Its tie breaker time! (1 Viewer)

[Milwalkeysbeast]

OK. Our league ends this week and playoffs start this coming weekend. Our rules state the following:

If 2 teams are tied, head to head is first tie breaker. After that divisional record, then total points, the points against, then coin flip.

Now when our schedule and rules were being made up, they were made up inferring everyone in the conference would play one another at least once. With divisional games taking up more of the schedule, this didn't happen and some teams didn't play each other. Now comes the tie breaker for the final wild card spot:

Team A and Team B will both most likely win tonight, giving each a record fo 6-6. Neithe rhave played each other during the season. They are in different divisions and Team B has a better divisional record. Team A is now saying that since neither team played each other and they are in different divisions, that they should not use divisional record for tie breaker and instead go right to total points as if they would in the NFL.

As commissioner, what would you do?

PS- the reason our leagues neds now is that it is a 24 team league, with 2 conferences of 12 teams each made up of the same players. Week 15 each conference champion is determined from their own "12 man league" conference, and these winners face off in week 16 for the overall championship.

In our league, the 3 divisional winners make the playoffs, with the top 2 receiving the bye weeks for the first playoff round. After those are picked, the 3 wild cards are picked with the rules above. Since there is no specification of tie breakers of teams who haven't played each other and the rules assume that everyone plays each other, should the rules on the website be upheld word for word, or should there be a more in depth look at who would win with the NFL tie breaker rule.

 

[posty]

You can't compare division records if they are in different divisions...

Total points

 

[Utter Chaos]

Team A is correct in that Division record should not be a tie-breaker for the wild card.

However if the rules say the tie-breaker is head-to-head (if applicable), then division record and does not specifically cover wild card situations then you can't change it now. Use division record for this season and change the rules next year so there is a tie-breaker for division champs and a different tie-breaker for wild cards.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Team A is correct in that Division record should not be a tie-breaker for the wild card.

However if the rules say the tie-breaker is head-to-head (if applicable), then division record and does not specifically cover wild card situations then you can't change it now. Use division record for this season and change the rules next year so there is a tie-breaker for division champs and a different tie-breaker for wild cards.

 

[Milwalkeysbeast]

Team A's argument is the NFL tie breaker - which I agree with. But looking at the NFl tie breaker, win-loss percentage of common games is above total points. After looking at both teams common %, Team B has a 55.5% win-loss record and Team A has a 54.5% win-loss record.

In either case, I think Team B should get the final spot in both our leagues current nonspecific rules that need to be changed and in the NFL tie breaker scheme.

 

[rick6668]

Team A is correct in that Division record should not be a tie-breaker for the wild card.

However if the rules say the tie-breaker is head-to-head (if applicable), then division record and does not specifically cover wild card situations then you can't change it now. Use division record for this season and change the rules next year so there is a tie-breaker for division champs and a different tie-breaker for wild cards.

Exactly

 

[Utter Chaos]

If 2 teams are tied, head to head is first tie breaker. After that divisional record, then total points, the points against, then coin flip.

Also, I think points against should not be part of any tie-breaker. I assume the team that gives up the least amount of points would win that tie-breaker if it came down to it. If that's the case then you're rewarding the team that had the easier schedule. A better 4th (or 3rd) tie-breaker would be strength of schedule or record vs common opponents.

 

[code]

Our tiebreaker rules (derived from the NFL rules):In Division Ties

If, at the end of the regular season, two or more clubs in the same division finish with identical won-lost-tied percentages, the following steps will be taken until a champion is determined.

Two Clubs

1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs).

2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division.

3. Best net points in all games.

4. MFL power rank.

5. Coin toss.

Three or More Clubs

(Note: If two clubs remain tied after third or other clubs are eliminated during any step, tie breaker reverts to step 1 of the two-club format).

1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).

2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division.

3. Best net points in all games.

4. MFL power rank.

5. Coin toss.

Wildcard Ties

If it is necessary to break ties to determine the two Wild-Card clubs from each conference, the following steps will be taken.

1. If the tied clubs are from the same division, apply division tie breaker.

2. If the tied clubs are from different divisions, apply the following steps.

Two Clubs

1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs).

2. Best net points in all games.

3. MFL power rank.

4. Coin toss.

Three or More Clubs

(Note: If two clubs remain tied after third or other clubs are eliminated, tie breaker reverts to step 1 of applicable two-club format.)

1. Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2.

2. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).

3. Best net points in all games.

4. MFL power rank.

5. Coin toss.

When the first Wild-Card team has been identified, the procedure is repeated to name the second Wild-Card, i.e., eliminate all but the highest-ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. In situations where three or more teams from the same division are involved in the procedure, the original seeding of the teams remains the same for subsequent applications of the tie breaker if the top-ranked team in that division qualifies for a Wild-Card berth.

 

[Milwalkeysbeast]

If 2 teams are tied, head to head is first tie breaker. After that divisional record, then total points, the points against, then coin flip.

Also, I think points against should not be part of any tie-breaker. I assume the team that gives up the least amount of points would win that tie-breaker if it came down to it. If that's the case then you're rewarding the team that had the easier schedule. A better 4th (or 3rd) tie-breaker would be strength of schedule or record vs common opponents.

It actually the opposite - the team who had more points scored against would have the tie breaker. Its pretty much the same as conference strength of schedule.

 

[Utter Chaos]

If 2 teams are tied, head to head is first tie breaker. After that divisional record, then total points, the points against, then coin flip.

Also, I think points against should not be part of any tie-breaker. I assume the team that gives up the least amount of points would win that tie-breaker if it came down to it. If that's the case then you're rewarding the team that had the easier schedule. A better 4th (or 3rd) tie-breaker would be strength of schedule or record vs common opponents.

It actually the opposite - the team who had more points scored against would have the tie breaker. Its pretty much the same as conference strength of schedule.

OK that's better than having the team that gave up the least points advance but I would still not use it as a tie-breaker (as well as net point differential). The reason is in fantasy football you have no control over how many points you give up. That works in the NFL but not in fantasy. As mentioned earlier better options would be either power rankings (what your record would be if you played every team each week), or record vs common opponents. Chances are you're hardly ever going to get past a total points tie-breaker anyway.

Three or More Clubs

5. Coin toss.

I'd like to see the coin you use to break a 3 way tie.

 

[dagogrease]

Team A is correct in that Division record should not be a tie-breaker for the wild card.

However if the rules say the tie-breaker is head-to-head (if applicable), then division record and does not specifically cover wild card situations then you can't change it now. Use division record for this season and change the rules next year so there is a tie-breaker for division champs and a different tie-breaker for wild cards.

Exactly

Yep...can't change it now.

 

[sinatravolta]

Tough call - and depends on what the people in your league are like. I think folks in my league would be willing to agree that using division makes no sense in this case and would be ok with a rule change at this point, even though it wasn't in writing. However, if the people are touchy and inflexible, then you shouldn't change the rules at this point in the year, even if they're illogical.

Note - if you're going to change the rules anyway for next year - I would consider screwing all this head-to-head and divisional record as the first tie-breakers. It makes sense in the NFL because teams line up against each other. It does NOT make sense in fantasy when how 2 teams do when they face each other is basically independent of each other. As in - it's not like Team A's D held back Team B's passing game.

So - I would go by total points or better yet, the Power Ranking - assuming that is something like CBS', which takes into account points scored and "breakdown" which is what your record would be if you played every other team every week.

Because in fantasy football - the Power Ranking is the better measure of which team has been better, than the H-t-H matchup, which is mostly luck.

A compromise would be Head-to-Head breakdown. Who would have won more often if the 2 teams had played every week? Actually I think that's an interesting idea.

 

[BigRighty]

A compromise would be Head-to-Head breakdown. Who would have won more often if the 2 teams had played every week? Actually I think that's an interesting idea.

We use that as the first tie-breaker in both my leagues and it has worked quite well. It removes the "luck factor" from the schedule by looking at the overall body of work in a season versus one or two weeks. It's also pretty easy to figure out. Team A has a point, but unfortunately you open up quite a Pandora's box if you go against what is in the rule book. Apologize and state that tie-breakers will be reviewed for next year.

 

[Swamprat]

As many other posters have stated...

Stay with your current rules for this season. Explain to Team A that the rules cannot be change in the middle of the game. Tell him to bring it up at next years rules meeting.