How to Interpret (1 Viewer)

[DepthCharts]

I believe our current rules are missing important information which leaves them up for interpretation. What is your interpretation of a three way tie with the following scenario's:

Team A and B (in one division) and C (different division) are all 9-4. All 3 have made the playoffs, seeding is the question.

None of Team A, B or C won all games against the other two tied teams.

Team A and B both beat team C once (played once since not in same division).

Team A and B split vs each other (played twice since they were in same divsion).

Team C score more points than A and B, A has scored 2nd most, B the 3rd most.

Team C had a better divison record then A and B (A and B are tied at division record).

Our only reference in rules is "Standings Tiebreakers":

Ties in the standings are resolved in this order: Winning Percentage, Head to Head Record, Division Record, Total Points.

Help, thanks.

regardless of outcome this is to help my league for next year, not this year.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

You're correct that it's very poorly worded and subject to interpretation. One way to look at it is as follows:

C is eliminated from contention by the head-to-head tiebreaker (they have zero wins in two games against A and B).

Between A and B, A wins on the total points tiebreaker. Therefore A is the top seed out of these three.

If necessary, B and C would then reset, and B would win the second seed based on head-to-head record against C.

Another valid interpretation is that head-to-head tiebreakers only apply to two-team ties, and division record tiebreakers only apply to ties within a division. Therefore you go to total points, where C is the top seed, then A, then B.

 

[ShaqAttaq]

You're correct that it's very poorly worded and subject to interpretation. One way to look at it is as follows:

C is eliminated from contention by the head-to-head tiebreaker (they have zero wins in two games against A and B).

Between A and B, A wins on the total points tiebreaker. Therefore A is the top seed out of these three.

If necessary, B and C would then reset, and B would win the second seed based on head-to-head record against C.

Another valid interpretation is that head-to-head tiebreakers only apply to two-team ties, and division record tiebreakers only apply to ties within a division. Therefore you go to total points, where C is the top seed, then A, then B.

this

 

[belljr]

If it helps you this is how we do Wildcard - addapted from the NFL WC rules.

1.Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding

to step 2. The original seeding within a division upon application of the division tie breaker remains the same for all subsequent applications of the procedure that are necessary to identify the two Wild-Card participants.

2. H2H (applies only if one team beats (sweeps) or losses to all of the other teams).

3 Total points scored.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

You're correct that it's very poorly worded and subject to interpretation. One way to look at it is as follows:

C is eliminated from contention by the head-to-head tiebreaker (they have zero wins in two games against A and B).

Between A and B, A wins on the total points tiebreaker. Therefore A is the top seed out of these three.

If necessary, B and C would then reset, and B would win the second seed based on head-to-head record against C.

Another valid interpretation is that head-to-head tiebreakers only apply to two-team ties, and division record tiebreakers only apply to ties within a division. Therefore you go to total points, where C is the top seed, then A, then B.

this

It's possible that's how they intended it. However, that's not how the NFL would do it, and in the case where it's totally ambiguous like this, they might want to use the NFL as their guide. By any reasonable mapping of the NFL rules, team A would be the top-seeded team, then B, then C.