I've been toying w/ the idea of expanding our 12 team league to include 8 playoff teams instead of just 6, under one condition; that the top two seeds wouldn't be risking their playoff life in the 1st round. If they were, I'd prefer to stick w/ a 6 team format w/ 1st round byes. Clearly, the playoffs would have to start earlier than week 14. Perhaps we could do 2 doubleheader weeks so that the normal 13 games could be played. Anyway, how would you even set up a double elimination tourney for 8 teams? Anyone ever done it?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Double Elimination Playoff Structure (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NoCheese
- Start date
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Love the idea of an eight team double-elimination tournament - anything that reduces luck and rewards good teams is a good idea IMO.
Unfortunately it can take as many as six games to decide the winner. And it always takes at least five.
Unfortunately it can take as many as six games to decide the winner. And it always takes at least five.
Last edited by a moderator:
Good point.
MarcO
Footballguy
I think actually it would take at least 6 maybe 7 depending if the loser bracket winner wins the 1st final game. The problem is that you can't start the losers bracket until the 2nd week of the playoffs.
Tell me if I'm thinking correctly:
Week 1 of Playoffs
1 seed vs 8 seed
2 seed vs 7 seed
3 seed vs 6 seed
4 seed vs 5 seed
The 4 losers would go to the losers bracket and play each other & the 4 winners would play each other (re-seeding). I heard an argument that it wouldn't be fair for winners to play winners, but I would argue that the 1, 5, 6, and 7 teams could all be winners, so it isn't really unfair at all since the top seeds could potentially be avoiding high seeds.
Week 2 of Playoffs
2 teams would be eliminated completely (both from the losers bracket). Now, 2 teams would be undefeated, 4 would have one loss, and 2 would be eliminated. After Week 13 in the current system, the 7 and 8 seeds would be eliminated anyhow, so this is pretty consistent with our current format.
Week 3 of Playoffs
Here's where it gets a little clumsy, but very manageable. The 2 undefeated teams would need to get a bye, then have the remaining 4 teams w/ 1 loss play each other. Losers from these 2 games would be eliminated and the winners would play the 2 teams w/ a bye, following a standard re-seeding format (top seed plays lowest remaining seeds).
Week 4 of Playoffs
There would be 4 teams remaining, 2 teams w/ 1 loss and 2 undefeated teams. I would think at this point you'd have to go single elimination (hey, the undefeated teams both get a Week 14 bye, just like the normal 6 team format with byes) to get the games in by Week 16 since nobody wants a title game in Week 17. With an 18 game schedule and 20 NFL weeks w/ 2 byes, a double elimination format would work even better. But I think if you had an 11 week regular season w/ a doubleheader in Weeks 1 and 11 (playoffs start in Week 12) you'd be OK.
Week 5 of Playoffs
The championship game. You could potentially say that if there was any remaining teams that were undefetaed they would receive a 5 point home field advanatge, but I'm not sure that's necessary.
Week 1 of Playoffs
1 seed vs 8 seed
2 seed vs 7 seed
3 seed vs 6 seed
4 seed vs 5 seed
The 4 losers would go to the losers bracket and play each other & the 4 winners would play each other (re-seeding). I heard an argument that it wouldn't be fair for winners to play winners, but I would argue that the 1, 5, 6, and 7 teams could all be winners, so it isn't really unfair at all since the top seeds could potentially be avoiding high seeds.
Week 2 of Playoffs
2 teams would be eliminated completely (both from the losers bracket). Now, 2 teams would be undefeated, 4 would have one loss, and 2 would be eliminated. After Week 13 in the current system, the 7 and 8 seeds would be eliminated anyhow, so this is pretty consistent with our current format.
Week 3 of Playoffs
Here's where it gets a little clumsy, but very manageable. The 2 undefeated teams would need to get a bye, then have the remaining 4 teams w/ 1 loss play each other. Losers from these 2 games would be eliminated and the winners would play the 2 teams w/ a bye, following a standard re-seeding format (top seed plays lowest remaining seeds).
Week 4 of Playoffs
There would be 4 teams remaining, 2 teams w/ 1 loss and 2 undefeated teams. I would think at this point you'd have to go single elimination (hey, the undefeated teams both get a Week 14 bye, just like the normal 6 team format with byes) to get the games in by Week 16 since nobody wants a title game in Week 17. With an 18 game schedule and 20 NFL weeks w/ 2 byes, a double elimination format would work even better. But I think if you had an 11 week regular season w/ a doubleheader in Weeks 1 and 11 (playoffs start in Week 12) you'd be OK.
Week 5 of Playoffs
The championship game. You could potentially say that if there was any remaining teams that were undefetaed they would receive a 5 point home field advanatge, but I'm not sure that's necessary.
Last edited by a moderator:
Figured there would be one wise guy.
DoubleG
Footballguy
That's correct. You can see a double elim. 8 team seeded bracket here:8 Team Seeded D.E.
However, with double headers you could make it considerably shorter. You could base the 2nd game of the double header bracket on the result of the first game (i.e. like they were played one after the other instead of simultaneosly). The problem with that is you really aren't minimizing luck - if a team had a good week (or bad one) - they'd win both games (or lose both). So realistically, given the current NFL schedule, limited number of games, etc. I don't see how this possible from a practical standpoint.
Obviously, an 18 game schedule could make it possible. But keep in mind that with an 18 game schedule, the chances that a team will have the division (or wildcard spot) locked up early is probably a greater possibility (i.e. "Colts Syndrome") - especially if most of the other teams within a division are poor. This season is a poor example of that.
MarcO
Footballguy
again, pretty sure it would need 6 weeks and 7 if you do double elim final and loser's bracket wins the first final. Look at the link to the bracket you provided, start the losers bracket in week2 and then count the weeks of the loser's bracket (it's the long pole).
Technically 8 out of 12 teams make it, but that is 66.67% and I think your point remains valid. The difficult part for a #8 seed winning it all would be that they would always be playing the highest seeded teams in the league since re-seeding after each round would always land them the most unfavorable matchup. If your concern is that a #8 seed would run the table, they would have to seriously earn it.
Chaka
Footballguy
I am not really concerned by anything I just find it odd to let that much of the league into the playoffs. It diminishes the regular season in every way. I think people battle harder when the task is more difficult. The reward is also more meaningful IMO.My thoughts are predicated on this being a money league with pay outs for the playoff teams. If it's a non money league then let everyone into the playoffs, who cares?
It's definitely a money league. It is a bit problematic to let 8 teams in the playoffs, that's my greatest concern. Would you consider double elimination for a 4 or 6 team playoff structure or are you just against it entirely?
Chaka
Footballguy
I have no problem with the concept of double elimination in the playoffs for any number of teams.I am merely expressing shock and surprise at letting such a large number of teams into the playoffs.
Similar threads
