Tie Breaker

[Grits and Shins]

You mean those that might start a WR who is catching their opponent's QB's throws? I thought such people were to be vilified and derided as not observing the stricture to "start the players who will score the most points"?

 

 

 

I certainly don't ascribe to the asinine philosophy of determining my starting QB or WR based on my opponent's QB or WR ... certainly those that do should be allowed to do so ... no matter how ludicrous the strategy.

 

In addition some owners may feel the need to take bigger risks based on the percieved strength of their opponent or may feel they can play it safe. Without knowing who your opponent is in the final week you can't gage the strength/weakness of your opponent.

[Easy n Dirty]

You mean those that might start a WR who is catching their opponent's QB's throws? I thought such people were to be vilified and derided as not observing the stricture to "start the players who will score the most points"?

 

 

 

I had the same reaction, couldn't believe those words were coming from Grits.

 

But having said that, I agree with Grits' post, that's a very rational reason why the "pick week 16 games" is a bad tiebreaker.

[Wild Wombat]

I would ask the two teams which of the following two options they would go for:

 

1) Coin toss.

 

2) They both submit lineups. Their opponent in the Superbowl only has to beat one of them to win the Superbowl (to put it another way, they both have to beat the opponent or they lose). Regardless of who wins the Superbowl, the share of the two tied teams (i.e. 1t place or 2nd place) can be split 50/50 or high score between them in the superbowl gets a greater share (all of it if they want, 70/30 ... whatever they want).

 

If they both don't agree with 2, then it has to be a coin toss.

 

Hope that makes sense.

[Boilerduff]

Why does your involvement in the outcome make me uneasy? You and the co-commish ran scenarios...hmmm. Whatever happened to the coin flip or dice roll? Was it because you had a 50% chance of facing the LT owner?

 

How can you come up with secnarios at this point when you do not have them covered in the rules? The most fair way at this point, although no matter what you do this season will end with a bad taste, was the dice roll or coin flip.

 

You may be the commish but you directly benefitted from the scenarios you concocted and it it will not sit well with your league. Think twice about this, remove your personal interest, and to what is best for your league...

 

 

I wouldn't have made the decision. Thats the co commisses Job. I helped him run the senarios, meaning get the data from Fanball, To help him with the calculations. We really don't allow either commish to have any say on a decsion that directly effect them. Even for Trades, Only the commishes have veto power, and we have never used it. If the Commishes try to trade with each other, it is a league vote. Believe me when I say we are definitly more impartial than the rest of the leauge. collusion only.

 

But it was a moot point anyway, simply because Palmer's fumble wasn't counted.

 

Thanks for all the posts! I don't think I have ever prompted a two pager before!

[Grits and Shins]

I wouldn't have made the decision. Thats the co commisses Job. I helped him run the senarios, meaning get the data from Fanball, To help him with the calculations. We really don't allow either commish to have any say on a decsion that directly effect them. Even for Trades, Only the commishes have veto power, and we have never used it. If the Commishes try to trade with each other, it is a league vote. Believe me when I say we are definitly more impartial than the rest of the leauge. collusion only.

 

But it was a moot point anyway, simply because Palmer's fumble wasn't counted.

 

Thanks for all the posts! I don't think I have ever prompted a two pager before!

 

 

See I think you took the wrong approach. The fact that you ran a bunch of scenarios can be percieved as you ran a bunch of scenarios in an attempt to come to the one that was most benefial to you. Yes, yes I know the co-commissioner was involved, but that doesn't really matter. Because in the end he/you ran a bunch of scenarios to determine who would be the winner THEN you came to a conclusion. There is NO appearance of impartiality there, none.

 

I understand that 90% of the scenarios resulted in one team winning ... but none of those were on the books ... you could just have easily had one of the 10% tie-breakers on the books.

 

One wonders if the LT team had the "90% advantage on tie-breakers" if a coin flip would have been used.

[ffjunkey]

Put yourself in the shoes of the team that you arbitrarily eliminated. You would feel that you just got screwed over. The only "fair" way to resolve this would be to have a rematch the following week, and either match the winning team's score against yours, or delay the superbowl for one week.

 

It's not perfect, but it's the best way to at least give both teams another chance. This is crucial for the integrity of your league if you plan on keeping it going beyond this year. It might end up costing your team, but as commish you are responsible for the league first.

[Ursa Majoris]

But having said that, I agree with Grits' post, that's a very rational reason why the "pick week 16 games" is a bad tiebreaker.

 

I do too, but that friendly jab at Grits was worth it.

[Boilerduff]

See I think you took the wrong approach. The fact that you ran a bunch of scenarios can be percieved as you ran a bunch of scenarios in an attempt to come to the one that was most benefial to you. Yes, yes I know the co-commissioner was involved, but that doesn't really matter. Because in the end he/you ran a bunch of scenarios to determine who would be the winner THEN you came to a conclusion. There is NO appearance of impartiality there, none.

 

I understand that 90% of the scenarios resulted in one team winning ... but none of those were on the books ... you could just have easily had one of the 10% tie-breakers on the books.

 

One wonders if the LT team had the "90% advantage on tie-breakers" if a coin flip would have been used.

 

 

 

Grits, As always I appreciate your input, and I can see what you are saying.

 

Again, I believe that I am not clear here. I would have had no input on the decision. I was the Data collector. There was also consultation with the parties involved, by the co-commish. I took myself out of the equation completely. He did all of the compilation, and discussed possibilites with the other parties involved. The co commish asked me to get data on the ones that I did. It wasn't prompted by me. I even emailed the first part of this post to give him ideas. If that isn't impartial I don't know what is. The decision had been made that the LT owner would win the Tie breaker, and both parties had agreed because of the lop sided nature of the senarios. I even put him (LT Owner) in the playoff spot online.

 

Then we found the scoring error, and the score determined the outcome, not any tiebreak senarios.

 

It was defintily impartial and fair, and I had no input to any tiebreak decision (even if proved unnessisary). It was my first statement to the co commish. "Dude, we have a tie and it is your call." I had no input on the outcome.

 

Thanks for the input

[TheGrunt]

There's the best solution right there. Not only does it make ties ten times less likely, it rewards every yard gained. It sucks to lose because you only get 16 points for 89 yards by two players when you should have 17.8.

 

That is one way to go about it, but I've always enjoyed playing fantasy football with scoring/rules similar to that of the NFL. It's impossible to have scoring the exact same, as well as rules, but you can get pretty close. Ties are a part of the NFL, and can actually happen during the regular season, so we use that in our league as well.

 

For example, during the regular season if two teams tie at, say, 89-89 then the first tie breaker is total starting player TD's. The reason for this is because scoring the most TD's in the NFL is one of the best ways to dictate which team is the winner and which is the loser.

 

If both teams have the same number of TD's, then we go to kicker points. It's the second more reliable way to win a football game. You have a lot of points from your kicker, you [probably] have a lot of points scored for your team. It's the second tiebreaker. And if both of those are ties, then the teams receive a tie for their regular season record. It's rare, but it can happen.

 

For the playoffs there are no ties. So after the first two tiebreakers mentioned above, the third will go to total defensive points scored. Defense wins games, and in this case, it can win a championship as well. We've never actually had a tie during the regular season yet, and never gone into the triple tiebreaker for the playoffs, but this seems like a pretty fair way to break some of those awkward ties.

[bigrocks]

Lots of good replies here. We came "this close" to having this happen this week as well in our local - and we did not have a playoff tiebreaker in place *whew*.

 

Based on feedback I received from a few coaches I pinged, most of them agreed the team with highest total points should advance in such a situation.

 

Needless to say I will address this in our rules next season!