Need Help With Playoff Seeding Please (1 Viewer)

[steelerfan1]

Hi all,

Years ago someone helped me with this. User Name was something like Eligno ______. (I can picture his avatar)

We try to stay with NFL Rules.

This will be for the 4, 5 and 6 seeds.

We have 3 teams all in different divisions with a 6-6 record.

No one team holds a head to head tie break so the next step I believe is the Conference record.

2 teams are 5-5 and 1 team is 4-6.

Now is the correct step to eliminate the 4-6 team briefly and then match the 2 other teams up against each other starting with the head to head record?

Or do you just keep all 3 teams in the comparison and go to division record.

Basically the way its done will flip flop the 4 and 5 teams.

Since they will play each other regardless it's not the end of the world, but I'd like to get it right.

Thanks for any help.

 

[bostonfred]

First we determine fourth place.  There is a 3 way tie for fourth place so we use the 3 way tiebreaker. 

Next we determine fifth place.  There is a two way tie for fourth place so we use the 2 way tiebreaker. 

Etc 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Hi all,

Years ago someone helped me with this. User Name was something like Eligno ______. (I can picture his avatar)

We try to stay with NFL Rules.

This will be for the 4, 5 and 6 seeds.

We have 3 teams all in different divisions with a 6-6 record.

No one team holds a head to head tie break so the next step I believe is the Conference record.

2 teams are 5-5 and 1 team is 4-6.

Now is the correct step to eliminate the 4-6 team briefly and then match the 2 other teams up against each other starting with the head to head record?

Or do you just keep all 3 teams in the comparison and go to division record.

Basically the way its done will flip flop the 4 and 5 teams.

Since they will play each other regardless it's not the end of the world, but I'd like to get it right.

Thanks for any help.

I’m so so confused by this.

you have how many teams on the league, 12?  14? 10? 

2 divisions? 

And 6 teams make the playoffs? 

Until i know that I’m not sure of how to answer. If you can post that info I’ll do my best to help.  

—————-

If I may suggest, it sounds like you’re over complicating it regardless. Too many teams are making the playoffs, it creates an unbalanced schedule & you’ve got a 4-6 team making the playoffs. My leagues are both 3 division, 14 week season and the tiebreakers across divisions are 1. Record, 2. H2H, 3. Division Record, 4. Points for, 5. Points against.

if the 1 seed & the WC are in the same division, 1 plays 3 & 2 plays 4. 

East. 

Anyway, lmk the league details and I’ll do my best to help your seeding. From your post I’m not getting it - sounds like you’re proposing giving a 4-6 Team a 1st round BYE, which would be odd.

i must be misreading that.

 

[kutta]

First we determine fourth place.  There is a 3 way tie for fourth place so we use the 3 way tiebreaker. 

Next we determine fifth place.  There is a two way tie for fourth place so we use the 2 way tiebreaker. 

Etc 

Right. Once a team is out they are out. 

 

[steelerfan1]

I’m so so confused by this.

you have how many teams on the league, 12?  14? 10? 

2 divisions? 

And 6 teams make the playoffs? 

Until i know that I’m not sure of how to answer. If you can post that info I’ll do my best to help.  

—————-

If I may suggest, it sounds like you’re over complicating it regardless. Too many teams are making the playoffs, it creates an unbalanced schedule & you’ve got a 4-6 team making the playoffs. My leagues are both 3 division, 14 week season and the tiebreakers across divisions are 1. Record, 2. H2H, 3. Division Record, 4. Points for, 5. Points against.

if the 1 seed & the WC are in the same division, 1 plays 3 & 2 plays 4. 

East. 

Anyway, lmk the league details and I’ll do my best to help your seeding. From your post I’m not getting it - sounds like you’re proposing giving a 4-6 Team a 1st round BYE, which would be odd.

i must be misreading that.

hi guys, sorry for not being clear. below is the link. The teams in question are Donkey Punch, Breaston Plants and The Fuzz.

I have it as Donkey Punch 4, Breaston Plants 5 and The Fuzz 6.

league standings

 

[Arodin]

The conference tiebreak is first, and donkey+breaston "win" that one.  You use the next tiebreaker only on those two, because the tie that needs breaking is a tie for the best conference record, not all the way back to the original tie in overall record.

 

[TheAssassin]

Points should always be the tiebreaker.

 

[steelerfan1]

The conference tiebreak is first, and donkey+breaston "win" that one.  You use the next tiebreaker only on those two, because the tie that needs breaking is a tie for the best conference record, not all the way back to the original tie in overall record.

So since donkey beat breaston in their head to head, donkey would be 4 seed, breaston 5 and fuzz 6, correct?

 

[Nemesis]

Points should always be the tiebreaker.

As a 20+ yr commissioner, I'm tired of trying to explain Playoff Tiebreaker rules to owners. 
IMO, if you try to implement some kind of H-to-H tiebreaker, you will drive yourself mad trying to explain to owners who already have pre-conceived "Argument X" of what it "should be" or their interpretation of what you have written.   Plus, your rules end up looking like an IF THEN stmt (if X happens, then y outcome...........but if A happens, then B is the outcome)

Therefore, i just make it simple and go with Overall record, Points Scored................end of story.   Simple to write.....simple to understand.   
No legal degree necessary and doesn't matter if 2 teams are tied or 4 teams are tied at the end of the season.

 

[steelerfan1]

Points should always be the tiebreaker.

Thanks assassin, but we've always done nfl rules. I'm just not 100% sure I was doing right steps

 

[steelerfan1]

As a 20+ yr commissioner, I'm tired of trying to explain Playoff Tiebreaker rules to owners. 
IMO, if you try to implement some kind of H-to-H tiebreaker, you will drive yourself mad trying to explain to owners who already have pre-conceived "Argument X" of what it "should be" or their interpretation of what you have written.   Plus, your rules end up looking like an IF THEN stmt (if X happens, then y outcome...........but if A happens, then B is the outcome)

Therefore, i just make it simple and go with Overall record, Points Scored................end of story.   Simple to write.....simple to understand.   
No legal degree necessary and doesn't matter if 2 teams are tied or 4 teams are tied at the end of the season.

Thanks nemesis. Simpler for sure. But then why not just make it a total points league and be done with it?

 

[Nemesis]

Thanks nemesis. Simpler for sure. But then why not just make it a total points league and be done with it?

Couple of years ago, we moved to NO divisions, and  playing Doubleheaders each week to keep the Head to Head competition feel.   It's worked out great as nobody can really complain that they got screwed by a bad schedule OR being put in a bad division.

 

[steelerfan1]

Couple of years ago, we moved to NO divisions, and  playing Doubleheaders each week to keep the Head to Head competition feel.   It's worked out great as nobody can really complain that they got screwed by a bad schedule OR being put in a bad division.

Tried selling the double header thing with 1 being against the average but it's an older school bunch and everyone is pretty happy with the setup as is.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The conference tiebreak is first, and donkey+breaston "win" that one.  You use the next tiebreaker only on those two, because the tie that needs breaking is a tie for the best conference record, not all the way back to the original tie in overall record.

+1 

that’s how I see it too. 

 

[steelerfan1]

+1 

that’s how I see it too. 

So since donkey beat breaston in their head to head, donkey would be 4 seed, breaston 5 and fuzz 6, correct?

 

[zftcg]

Points should always be the tiebreaker.

Came here to post exactly that. Reminds me of the leagues that don't use fractional scoring, and then come up with all sorts of elaborate tie-breakers involving bench points, TDs scored, higher seed, etc. Just use the tiebreaker that's simplest to rank and almost impossible to itself result in a tie. (If you need to come up with an additional tie-breaker in the extremely rare event of a fractional tie, fine. Or just flip a coin. I promise it will hardly ever happen.)

Also, total points scored has the added benefit of reflecting a team's overall quality (better, I would argue, than even head-to-head). We always hear about the teams that led the league in scoring but ended up 7-6. This is a way to reward them.

An additional complication of doing H2H, divisional records, etc.: It is extremely difficult to set up a schedule that ensures all of those numbers will be equal. As an example, I play in a 16-team, two-division league with a 13-week regular season. That means right from the start you're not facing every team. Then, to complicate it even further, Yahoo's default scheduling is a mess: I just had my second match-up this season with a team that's not even in my division. And yet for some reason we still use divisional record as a tiebreaker.

If you're playing in a 10-team, two-division league, it all works out: 8 games (2x4 teams) within your division, five games against the rest of the league. But otherwise, it's extremely difficult to achieve the proper balance.

Finally, @Hot Sauce Guy, much respect, but no league should ever use points against as a tiebreaker. I get that it's meant to mimic NFL rules, but it is a number you have absolutely no control over. If anything, penalizing a team with high PA has it backwards. If two teams have the same record but one has higher PA, that means they've overcome bad luck to get to where they've gotten. It's like saying that a poor kid who earns $1M deserves less credit than a rich kid who earns the same amount. They deserve *more* credit.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

So since donkey beat breaston in their head to head, donkey would be 4 seed, breaston 5 and fuzz 6, correct?

Yes, that seems to be the case. The loser of the 1st tiebreaker is 6-seed, loser of the 2nd tiebreaker is 5-seed & winner of 2nd tiebreaker is 4-seed.

 

[zftcg]

Thanks assassin, but we've always done nfl rules. I'm just not 100% sure I was doing right steps

You're doing it right, but I would suggest changing it for next year and saving yourself the hassle.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Finally, @Hot Sauce Guy, much respect, but no league should ever use points against as a tiebreaker. I get that it's meant to mimic NFL rules, but it is a number you have absolutely no control over. If anything, penalizing a team with high PA has it backwards. If two teams have the same record but one has higher PA, that means they've overcome bad luck to get to where they've gotten. It's like saying that a poor kid who earns $1M deserves less credit than a rich kid who earns the same amount. They deserve *more* credit.

Yeah; well, that’s just like, your opinion, maaaaaaaan.

/lebowski

we’ve never had to go to the last tiebreaker. But the logic goes to SOS.

if you had more points against you yet have the same record, you played a harder schedule and thus deserve to get in.

It works for us - your league can do whatever.  

 

[steelerfan1]

You're doing it right, but I would suggest changing it for next year and saving yourself the hassle.

I have a bunch of people who hate change. ?

 

[Nemesis]

I have a bunch of people who hate change. ?

You solve that by nominating them as the next commissioner and that THEY have to write and explain the tie-breaker rule next year.

 

[zftcg]

Yeah; well, that’s just like, your opinion, maaaaaaaan.

/lebowski

we’ve never had to go to the last tiebreaker. But the logic goes to SOS.

if you had more points against you yet have the same record, you played a harder schedule and thus deserve to get in.

It works for us - your league can do whatever.  

Ah, so you are at least using it the right way. I misunderstood. Someone once posted in a different thread that his league used point differential as a tiebreaker, which would penalize teams with higher PA. I jumped to the conclusion that you were doing the same thing. Carry on. 

 

[steelerfan1]

You solve that by nominating them as the next commissioner and that THEY have to write and explain the tie-breaker rule next year.

Lol, it's really not that bad. I don't mind spending the time, but just wanted to make sure I was doing it correctly. When it becomes a burden I will take your advice.

 

[zftcg]

I have a bunch of people who hate change. ?

I can totally relate. I mentioned in my other post that my main money league (where I'm not commissioner) still uses divisional record. I could lobby to have it changed, but it's minor enough that i figure I should pick my battles and focus on more important things (like last year, when I convinced the commish that we needed to do away with four divisions before we ended up in a scenario where a 5-8 team made the playoffs as a top-4 seed because they lucked into a crappy division, while a 7-6 team got shut out because they didn't win theirs.)

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

You solve that by nominating them as the next commissioner and that THEY have to write and explain the tie-breaker rule next year.

Exactly how we did it in one league where every year everyone whined about everything. Rotate commish every year (with prior year’s commish as co-commish) no one ever complained again. 

 

[renesauz]

Yeah....points scored is more fair then H2H anyway since bye weeks can easily handicap H2H results...which is NOT something the NFL has to worry about. IE: It's patently unfair to try to follow the NFL's tiebreaking rules. NFL teams don't have their star RB on a bye when they face an opponent.

That said, the NFL rules I believe call for moving step by step until there is a WINNER, not a team eliminated.. Once there is a winner, they start over from the top with everyone remaining....and the steps are NOT quite identical for 2 teams compared to three or more teams.

 

[Arodin]

So since donkey beat breaston in their head to head, donkey would be 4 seed, breaston 5 and fuzz 6, correct?

Puzzled by the question, since it isn't consistent with your first post:

No one team holds a head to head tie break so the next step I believe is the Conference record.

If Donkey beat Breaston H2H and no other teams in the original tie played each other, then step 1 is that H2H eliminates Breaston, and then you go to conf. record to break the tie between the remaining teams.

On the other hand, if H2H was circular (team A beat team B beat team C beat team A) tyhen you are already past that and don't go back to it.  In that case, H2H eliminates nobody, so you went to conf. record, which eliminated one, and now you are on to the NEXT tiebreak to decide between Donkey and Breaston.  The results of H2H dont change just because a later tiebreak was invoked.

At least that's the way I run tiebreakers...you could put the exact opposite into your rules, which is why tiebreak rules (as others have noted) need to be VERY precisely spelled out in a ruleset.  If yours isn't then somebody is going tombe upset regardless, because you are making the ruling now when it affects someone rather than before the season when everyone still expects to be the 1-seed.

Points are certainly an easier tiebreak to manage, but a robust ruleset can easily handle whatever tiebreak you like, and for me, if it's a local league with active friends, I want the fun of H2H rivalries that matter, so we use H2H and division record, etc.  Points makes the most sense for online leagues with strangers, imo, since the rivalries don't really exist.

 

[steelerfan1]

Puzzled by the question, since it isn't consistent with your first post:

If Donkey beat Breaston H2H and no other teams in the original tie played each other, then step 1 is that H2H eliminates Breaston, and then you go to conf. record to break the tie between the remaining teams.

On the other hand, if H2H was circular (team A beat team B beat team C beat team A) tyhen you are already past that and don't go back to it.  In that case, H2H eliminates nobody, so you went to conf. record, which eliminated one, and now you are on to the NEXT tiebreak to decide between Donkey and Breaston.  The results of H2H dont change just because a later tiebreak was invoked.

At least that's the way I run tiebreakers...you could put the exact opposite into your rules, which is why tiebreak rules (as others have noted) need to be VERY precisely spelled out in a ruleset.  If yours isn't then somebody is going tombe upset regardless, because you are making the ruling now when it affects someone rather than before the season when everyone still expects to be the 1-seed.

Points are certainly an easier tiebreak to manage, but a robust ruleset can easily handle whatever tiebreak you like, and for me, if it's a local league with active friends, I want the fun of H2H rivalries that matter, so we use H2H and division record, etc.  Points makes the most sense for online leagues with strangers, imo, since the rivalries don't really exist.

Morning arodin,

The initial head to head between the 3 teams were circular.

That then put us to the conference record tie breaker where  1 team was eliminated with a 4-6 record, leaving 2 teams at 5-5.

Here's where I was inquiring since the 1 team was ruled out of the 4 seed do you now go back to the head to head between the 2 remaining teams where donkey had the win over breaston.

Or do you not go back to head to head and move on from the conference to the division?

Luckily this doesn't change the matchups as 4 plays 5 regardless, but I'd still like to get it right.

 

[Bronco Billy]

Wait. This happened before and you guys didn’t learn enough from that experience to develop some rules governing this?

I don’t quite get that.

 

[shadyridr]

Points should be the tie breaker. /thread

/confusion

 

[zftcg]

Personally, I hate this. 

I'm playing H2H, and I plan on winning H2H every week. Therefore, I want to win games, not amass points. Sometimes it's better management to intentionally carry players who may not score a lot in a particular week, if they'll still do just enough to win that week's games, in order to make sure you have them for better matchups later. In some leagues, H2H is a better tiebreaker. During the season, I manage bye weeks to not fall during in-conference games or look for covariance opportunities to make it more likely to beat a particular opponent in a particular week. If I think I can win 80-40 over my opponent, I'll set my lineup to do that. I won't blow up my bench trying to run up the score to 120-40.  

My main league is H2H and has H2H tiebreakers, and I play all season with that in mind. I focus intentionally on beating conference rivals and constantly manage my roster two or three weeks ahead to have the right streamers in place for DST and other positions. I don't believe that a simple "points for" would be a better gauge of management. 

Sorry, but I don't understand how you can have enough faith to fine-tune your roster that way. Yes, the goal is to maximize wins, not points, but the two factors that determine wins are points for and points against, the latter of which you have no control over. I can see choosing a less-than-optimal DST match-up in order to have the right streamer in place for future weeks. And I guess in leagues that limit transactions, it might be worth taking a zero at a position on someone's bye week in order to retain flexibility for later in the season.

But the effect of situations like that would be marginal. By far the best way to maximize your chance of victory every week is by maximizing your point total. Furthermore, if a team has the highest season-long point total, that is very likely a reflection of their roster's performance throughout the year. Conversely, if a team has a low total but a good record, that is likely a reflection of luck.

 

[TheAssassin]

Sorry, but I don't understand how you can have enough faith to fine-tune your roster that way. Yes, the goal is to maximize wins, not points, but the two factors that determine wins are points for and points against, the latter of which you have no control over. I can see choosing a less-than-optimal DST match-up in order to have the right streamer in place for future weeks. And I guess in leagues that limit transactions, it might be worth taking a zero at a position on someone's bye week in order to retain flexibility for later in the season.

But the effect of situations like that would be marginal. By far the best way to maximize your chance of victory every week is by maximizing your point total. Furthermore, if a team has the highest season-long point total, that is very likely a reflection of their roster's performance throughout the year. Conversely, if a team has a low total but a good record, that is likely a reflection of luck.

100% agree.  Additionally, yes the goal is to "MAXIMIZE WINS", the fact that we are discussing a tiebreaker means the teams all have the SAME # of wins.  Now the question becomes who is more deserving, a team that scored less (sometimes far less) points but caught you on a bad week for Byes or team that has scored more points but run up against opponents having good weeks. Pretty clear IMO.

 

[renesauz]

Personally, I hate this. 

I'm playing H2H, and I plan on winning H2H every week. Therefore, I want to win games, not amass points. Sometimes it's better management to intentionally carry players who may not score a lot in a particular week, if they'll still do just enough to win that week's games, in order to make sure you have them for better matchups later. In some leagues, H2H is a better tiebreaker. During the season, I manage bye weeks to not fall during in-conference games or look for covariance opportunities to make it more likely to beat a particular opponent in a particular week. If I think I can win 80-40 over my opponent, I'll set my lineup to do that. I won't blow up my bench trying to run up the score to 120-40.  

My main league is H2H and has H2H tiebreakers, and I play all season with that in mind. I focus intentionally on beating conference rivals and constantly manage my roster two or three weeks ahead to have the right streamers in place for DST and other positions. I don't believe that a simple "points for" would be a better gauge of management. 

H2H is the WORST POSSIBLE tiebreaker in fantasy, because fantasy teams don't share NFL bye weeks. While the fairness evens out over the course of the season (with regards to total wins), there is an inherent disadvantage for fantasy teams in any given week. Why should a team lose a tiebreak to a lesser opponent because they had two studs on a bye and another out that week hurt while their clearly weaker opponent was at full strength? If I've outscored a guy by 250 points on the year but he happened to beat me the one randomly determined week I faced him because he was at full strength I'd be pissed...there is NOTHING fair about that.

Total points is, IMHO, the BEST POSSIBLE tiebreaker because you should always be striving for your best total points in any given week. YOur example is terrible...sure you might keep a slightly sub=par option on your roster because of a future match-up, but you do so with the idea in mind of better points overall. Not to mention on the roster doesn't mean STARTED. The argument is over total points SCORED, not possible.

IN one of my leagues, I scored the second most points in the league, a full 150 points ahead of the third. Yet somehow had the highest points scored against and ended up in a 4 or 5 way tie record wise for the #2 seed. Had circular H2H been utilized as the first tiebreaker, I would have been....probably the fourth seed, maybe even eliminated.

 

[renesauz]

Puzzled by the question, since it isn't consistent with your first post:

If Donkey beat Breaston H2H and no other teams in the original tie played each other, then step 1 is that H2H eliminates Breaston, and then you go to conf. record to break the tie between the remaining teams.

On the other hand, if H2H was circular (team A beat team B beat team C beat team A) tyhen you are already past that and don't go back to it.  In that case, H2H eliminates nobody, so you went to conf. record, which eliminated one, and now you are on to the NEXT tiebreak to decide between Donkey and Breaston.  The results of H2H dont change just because a later tiebreak was invoked.

At least that's the way I run tiebreakers...you could put the exact opposite into your rules, which is why tiebreak rules (as others have noted) need to be VERY precisely spelled out in a ruleset.  If yours isn't then somebody is going tombe upset regardless, because you are making the ruling now when it affects someone rather than before the season when everyone still expects to be the 1-seed.

Points are certainly an easier tiebreak to manage, but a robust ruleset can easily handle whatever tiebreak you like, and for me, if it's a local league with active friends, I want the fun of H2H rivalries that matter, so we use H2H and division record, etc.  Points makes the most sense for online leagues with strangers, imo, since the rivalries don't really exist.

Per NFL rules, which the OP said they followed, H2H between multiple teams is only used if every team played every other team an equal number of times. You can't include 2 of the 3 teams in an early tiebreak to eliminate one while the third is safe...not sure how anyone could think this way

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Hi all,

Years ago someone helped me with this. User Name was something like Eligno ______. (I can picture his avatar)

We try to stay with NFL Rules.

This will be for the 4, 5 and 6 seeds.

We have 3 teams all in different divisions with a 6-6 record.

No one team holds a head to head tie break so the next step I believe is the Conference record.

2 teams are 5-5 and 1 team is 4-6.

Now is the correct step to eliminate the 4-6 team briefly and then match the 2 other teams up against each other starting with the head to head record?

Or do you just keep all 3 teams in the comparison and go to division record.

Basically the way its done will flip flop the 4 and 5 teams.

Since they will play each other regardless it's not the end of the world, but I'd like to get it right.

Thanks for any help.

probably @Ignoratio Elenchi

 

[beerbuff]

Personally, I hate this. 

I'm playing H2H, and I plan on winning H2H every week. Therefore, I want to win games, not amass points. Sometimes it's better management to intentionally carry players who may not score a lot in a particular week, if they'll still do just enough to win that week's games, in order to make sure you have them for better matchups later. In some leagues, H2H is a better tiebreaker. During the season, I manage bye weeks to not fall during in-conference games or look for covariance opportunities to make it more likely to beat a particular opponent in a particular week. If I think I can win 80-40 over my opponent, I'll set my lineup to do that. I won't blow up my bench trying to run up the score to 120-40.  

My main league is H2H and has H2H tiebreakers, and I play all season with that in mind. I focus intentionally on beating conference rivals and constantly manage my roster two or three weeks ahead to have the right streamers in place for DST and other positions. I don't believe that a simple "points for" would be a better gauge of management. 

I like points because it removes the luck factor of schedule matchups,  We use record for conference champion and the top 2 point getters that aren't conference champs get in on a wildcard and also use points as a tiebreaker for conference champions.

 

[Arodin]

Morning arodin,

The initial head to head between the 3 teams were circular.

That then put us to the conference record tie breaker where  1 team was eliminated with a 4-6 record, leaving 2 teams at 5-5.

Here's where I was inquiring since the 1 team was ruled out of the 4 seed do you now go back to the head to head between the 2 remaining teams where donkey had the win over breaston.

Or do you not go back to head to head and move on from the conference to the division?

Luckily this doesn't change the matchups as 4 plays 5 regardless, but I'd still like to get it right.

The way I do it, they are nested.  For example:

Ties are broken by H2H.  

If H2H results in a tie, the tied teams are sorted by conf. record.

If conf. record is tied, those tied teams are sorted by div. record.

If div. recors ismtied, those tied teams are sorted by....

I do not go back to the beginning upon an elimination; I keep going until one team "wins," award that team the seed in question, and THEN, if there is another seed to be filled in, the remaining teams start the process over.  Which in your case would stop with their H2H result, since the team already in isn't part of the new tie.

This is by no means the only way to do it.  It's what makes sense to me, so it is how tiebreakers are implemented in the leagues I run.  Other systems will work equally well, provided they are well spelled out in the rules.

Those fo you looking to points as the holy grail still need a plan for the unlikely event that two teams end with equal points.  Rare, but you know it will happen to someone eventually.

 

[GregR]

Here are the NFL tie break rules.

I believe the two questions you're asking are answered by this one part:

OTHER TIE-BREAKING PROCEDURES

Only one club advances to the playoffs in any tie-breaking step. Remaining tied clubs revert to the first step of the applicable division or Wild Card tie-breakers. As an example, if two clubs remain tied in any tie-breaker step after all other clubs have been eliminated, the procedure reverts to Step 1 of the two-club format to determine the winner. When one club wins the tiebreaker, all other clubs revert to Step 1 of the applicable two-club or three-club format.

So the tiebreak for 4th that starts with 3 teams is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the tiebreak done for 5th after the previous spot has been awarded.  They start back at step 1.

And in the middle of the 4th place tiebreaker, when one of the 3 tied teams is eliminated and you get down to 2 teams left for that spot, you restart with those two teams back at Step 1 of the two-team formula.

Though I agree with those who suggest in the future, amend rules to make it simple.  Record (use decimal scoring to limit ties there too), total points, coin flip.   

 

[Gally]

Let's say you're up 130-110. Your opponent still has AJ Green going on Monday Night Football. You have a QB left to play, and you can pick either Ben Roethlisberger or Andy Dalton who both play in MNF. Ben is projected to outscore Dalton by 15 points. 

You do understand that Dalton is the correct play, right? 

That is an isolated case where you are trying to maximize your win strategy for a very specific situation.  In the overall scheme of things wins are more important because points would only come into play as a tie break (if that is the method being used). 

In general, I think we could all agree that we want the most deserving (best) teams moving onto the playoffs.  The debate is what really is the best representation to decide which are the best teams in case of an identical record.  In my opinion head to head doesn't necessarily equate to "best" team.  Too many factors come into play for one specific week (bye, injury, bad NFL matchup, etc) that can skew that single week that doesn't specifically represent the true performance of a team.  Using total points scored shows which team is the best team.  The point may be to win but there is much luck that goes into the schedule.  Total points scored is a representation over a longer period of time that shows which team is the best.  That is why total points is my preferred tie break situation.  Plus it is simple to know where you stand all season long.  In the case where two teams score identical points for the year then head 2 head would be used as the second tie break. 

 

[zftcg]

Let's say you're up 130-110. Your opponent still has AJ Green going on Monday Night Football. You have a QB left to play, and you can pick either Ben Roethlisberger or Andy Dalton who both play in MNF. Ben is projected to outscore Dalton by 15 points. 

You do understand that Dalton is the correct play, right? 

For a MNF game, yes. But if it's a Sunday 1 p.m. game, Dalton is only the play if you are a huge favorite and want to limit downside (and possibly not even then).

 

[Gally]

I disagree. I think putting your team in the best position to win more often is a better measurement of who performed better. 

Very true.  I agree you are trying to put your team in the best position to win and in 99% of the cases that means playing the players you believe will score more points that week. 

The scenario you gave as an example is an extreme case where you have the opportunity to "block" a player by using a player (that you just happen to have during that specific matchup and playing the last game of the week).  This occurs vary rarely to the point that you change your lineup because of the known information.  Most of the time you do not have that opportunity and would play Roethlisberger because he gives  you the best opportunity to score more points.  

Scoring the most points possible will always give you the best possible chance to win.  If you are guaranteed that Ben will score more than Dalton you would play Ben even with the AJ Green situation in your example.  The problem is you don't know who will score more for sure so you use the best game theory solution for that very rare situation and start Dalton.  Wins are more important than points at that stage.  However, at the completion of the regular season if two teams have the same number of wins I still believe the team with the most total points scored is the better team and that should be the tie breaker.

 

[TheAssassin]

I disagree. I think putting your team in the best position to win more often is a better measurement of who performed better. 

As I stated BOTH teams are EQUAL in wins, so they've equally put their team in the best position to win.  How do you decide further, randomly picking a game or two or points over a whole season?

 

[steelerfan1]

Wait. This happened before and you guys didn’t learn enough from that experience to develop some rules governing this?

I don’t quite get that.

Well, in fairness, a version of the league has been around since 1999 and this will be the 2nd time I Got a brain cramp.

Had it been more common it would have probably been addressed.

We will update the process for the 2018 season.

 

[steelerfan1]

probably @Ignoratio Elenchi

Yup, thanks Dr.

 

[steelerfan1]

For the people who like total points as a tie breaker... would a team that has a few blow up games during the year but overall is fair to midlin the majority of the year deserve the shot over a team that's been really consistent on a weekly basis but has a few less points?

 

[steelerfan1]

Here are the NFL tie break rules.

I believe the two questions you're asking are answered by this one part:

So the tiebreak for 4th that starts with 3 teams is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the tiebreak done for 5th after the previous spot has been awarded.  They start back at step 1.

And in the middle of the 4th place tiebreaker, when one of the 3 tied teams is eliminated and you get down to 2 teams left for that spot, you restart with those two teams back at Step 1 of the two-team formula.

Though I agree with those who suggest in the future, amend rules to make it simple.  Record (use decimal scoring to limit ties there too), total points, coin flip.   

Thanks Greg, for some reason my mind isn't wrapping around it. I'm getting old now and it's probably time to dumb it down for 2018. Don't even get me going on the MFL waiver process this year...

 

[DropKick]

So since donkey beat breaston in their head to head, donkey would be 4 seed, breaston 5 and fuzz 6, correct?

The way the NFL does it is it starts as a 3 way tie...

First, Fuzz is eliminated (conference record) and you break the tie between Donkey and Breaston.  Donkey is the 4...

Now you proceed WITH THE FIRST TIEBREAKER again to break the two team tie with Breaston and Fuzz.  The 5 might be Fuzz even though he was eliminated early in the 3 team tie breaker.

 

[steelerfan1]

The way the NFL does it is it starts as a 3 way tie...

First, Fuzz is eliminated (conference record) and you break the tie between Donkey and Breaston.  Donkey is the 4...

Now you proceed WITH THE FIRST TIEBREAKER again to break the two team tie with Breaston and Fuzz.  The 5 might be Fuzz even though he was eliminated early in the 3 team tie breaker.

Breaston did beat fuzz in their head to head so think fuzz is 6. Thanks for your input.

 

[TheAssassin]

For the people who like total points as a tie breaker... would a team that has a few blow up games during the year but overall is fair to midlin the majority of the year deserve the shot over a team that's been really consistent on a weekly basis but has a few less points?

Actually that brings up a good point.  I really prefer "All Play" record as a tie breaker.  It's the record if you played every team each week, it's the best of both. 

 

[TheAssassin]

We are talking about "Tie Breakers" not Wins/Losses vs Points.  I agree, Wins/Losses is more fun for determining standings.