4-way tie for the #5/6 seed (1 Viewer)

[Competitive1]

League: Head 2 Head 8-team league

Playoffs: 6 teams (3 rounds, 2 byes)
Tie-Breaker: Head 2 Head Record

#1 & #2 seed each team has 10 wins, no issues with the seeds
#3 & #4 seed each team has 6 wins, no issues with the seeds

#5 & #6
There is a 4-way tie with each team having 5 wins.

The ESPN site appears to use Head 2 Head where applicable and defaults to "Points For" when Head 2 Head is not applicable. The ESPN site doesn't have another tie-breaker listed. However, the Commissioner states the league has always used the tie-breaker as; 1) Head to Head, 2) Matchup Points, 3) Total Points. The dilemma is between what the ESPN site has for seeds opposed to what the league has always used. On top of that with a 4-way tie the tie-breaker (what the league has always used) doesn't appear clear. The Commissioner states (ESPN lists him at out of the playoffs) that he has the tie-breakers won.


An idea was thrown out there by the #1 seed (I'm #2 seed) to have ALL 8 teams make the playoffs instead of 6. Which would eliminate the #1 & #2 seed 1st round byes. At least that's what the Commissioner said, but I have a problem with this as I earned a first round bye. There is NO PAYOUT for the regular season. Only for the Super Bowl teams (75% / 25%). Apparently, the majority of the league voted to have ALL 8 teams make the playoffs. In my opinion, why wouldn't they? After all 2 teams of the 4 could be out. The #3 & #4 seed would vote yes because after all upsets happen and the #1 & #2 seeds are really good teams.

I have 10 wins and I'm the #2 seed. Am I wrong to be upset because I could potentially lose a 1st round because of a 4-way tie for the #5 & #6 seeds among 5 win teams?

 

[MattFancy]

Well it seems strange that 75% of the teams make the playoffs anyway. Why not just do the top 4?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

What do the actual rules say (not what the commish says they always were)? Are they in writing somewhere? Those tiebreakers should be used. If not you have to go with what is actually inputted into the website.

If 6 teams make the playoffs per your rules, you can't vote to allow 8 teams in. That's just ridiculous.

I know it's too late to change this, and you guys can obviouslydo what you want,but 6 teams should not be making the playoffs in an 8 team league - that's a large part of the issue right there.

 

[Warhogs]

If the league has always used a certain tie beaker format then that is what you use.

 

[Competitive1]

I agree and I've always said 4 teams should make the playoffs. The problem with the format is how do you break a 4-way tie with the following as the tie-breaker 1) H2H 2) matchup points 3) total points. Some teams have 5 games, some 6 games vs. all 4 teams...

 

[Chachi]

The Chachinator doesn't see the problem here.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I agree and I've always said 4 teams should make the playoffs. The problem with the format is how do you break a 4-way tie with the following as the tie-breaker 1) H2H 2) matchup points 3) total points. Some teams have 5 games, some 6 games vs. all 4 teams...

(1) HTH - should either be specified as best HTH record (winning %) between all tied teams (meaning team A is 4-3, Team B is 2-4, etc.) and if it is not specified that way, you got to

(2) matchup points - I don't know what you guys mean by that though..

 

[Competitive1]

8 team league, 6 teams make the playoffs, the top 2 seeds get byes.. The problem is with the #5 & #6 seeds... There are 4 teams with a record of 5-8. The ESPN site has the #5/#6 seeds different to what the league tie-breaker has always been 1) H2H 2) Matchup Points 3) Total Points.

A resolution to fix the 4-team tie-breaker is to PULL ALL 8 teams into the playoffs, eliminating the #1 & #2 seed byes..

 

[Competitive1]

I agree and I've always said 4 teams should make the playoffs. The problem with the format is how do you break a 4-way tie with the following as the tie-breaker 1) H2H 2) matchup points 3) total points. Some teams have 5 games, some 6 games vs. all 4 teams...

(1) HTH - should either be specified as best HTH record (winning %) between all tied teams (meaning team A is 4-3, Team B is 2-4, etc.) and if it is not specified that way, you got to

(2) matchup points - I don't know what you guys mean by that though..

I guess there is no language stating for 1) H2H being winning % or 2) Matchup Points being average points considering the teams playing unequal games vs. one another. Which I guess the easy way was to throw out the idea to PULL ALL 8 teams in.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

It's that time of year when the Shark Pool will be flooded with threads like this about leagues where no one had the foresight to think about this four months ago.

However, the Commissioner states the league has always used the tie-breaker as; 1) Head to Head, 2) Matchup Points, 3) Total Points.

Does he have any evidence that this is the case? Like, a set of written rules posted to the website? Or can he point to examples in prior years where this is how ties were broken?

On top of that with a 4-way tie the tie-breaker (what the league has always used) doesn't appear clear.

This is a whole separate issue which comes up many times every year. Should've been figured out prior to this week. Since it wasn't, someone's going to feel they got screwed since there's rarely a "right" answer to the question of how to break multi-team ties.

The Commissioner states (ESPN lists him at out of the playoffs) that he has the tie-breakers won.

How convenient for him. Regardless of how this turns out, you need a new commissioner or a new league for next year.

 

[Sake-Bombers]

Maintain the byes for 1 and 2, put the four tied teams in the playoffs in a four way matchup, and the top two teams advance. Settle it on the field, so to speak.

Then next week have either 1 seed choose opponent or designate how that will happen now.

 

[MAC_32]

Change the rules next year so total points are the tiebreaker.

This year? Fight to the death.

 

[tonystrong]

use winning percentage vs all teams tied.

For example :

Team A vs. B, C, D winning percentage = .667

Team B vs. A, C, D winning percentage = .456

Team C vs A, B, D, winning percentage = .333

Team D vs. A, B, C, winning percentage = .667

This way it doesn't matter if the teams did not play each other the same amount of times

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Maintain the byes for 1 and 2, put the four tied teams in the playoffs in a four way matchup, and the top two teams advance. Settle it on the field, so to speak.

Then next week have either 1 seed choose opponent or designate how that will happen now.

Uh, what about the 3 and 4 seeds?

 

[RUSF18]

I would exclude Andre and Ruxin from the playoffs, and make the two fight it out for the Sacko.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I agree and I've always said 4 teams should make the playoffs. The problem with the format is how do you break a 4-way tie with the following as the tie-breaker 1) H2H 2) matchup points 3) total points. Some teams have 5 games, some 6 games vs. all 4 teams...

(1) HTH - should either be specified as best HTH record (winning %) between all tied teams (meaning team A is 4-3, Team B is 2-4, etc.) and if it is not specified that way, you got to

(2) matchup points - I don't know what you guys mean by that though..

I guess there is no language stating for 1) H2H being winning % or 2) Matchup Points being average points considering the teams playing unequal games vs. one another. Which I guess the easy way was to throw out the idea to PULL ALL 8 teams in.

Obviously your rules need to be fixed going forward - matchup points does seem like it should work though. The two teams that averaged the highest points in the matchups with any of the four teams that are tied, should be in.

imo that's a pretty dumb second tie-breaker, but that's the rules that you have.

 

[iamkoza]

if no offficial written rules were in place before the start of the season.... you HAVE to go by whatever ESPN has as a default (see here for a good explanation of ESPN rules - http://games.espn.go.com/ffl/resources/help/faq?name=how-do-playoff-tiebreakers-work )

 

[Sake-Bombers]

Maintain the byes for 1 and 2, put the four tied teams in the playoffs in a four way matchup, and the top two teams advance. Settle it on the field, so to speak.

Then next week have either 1 seed choose opponent or designate how that will happen now.

Uh, what about the 3 and 4 seeds?

Ah I misunderstood. Sorry!

I'd put them in the all play but with an HFA bonus added based on their point totals above average points of all 4 5/6 seeds.

 

[Competitive1]

They're all pulling for 8 team playoffs and no byes. How convenient. This will be my last year in this league.

Yes, I agree have the 4 (5-8) fight it out.. What give anyone the right to nullify the #1 & #2 byes to fix another problem.

 

[Warhogs]

Completely changing the playoff format is not the best fix IMO. You need to go by the tie breakers used in the past. If the league can not agree on a tie breaking format then use the last straw tie breaker of coin flip or drawing out the names of the playoff teams. In no way should the OP be forced into losing a bye.

 

[Rove!]

I don't understand the appeal of using h2h as a tiebreaker when there are much better and simpler methods available. (total points, all-play, etc)

The reason most leagues uses h2h weekly matchups is that it easy to understand and you know what you're rooting for or against.As a playoff tiebreaker, you lose that.

so you lose out on both fairness and entertainment factors. Why do leagues do this?

 

[John 14:6]

They're all pulling for 8 team playoffs and no byes. How convenient. This will be my last year in this league.

Yes, I agree have the 4 (5-8) fight it out.. What give anyone the right to nullify the #1 & #2 byes to fix another problem.

What I don't get about this is they'll still need to seed the four tied teams 5-8. If they're going to do that anyway, they might as well drop out the last two so you guys can get the byes you earned.

 

[rick6668]

No way the 1 and 2 seeds should lose their byes.

If they do it anyway with an 8 team playoff I would propose the following.

Have a mini playoff between teams 5,6,7,8 this week.

Team 5 vs Team 8

Team 6 vs Team 7

In order for the winner for Team 5 vs Team 8 to advance, they both would have to score higher than Team 3.

In order for the winner for Team 6 vs Team 7 to advance, they both would have to score higher than Team 4.

This prevents Teams 3 and 4 from having to beat 2 teams, if they lose to both it wouldn't matter who advanced.

Week 14:

Team 1, Team 2 - Bye

Team 3 vs (Team 5 and Team 8, both must score higher than Team 3 for one to advance)

Team 4 vs (Team 6 and Team 7, both must score higher than Team 4 for one to advance)

This is kind of weird, but it keeps 1 and 2 with their byes and doesn't hurt teams 3 and 4 with having to play 2 teams. It only hurts teams 5,6,7,8 but at least they have a chance.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Have a mini playoff between teams 5,6,7,8 this week.

Team 5 vs Team 8

Team 6 vs Team 7

Better idea: Just put teams 5 and 6 in the playoffs.

 

[rick6668]

Have a mini playoff between teams 5,6,7,8 this week.

Team 5 vs Team 8

Team 6 vs Team 7

Better idea: Just put teams 5 and 6 in the playoffs.

I agree. I would flip a coin for the above. Either way, I'm guessing OP is going to get screwed into playing this week.

I'm glad all my leagues have the first tie breakers as points. HTH sucks.

 

[Competitive1]

A great point is you're still going to have to seed #5-8. How and why? And why simply wouldnt 7 & 8 be eliminated!!!!!!

 

[Ministry of Pain]

4 teams play this week, top 2 face seeds 3 and 4 next week, next week are the Semi, Finals week 17.

 

[Alkahsu]

Just refer to your league bylaws that supplement the rules from ESPN. If you don't have league bylaws make them for next year and the only fair thing to do this year is follow ESPNs tie breaker rules since there are no bylaws to refer to.

 

[ebsteelers]

8 team league those teams must be ####### exciting on paper..

why not just have a battle royal between teams 3 to 8

and keep the 2 byes... 2 teams with the most points in the battle royal move on

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

why not just have a battle royal between teams 3 to 8

and keep the 2 byes... 2 teams with the most points in the battle royal move on

Because that's not fair to the 3 and 4 seeds. They've earned the right to face a single opponent next week.

 

[Competitive1]

8 team teams are ridiculously stupid, however it's my brothers league

And yes just as deserving as the #1 & #2 should have a bye, #3 & #4 should play 1 team. I'm not sure why in the world the #5 - #8 seed are getting special extra attention.

8 team league those teams must be ####### exciting on paper..

why not just have a battle royal between teams 3 to 8

and keep the 2 byes... 2 teams with the most points in the battle royal move on

 

[ebsteelers]

8 team teams are ridiculously stupid, however it's my brothers league

And yes just as deserving as the #1 & #2 should have a bye, #3 & #4 should play 1 team. I'm not sure why in the world the #5 - #8 seed are getting special extra attention.

8 team league those teams must be ####### exciting on paper..

why not just have a battle royal between teams 3 to 8

and keep the 2 byes... 2 teams with the most points in the battle royal move on

well it seems like it would be the only way to do it since there seems to be no tie breakers already in place..

either the 3 and 4 might get screwed or the 1 and 2 seeds do

seems more fair to have the 3 and 4 play who are suppose to be playing anyway then the 1 and 2 who earned the bye that 3 and 4 didnt

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Because that's not fair to the 3 and 4 seeds. They've earned the right to face a single opponent next week.

Don't leave your league in the hands of the Sharkerees, handle your business.

 

[ebsteelers]

Because that's not fair to the 3 and 4 seeds. They've earned the right to face a single opponent next week.

Don't leave your league in the hands of the Sharkerees, handle your business.

exactly. if anything 1 and 2 have more a complain they truly earned the 1 and 2 seeds which are byes

 

[PatsWillWin]

There's no way you should be changing the number of playoff teams. That is a MASSIVE change, especially if it ends up with 100% of the teams making the playoffs. That idea is too stupid for words.

One way or another, you (or the commissioner, rather) needs to figure out how to apply the existing tie-breakers to a 4-way tie. There's not going to be a "perfect" way to do it. This is where judgement comes in. This is why we have commissioners and why they need to be reasonable, objective, and at times, assertive. Make a call, go with it, fix the rules for next year.

 

[Perfect Tommy]

There is a fair fix. Have teams 5-8 in a four way battle with one team advancing. Have team 3 play team 4. Leave the bye week for teams one and two. Next week team 1 plays the winner of the 5-8 battle and team 2 plays the winner between team 3 and team 4. It is total BS to just take away the byes for teams 1 and 2.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

There is a fair fix. Have teams 5-8 in a four way battle with one team advancing. Have team 3 play team 4. Leave the bye week for teams one and two. Next week team 1 plays the winner of the 5-8 battle and team 2 plays the winner between team 3 and team 4. It is total BS to just take away the byes for teams 1 and 2.

That's not fair to team 3.

All of these suggestions to come up with alternate playoff scenarios are absurd. There is a four-way tie for the 5 and 6 seeds. Break the tie. If your league can't figure out how to do that without ####### things up even worse, just give everyone their money back and find someone more experienced to run your league for next year.

 

[RealReactions]

Do total points scored as the tie breaker. Then go total points against. Those should make out whose in and whose out

 

[Nero]

Have teams 3 and 4 play two of the teams 5-8 apiece. Let team 3 pick one of his opponents, then have team 4 pick an opponent. Then team 3 picks his second opponent leaving the second opponent for team 4. One winner from each three way advances.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Have teams 3 and 4 play two of the teams 5-8 apiece. Let team 3 pick one of his opponents, then have team 4 pick an opponent. Then team 3 picks his second opponent leaving the second opponent for team 4. One winner from each three way advances.

that's not fair to the 3 and 4 seeds. They've earned the right to face a single opponent next week.

All of these suggestions to come up with alternate playoff scenarios are absurd. There is a four-way tie for the 5 and 6 seeds. Break the tie. If your league can't figure out how to do that without ####### things up even worse, just give everyone their money back and find someone more experienced to run your league for next year.

 

[ratbast]

avg the h2h points per game. then change the rules for next year.

 

[belljr]

did not read the whole thread - the only defense I will give to the commisssioner is this. I use the same tiebreaking procedures since the beginning. I use the NFL tie breakers. Yes H2h sweep for wild card etc.... I never wrote it down only emailed people that is what we used until this forum. It is written down.

That being said.... I have to manually adjust my seed every year because every site I have used can't figure out the NFL logic for tiebreakers. It autmatically jumps to total points for WC.

 

[tone1oc]

If I were one of the 5-8 teams in an 8 man league I would probably decline consideration for playoffs. I want no part of that pity party.

 

[Perfect Tommy]

There is a fair fix. Have teams 5-8 in a four way battle with one team advancing. Have team 3 play team 4. Leave the bye week for teams one and two. Next week team 1 plays the winner of the 5-8 battle and team 2 plays the winner between team 3 and team 4. It is total BS to just take away the byes for teams 1 and 2.

That's not fair to team 3.

All of these suggestions to come up with alternate playoff scenarios are absurd. There is a four-way tie for the 5 and 6 seeds. Break the tie. If your league can't figure out how to do that without ####### things up even worse, just give everyone their money back and find someone more experienced to run your league for next year.

How is that not fair to team 3? He expected to play one opponent and he does. Team 3 and team 4 have to play teams with slightly better records than expected but that is trivial.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

How is that not fair to team 3?

Because he's supposed to play the 6 seed, not the 4 seed. And, for that matter, the 4 seed is supposed to play the 5 seed, not the 3 seed.

All of these "solutions" are dumb. There is a tie for the 5 and 6 seeds. Break the tie. This is not complicated. There are two possible outcomes - either the commissioner can demonstrate that the league uses a different tiebreaker than the one implemented by the website, or he can't. If he can, break the tie that way. If he can't, the website has already broken the tie. There is zero reason to change anything involving the 1-4 seeds.

 

[TheAssassin]

No way the 1 and 2 seeds should lose their byes.

If they do it anyway with an 8 team playoff I would propose the following.

Have a mini playoff between teams 5,6,7,8 this week.

Team 5 vs Team 8

Team 6 vs Team 7

In order for the winner for Team 5 vs Team 8 to advance, they both would have to score higher than Team 3.

In order for the winner for Team 6 vs Team 7 to advance, they both would have to score higher than Team 4.

This prevents Teams 3 and 4 from having to beat 2 teams, if they lose to both it wouldn't matter who advanced.

Week 14:

Team 1, Team 2 - Bye

Team 3 vs (Team 5 and Team 8, both must score higher than Team 3 for one to advance)

Team 4 vs (Team 6 and Team 7, both must score higher than Team 4 for one to advance)

This is kind of weird, but it keeps 1 and 2 with their byes and doesn't hurt teams 3 and 4 with having to play 2 teams. It only hurts teams 5,6,7,8 but at least they have a chance.

Actually, this is a very clever way of doing it. It actually tilts a bit into Team 3 and 4's favor but that's okay.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

No way the 1 and 2 seeds should lose their byes.

If they do it anyway with an 8 team playoff I would propose the following.

Have a mini playoff between teams 5,6,7,8 this week.

Team 5 vs Team 8

Team 6 vs Team 7

In order for the winner for Team 5 vs Team 8 to advance, they both would have to score higher than Team 3.

In order for the winner for Team 6 vs Team 7 to advance, they both would have to score higher than Team 4.

This prevents Teams 3 and 4 from having to beat 2 teams, if they lose to both it wouldn't matter who advanced.

Week 14:

Team 1, Team 2 - Bye

Team 3 vs (Team 5 and Team 8, both must score higher than Team 3 for one to advance)

Team 4 vs (Team 6 and Team 7, both must score higher than Team 4 for one to advance)

This is kind of weird, but it keeps 1 and 2 with their byes and doesn't hurt teams 3 and 4 with having to play 2 teams. It only hurts teams 5,6,7,8 but at least they have a chance.

Actually, this is a very clever way of doing it. It actually tilts a bit into Team 3 and 4's favor but that's okay.

If you're going to do it that way, why not just put the 5 and 6 seeds in the playoffs like they're supposed to be?

 

[BusMan]

A long term solution to problems of this nature is to have a league charter or constitution.

 

[Hoosier16]

4 teams play this week, top 2 face seeds 3 and 4 next week, next week are the Semi, Finals week 17.

This is the best option at this point.

If you can't agree on a tie breaking system, go to an 8 team playoff and use week 17. While not ideal, nothing is at this point and at least you can maintain the bye week advantage for the 1 and 2 seeds.

 

[John 14:6]

Auction off the last two play off spots to the four teams. Whoever pays the most is the fifth seed, second highest payer is the sixth seed. Add the money they pay to the award pot. If nobody wants to pay, give team three and four byes as needed.