALLY when the tie involves teams from different divisions, is that it's simple and the answer is cut and dried. head-to-head inevitably becomes a hugh mess. say you have 4 teams tied for the last wildcard berth. 2 teams are in the same division, and the other two are in different divisions. do you break the tie between the two teams in the same division, then have a 3-way tiebreaker between the remaining 3 teams? or do you do a 4-way tiebreaker? how do you deal with the fact that 2 of the teams have 4 games against the other 3, and the other 2 only have 3 games against? do you require a head-to-head sweep to break the tie (like the NFL), or is the best winning percentage enough? how you answer all of these questions could easily have a direct impact on who gets the nod. most leagues unfortunately don't have the foresight to account for all these hypotheticals, and you end up with a mess, different people feeling like they deserved to get in.

 

i'm fine with head-to-head and divisional record breaking ties within a division, even though i still believe total points is the better determinant of the stronger team and less dependent on the one-week luck factor. but in comparing teams across divisions, total points is definitely the way to go.

Edited December 8, 2006 by Azazello1313

[Azazello1313]

I'm of the opinion that if you're doing H2H, then those games need to count for something, otherwise why play head to head at all?

 

 

well they count in the W-L record, which of course rules over everything else.

[Bier Meister]

 

az and i are in a league together where this has been an issue

 

 

if the other guy has more points than you and the same record, i'd say luck of schedule is likely working more against him than against you.

 

you mean, that if his opponants had scored as many points against as me (in the hypothetical), he'd have more losses? or if i had less points agianst, i'd have more wins?

 

the main reason i'm in favor of points as a tiebreaker, ESPECIALLY when the tie involves teams from different divisions, is that it's simple and the answer is cut and dried. head-to-head inevitably becomes a hugh mess. say you have 4 teams tied for the last wildcard berth. 2 teams are in the same division, and the other two are in different divisions. do you break the tie between the two teams in the same division, then have a 3-way tiebreaker between the other 3 teams? or do you do a 4-way tiebreaker? how do you deal with the fact that 2 of the teams have 4 games against the other 3, and the other 2 only have 3 games against? do you require a head-to-head sweep to break the tie (like the NFL), or is the best winning percentage enough? how you answer all of these questions could easily have a direct impact on who gets the nod. most leagues unfortunately don't have the foresight to account for all these hypotheticals, and you end up with a mess, different people feeling like they deserved to get in.

 

i'm fine with head-to-head and divisional record breaking ties within a division, even though i still believe total points is the better determinant of the stronger team and less dependent on the one-week luck factor. but in comparing teams across divisions, total points is definitely the way to go.

 

 

 

when overall record is tied, i am a proponant of:

1. hth

2. div record

3. points

4. coin

 

if there are 4 teams in contention from the different divisions... i like:

 

*if a team is undefeated vs all other teams with same record, they are in and the tie breaking process starts again

*if a team has not won vs all other teams same record, they are booted...and process starts again

*div record only comes into the picture when the remaining teams are in the same div.

when 3 or more teams are tied... there is a strong likelihood that it will go to points.... and i can easily live with it, just think htd and div record should have more weight in a league where hth is the format and there are mult divisions involved.

 

 

another thing that i have recently been thingin about is after hth is record vs tied teams (but haven't thought that through entirely)

Edited December 8, 2006 by Bier Meister

[Azazello1313]

let me put it this way. you have two (or more) teams, who, over the course of the first 13 weeks of the NFL season, outscored their fantasy opposition 7 times, and got outscored 6 times.

 

now which is more indicative of the stronger, more deserving team: the fact that over the course of the season, my team averaged 5 points more per week than your team? or the fact that back in week 4 when my best player was on bye your team squeaked out a 76-74 victory over mine?

[Bier Meister]

let me put it this way. you have two (or more) teams, who, over the course of the first 13 weeks of the NFL season, outscored their fantasy opposition 7 times, and got outscored 6 times.

 

now which is more indicative of the stronger, more deserving team: the fact that over the course of the season, my team averaged 5 points more per week than your team? or the fact that back in week 4 when my best player was on bye your team squeaked out a 76-74 victory over mine?

 

 

 

perhapse in week 4 i lost SA in the 2nd quarter of the game...and maybe i bye week players sitting as well. ultimately, i would have beaten you in our only opportunity to play. more than total points, i'd rather see how the 2 teams stacked up htd for 13 weeks.... better indicator to me.

[slickvick]

We do three divisions.Top two in each divison get the 1-6 seeds.Two wild card spots get the 7-8 seeds.This is a 12 team league.It usually works out well.This year was different.My division had teams with 10,9,8 and 5 wins.I actually got the 8 seed with 5 wins but the guy with 8 wins got the 7 seed and he has a better record than 2 of the top 6 seeds.No one has complained and being we do divisions everyone seems to like it.I have found that points as tie-breakers is better than head to head.We try to give teams that score a lot of points some kind of reward for it.I finished 3rd in points but only got 5 wins.I got the 8 seed over all the other 5 win teams with my point total.

[Azazello1313]

perhapse in week 4 i lost SA in the 2nd quarter of the game...and maybe i bye week players sitting as well. ultimately, i would have beaten you in our only opportunity to play.

 

 

but the point remains the same....it's boiling everything down to one week, versus 13. which multiplies the luck factor by 13.

 

more than total points, i'd rather see how the 2 teams stacked up htd for 13 weeks.... better indicator to me.

 

 

now THAT i would be strongly in favor of. a 13 week hypothetical head-to-head. does MFL or another site offer something like that as an option? and there's the logistical problem if more than two teams are tied.

Edited December 8, 2006 by Azazello1313

[Bier Meister]

now THAT i would be strongly in favor of. a 13 week hypothetical head-to-head. does MFL or another site offer something like that as an option? and there's the logistical problem if more than two teams are tied.

 

 

 

could look at it combined... me, you, rhino, and atomic are hypothetically tied at 7-6. can look at total record vs all tied teams.

[Big Country]

This is always a heated debate, and I swing back and forth a lot.

 

IMO, a lot depends on the make up of the league.

 

In Faultline, we have divisions based on Northern California and Southern California, and it is designed such that we get to a SuperBowl containing one Nor Cal team and one So Cal team. Now, all this may change next season as we are exploring going to a 3 division format as some owners have since moved and no longer reside in California (the Transplants). So, in that league, H2H is relevant as we are only looking within the division to determine playoff seedings.

 

Now, I'm of the mind like several others that if you are just taking the top X amount of teams for the playoffs, then there is no need for divisions, unless there is the additional motive of trying to build rivalries year in and year out (more likely in keeper/dynasty leagues) between the same subset of owners. In this case, as you are looking for the top X amount of teams, then a less random factor as the one head to head game IMO is a better indicator of the better team, such as total points scored or, as Bier and others mentioned, the hypothetical head to head record for the entire season (IMO, this may be the best indicator for two tied teams, not sure howwell it works with more than 2 tied teams)

[Bier Meister]

does MFL or another site offer something like that as an option? and there's the logistical problem if more than two teams are tied.

 

 

ironically, cbs has a breakdown feature which shows how you would have done vs each opponant