Commissioner Question-Playoffs

[blacksheep]

In one league that I commish, we had 4 teams in one division end up with the same record, 8-5. Tie-breaker is total points scored so one of the four didn't get in but.....he had the best divisional record. To me divisional record should count for something. In the real league, you need to beat your divisional rivals to get in the playoffs. Is this a problem that needs to be corrected in the off-season? Our rules clearly state that the tie-breaker is total points so nothing ambigious or shady there but it just doesn't seem right to me. I've looked at a few of the other leagues I'm in and they go with two tied teams, its H2H but with more than two, its total points. In another, its divisional record, then H2h, and then total points. I need some good opinions here. Thanks.

[Steelersfan]

I think the fair way is H2H when 2 teams are involved, then total points. But you already knew that...

[Misfit74]

In one league that I commish, we had 4 teams in one division end up with the same record, 8-5. Tie-breaker is total points scored so one of the four didn't get in but.....he had the best divisional record. To me divisional record should count for something. In the real league, you need to beat your divisional rivals to get in the playoffs. Is this a problem that needs to be corrected in the off-season? Our rules clearly state that the tie-breaker is total points so nothing ambigious or shady there but it just doesn't seem right to me. I've looked at a few of the other leagues I'm in and they go with two tied teams, its H2H but with more than two, its total points. In another, its divisional record, then H2h, and then total points. I need some good opinions here. Thanks.

This can be done a variety of ways. One of my leagues voted this off-season to make the first tiebreaker 'head-to-head record', followed by 'total points scored'. I like it this way because you shouldn't lose out on a playoff spot to a team you beat (or had the better record against).

[blacksheep]

In one league that I commish, we had 4 teams in one division end up with the same record, 8-5. Tie-breaker is total points scored so one of the four didn't get in but.....he had the best divisional record. To me divisional record should count for something. In the real league, you need to beat your divisional rivals to get in the playoffs. Is this a problem that needs to be corrected in the off-season? Our rules clearly state that the tie-breaker is total points so nothing ambigious or shady there but it just doesn't seem right to me. I've looked at a few of the other leagues I'm in and they go with two tied teams, its H2H but with more than two, its total points. In another, its divisional record, then H2h, and then total points. I need some good opinions here. Thanks.

This can be done a variety of ways. One of my leagues voted this off-season to make the first tiebreaker 'head-to-head record', followed by 'total points scored'. I like it this way because you shouldn't lose out on a playoff spot to a team you beat (or had the better record against).

The H2H, is that with all teams involved? Or just when two teams are tied? I agree with you on the last sentence, Allen, you shouldn't lose out to a team you beat in the regular season. That's my whole problem with the total points tie-breaker.

[Misfit74]

In one league that I commish, we had 4 teams in one division end up with the same record, 8-5. Tie-breaker is total points scored so one of the four didn't get in but.....he had the best divisional record. To me divisional record should count for something. In the real league, you need to beat your divisional rivals to get in the playoffs. Is this a problem that needs to be corrected in the off-season? Our rules clearly state that the tie-breaker is total points so nothing ambigious or shady there but it just doesn't seem right to me. I've looked at a few of the other leagues I'm in and they go with two tied teams, its H2H but with more than two, its total points. In another, its divisional record, then H2h, and then total points. I need some good opinions here. Thanks.

This can be done a variety of ways. One of my leagues voted this off-season to make the first tiebreaker 'head-to-head record', followed by 'total points scored'. I like it this way because you shouldn't lose out on a playoff spot to a team you beat (or had the better record against).

The H2H, is that with all teams involved? Or just when two teams are tied? I agree with you on the last sentence, Allen, you shouldn't lose out to a team you beat in the regular season. That's my whole problem with the total points tie-breaker.

Just when teams have the same record (tied). These are called tiebreaker rules. So, if team A is 8-5 and team B is 8-5 and neither is a division winner, then it would go to head to head record. Maybe team A went 0-1 against team B. In that case, team B would get the higher seed. If team A and B had same 8-5 record and were 1-1 in head to head play, then total points would be the next tiebreaker.

[blacksheep]

I understand the concept, I'm just wondering if there is any way you can effectively apply H2H to more than two teams because that seems the fairest way to break a tie.

[WashingtonFever]

Total points > H2H in my book. H2H is based on complete luck on match-ups for the given week, where total points is a better basis to which team is actually better through the course of the year, especially if one or two of those teams is actually much worse than the others.

In our league, the 2nd worst point producer ended up 7th overall (7-6) only because he was never scored on with the favorable match-ups he lucked out with. He was lucky the entire season until finally his luck ran out and a better team was able to overtake him in the very last week with overall record with tie breaker in points. So his team had just enough each week to beat some one's low for the year. To put numbers to this, he scored less than 1,000 pts in the season (76 per week), 4 of the 6 in his division scored over 1,200 (92 per week) with the highest (8-5 record, only 1 win better) over 1,300 (100 per week). And he beat the top team in his division both times, which ended up being the top teams lowest 2 weeks over the entire year. Now that to me is just plain luck as he was lucky enough to play him those 2 weeks that his players couldn't get much in points, especially when anyone could have got those wins in those weeks. This same team almost beat me too as I put up a low week and nudged him by 1 point and I scored almost 1,500 points (115 per week). I went 9-4, 2 losses by less than a point, with 1 (mentioned above) win less than a point.

Conclusion: 1st tie-breaker = highest points overall during the season

[Misfit74]

I understand the concept, I'm just wondering if there is any way you can effectively apply H2H to more than two teams because that seems the fairest way to break a tie.

You can use inter-division record as one tiebreaker as an option. H2H, TotPts, Inter-Division Record 1,2,3. There are endless ways, just depends on how you want it to go. If H2H doesn't work, (3 teams at 8-5, all are 1-1 vs. each other) then total points should break the tie as the 2nd tiebreaker. Two tiebreakers usually does it.

[meineymoe]

I understand the concept, I'm just wondering if there is any way you can effectively apply H2H to more than two teams because that seems the fairest way to break a tie.

In a word, no.

However, if the four teams at 8-5 are in the same division, and tied for First in the Division, a very strong argument can be made for the team with the best Division Record to be declared the division winner, then the rest of the teams vie for wild card placement based on total points.

If, however, there was a different division winner, and they were going for wild card spots, then total points is the way to go.

-oo-

[thewhyterabbit]

In one league that I commish, we had 4 teams in one division end up with the same record, 8-5. Tie-breaker is total points scored so one of the four didn't get in but.....he had the best divisional record. To me divisional record should count for something. In the real league, you need to beat your divisional rivals to get in the playoffs. Is this a problem that needs to be corrected in the off-season? Our rules clearly state that the tie-breaker is total points so nothing ambigious or shady there but it just doesn't seem right to me. I've looked at a few of the other leagues I'm in and they go with two tied teams, its H2H but with more than two, its total points. In another, its divisional record, then H2h, and then total points. I need some good opinions here. Thanks.

overall record > division record > HTH > total points ... thats how i see it

[gunslinger]

We go Overall Record - H2H record - Division Record - Total Points Scored - Total Points Against.

[hosler427]

I have always done total points but I think a valid argument can be made for H2H record and I am considering bringing this up in my leagues this off-season. I need to think about it more....

[jimmo]

I understand the concept, I'm just wondering if there is any way you can effectively apply H2H to more than two teams because that seems the fairest way to break a tie.

Victory Points!

[thewhyterabbit]

i think wins tell the story more than points. it shouldnt matter how many points you score unless your in a money league and the high points gets something back... the score that week represents what you needed to win... and if you get the job done you get the W... strength schedule shouldnt be a deterrent to not allow a better record team in the playoffs...

we all know that Pittsburgh is a good football team... but they sit at 6-6 and are on the verge of missing the playoffs if they keep sliding... there is a reason why wins and loses count, dont forget that ... its who the best team was THAT day... not the whole season. should i remind people of the pats magical season and the giants playing great football at the end? and i dont think i have to mention how much luck the giants had in winning the superbowl...

iv seen it time and time again... teams limp into the playoffs... then something comes on... and they play insane football.

[hosler427]

i think wins tell the story more than points. it shouldnt matter how many points you score unless your in a money league and the high points gets something back... the score that week represents what you needed to win... and if you get the job done you get the W... strength schedule shouldnt be a deterrent to not allow a better record team in the playoffs...

we all know that Pittsburgh is a good football team... but they sit at 6-6 and are on the verge of missing the playoffs if they keep sliding... there is a reason why wins and loses count, dont forget that ... its who the best team was THAT day... not the whole season. should i remind people of the pats magical season and the giants playing great football at the end? and i dont think i have to mention how much luck the giants had in winning the superbowl...

iv seen it time and time again... teams limp into the playoffs... then something comes on... and they play insane football.

Are you saying the David Tyree catch was LUCK???? How dare you????