need your help to determine what is the most fair tiebreaker (1 Viewer)

[cylenz]

i need your help sharks. am i too paranoid about this? i am playing in a 12 team money league. the commish never set a tie break procedure for the playoffs. I ended up tying a team in the semi-finals and the commish decided to arbitrarily use bench points to break the tie. i never played the team that i tied with head to head.

my opinion is that commish should just take the scores out to the decimals to determine the winner since no one knew that bench scoring would be a tie breaker.

i'd appreciate your opinion on this!

thanks!!

<edited> to add the coin flip option.

 

[MaddHatter]

Where can I vote for: Follow the league rules option?

 

[Wrigley]

i need your help sharks. am i too paranoid about this? i am playing in a 12 team money league. the commish never set a tie break procedure for the playoffs. I ended up tying a team in the semi-finals and the commish decided to arbitrarily use bench points to break the tie. i never played the team that i tied with head to head.my opinion is that commish should just take the scores out to the decimals to determine the winner since no one knew that bench scoring would be a tie breaker.i'd appreciate your opinion on this!thanks!!

You lost huh?What do your league rules say?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Higher seed should win.

Using bench points to declare a winner is as stupid as stupid can get.

 

[cylenz]

that's the thing, there are no rules for playoff ties. the commish just decided arbitrarily. yes i lost so if everyone thinks the decision is fair then i'll eat the humble pie, to me i think we should just look at the decimals...seems simple to me.

 

[stevegamer]

Assuming there's no rule, he needs to pick something that's somewhat reasonable. I can see bench points as reasonable, extending the scoring to decimals is definitely reasonable.

You REALLY need to read a definition of collusion - this isn't smelling anything like it.

Make sure that whatever is decided here will hold for the rest of the year. And propose decimal scoring for next year, in any event.

 

[fsufan]

decimal scoring is the fairest way. some bench players may be back ups/handcuffs who never get any playing time

 

[cylenz]

decimal scoring is the fairest way. some bench players may be back ups/handcuffs who never get any playing time

the reason i think it may be collusion, is because the commish awarded the guy i played the first waiver pick after the first game, there was no drawing for waiver order and all of sudden the waiver order was published and the guy i played was number 1 (needless to say he picked up eddie royal). so looking at that and the fact that he picked bench points as the tiebreaker (i have lots of handcuffs, sproles etc.) makes me think that something is fishy.overall my issue is that he picks bench scoring to be the tiebreaker when it was not specified in any of the league rules. that's what drives me nuts, i would be okay with losing if the decimals showed that i did (he wouldn't even calculate them).

 

[crush304]

coin flip

 

[cylenz]

coin flip

lol i would actually look at that as more fair than the bench scoring tiebreaker arbitrary decision.

 

[Die]

Without a league rule set down beforehand, the decision ought to be the commissioner's discretion. If you don't trust the commissioner to make that call, you could try to make someone you trust the commissioner, or leave the league. I don't think you have any recourse here because the entire point of having a commissioner is to make a final ruling in matters like this so drama doesn't continue interminably. You agreed to his commissionership so you have to live by his decision.

 

[cylenz]

Without a league rule set down beforehand, the decision ought to be the commissioner's discretion. If you don't trust the commissioner to make that call, you could try to make someone you trust the commissioner, or leave the league. I don't think you have any recourse here because the entire point of having a commissioner is to make a final ruling in matters like this so drama doesn't continue interminably. You agreed to his commissionership so you have to live by his decision.

yup you're right, it's his discretion, i was just wanted to see what everyone else would have done in the same situation...

 

[WisWolvrns]

Higher seed should win. Using bench points to declare a winner is as stupid as stupid can get.

You can't just throw in new scoring options after the fact. The higher seeded team should just get the nod in a tie. Think of it as home field advantage. That is how we run it, the home team in the playoffs wins any ties. Simple and gives teams alittle more incentive to try and improve their playoff seeding all year for the off chance a tie happens in the playoffs.Every sportsbook takes home field in consideration too, typically giving the nod of two like ranked teams to the home team... so it's a pretty common convention.

 

[zanti8]

highest seeded team

 

[Shrek]

The only way highest seed should be used is if it's specified in the rules. To decide on this mid-season (or worse, mid-playoffs) is not reasonable.

Bench scoring is ridiculous. People have different players on their benches for different reasons.

Out of your choices, decimal scoring is the fairest way, no question.

And get this resolved before next season!

 

[LionsFan78]

Never ever use bench points to determine anything

 

[sirelfman]

coin flip

With no pre-established rule, this is reasonable and the fairest possible resolution. That being said, I think using decimal scoring is the most reasonable of the choices offered. Does the league management software not have a "default" tiebreaker?

 

[zdaddy]

Never ever use bench points to determine anything

I was in a league for awhile that you had to set a couple of bench players that would be used in the event in a tie. Wasn't a bad rule now that I think about it.

 

[BLOX]

How about settling the difference by playing a second championship game this weekend?

 

[LionsFan78]

Never ever use bench points to determine anything

I was in a league for awhile that you had to set a couple of bench players that would be used in the event in a tie. Wasn't a bad rule now that I think about it.

Yes, if you designate one exact bench position to determine a tiebreak, that can work.I was referring to using total bench points...which is absurd and screws anyone who 1) carries handcuffs, 2) rosters injured players (keeper/dynasty), or 3) doesn't load up on QB's

 

[PosterNutBag]

here is a related thread for you in case you wanted to see some additional viewpoints

 

[PosterNutBag]

just to throw my two cents into this thread....

Facts:

you are trying to break a tie in a week 15 game ... no matter what you decide a new rule MUST be created to break this tie ... obviously the commish needs to decide what is the fairest way to decide all of this AFTER the fact

Thoughts/Conclusion:

to me, it makes the most sense to decide the winner of this week 15 matchup based on decisions made by each teams that were not yet judged by your scoring system ... i am referring to the starting lineups of both teams and any yardage that went unjudged b/c the league has integer based scoring instead of decimal scoring ... just use the same scoring set up (if it is 10yds=1pt ... then 1 yard now equals 0.1 pts ... same thing, but broken down to the smallest denomination of 1 yard).

obviously this situation reeks of controversy since it is being decided after the fact, but since there is no rule already in place it seems that the fairest and unbiased way to decide it is by taking the judgement of their starting lineups one level deeper than your current non-decimal based scoring system does

 

[Marked]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Varmint]

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

You play all season for the higher seed in the playoffs...why?

Because the higher seed takes any ties during the playoffs.

How else could the seeding be of benefit to anyone?

 

[footballnerd]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.

If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

 

[Varmint]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...I don't like decimal scoring...BUT..since the "decimal" ususally comes from yardage.....Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

 

[blackjack23]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...decimal scoring sucks.Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

 

[footballnerd]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...decimal scoring sucks.Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

Using decimals would only require to the tenth, so its pretty easy. How do you distinguish between 6 and 10 yds then? You just throw out the smaller numbers?

 

[PosterNutBag]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules. For example, you are in a 12-team league with 3 divisions of 4 teams in each. The top 3 seeds are the division winners and the next 3 best teams get the wild card spots. The top two division winners get the first round byes to week 15. Let's assume that there was a division winner at 9-4, who ended up as the 2 seed with a first round bye. This 2 seed had the 3 worst teams in his division and was 6-0 against them, but just 3-4 against the rest of the league. Now let's assume the best wildcard team finished 2nd in his division and was also 9-4 but lost the division title on a tiebreaker and ended up with the 4 seed. This 4 seed defeated the 2 seed in their only head to head regular season meeting.Given the above situation, I think just saying that seeding should be the tiebreaker is silly (unless decided BEFORE the fact). Just b/c you are the higher seed, doesn't necessarily mean you are the better team. It's clear in the above example that the 2 seed is overrated due to a weak division, while the 4 seed is underrated due to a stronger division....plus the 4 seed beat the 2 seed during the regular season.A real life example would be in the NFC this season. Arizona has clinched the NFC West title a couple weeks ago and can be no worse than the 4 seed. It appears reasonable that they may finish at 9-7. It appears that there will also be an NFC South team, like Tampa Bay, finishing at 11-5 with the 5 seed. Under this thought process, Arizona should be considered the better team compared to Tampa, which I disagree with b/c all that does is perpetuate the fact that Arizona played in the worst division in football and further rewards them for it (I am glad the NFL uses sudden death OT as the tiebreaker in this case).Obviously something needs to be decided here and since there previously was no rule and we are talking about something that took place in a given week, why shouldn't we only use information from that given week to make this decision? I mean, the slate is wiped clean during the playoffs and the regular season is over. If the league decided ahead of time that the regular season results should be the tiebreaker, then so be it. That did not happen here.The reason decimal scoring is the best solution is b/c you could never argue that you would have started someone different had you known it was decimal scoring instead of integer scoring. My point is that decimal scoring doesn't change the scoring rules, it simply accounts for yardage that integer scoring ignored. I honestly don't understand how playoff seeding could be considered more fair when it wasn't decided before the fact. Use something in the game that was not yet used and can still be judged. It's the most fair and unbiased approach here.

 

[blackjack23]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...decimal scoring sucks.Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

The funny thing about this is he basically goes to decimal pt scoring to break ties. Why not just do it before any ties?

 

[blackjack23]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules. For example, you are in a 12-team league with 3 divisions of 4 teams in each. The top 3 seeds are the division winners and the next 3 best teams get the wild card spots. The top two division winners get the first round byes to week 15. Let's assume that there was a division winner at 9-4, who ended up as the 2 seed with a first round bye. This 2 seed had the 3 worst teams in his division and was 6-0 against them, but just 3-4 against the rest of the league. Now let's assume the best wildcard team finished 2nd in his division and was also 9-4 but lost the division title on a tiebreaker and ended up with the 4 seed. This 4 seed defeated the 2 seed in their only head to head regular season meeting.Given the above situation, I think just saying that seeding should be the tiebreaker is silly (unless decided BEFORE the fact). Just b/c you are the higher seed, doesn't necessarily mean you are the better team. It's clear in the above example that the 2 seed is overrated due to a weak division, while the 4 seed is underrated due to a stronger division....plus the 4 seed beat the 2 seed during the regular season.A real life example would be in the NFC this season. Arizona has clinched the NFC West title a couple weeks ago and can be no worse than the 4 seed. It appears reasonable that they may finish at 9-7. It appears that there will also be an NFC South team, like Tampa Bay, finishing at 11-5 with the 5 seed. Under this thought process, Arizona should be considered the better team compared to Tampa, which I disagree with b/c all that does is perpetuate the fact that Arizona played in the worst division in football and further rewards them for it (I am glad the NFL uses sudden death OT as the tiebreaker in this case).Obviously something needs to be decided here and since there previosuly was no rule and we are talking about something that took place in a given week, why shouldn't we only use information from that given week to make this decision? I mean, the slate is wiped clean during the playoffs and the regular season is over. If the league decided ahead of time that the regular season results should be the tiebreaker, then so be it. That did not happen here.The reason decimal scoring is the best solution is b/c you could never argue that you would have started someone different has you known it was decimal scoring instead of integer scoring. My point is that decimal scoring doesn't change the scoring rules, it simply accounts for yardage that integer scoring ignored. I honestly don't understand how playoff seeding could be considered more fair when it wasn't decided before the fact. Use something in the game that was not yet used and can still be judged. It's the most fair and unbiased approach here.

But in your example above Arizona gets the home playoff game and not TB.

 

[Varmint]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules.

There are no "imbalanced schedules" in a 14-team, 13-Week season...eveybody plays everybody once.AND....since the "decimal" in a decimal scoring league ususally comes from yardage.....Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's...Yards don't matter unless its a tie.Ties in the playoffs...(Weeks 14 & 15)....the higher seeded team wins.Besides...ANY format will work...as long as the COMMISSIONER has the foresite to include it in the rules BEFORE the first kickoff!!

 

[cylenz]

coin flip

With no pre-established rule, this is reasonable and the fairest possible resolution. That being said, I think using decimal scoring is the most reasonable of the choices offered. Does the league management software not have a "default" tiebreaker?

it does..except the commish left it as leave games as a tie. so there is no tiebreaker!

 

[PosterNutBag]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules.

There are no "imbalanced schedules" in a 14-team, 13-Week season...eveybody plays everybody once.AND....since the "decimal" in a decimal scoring league ususally comes from yardage.....Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's

That is one particular league where that is true. Unfortunately, that point is not valid in this thread since the OP is talking about a 12-team league.I agree that your proposal many times ends in the same result. I just think it is much more arbitarary compared to simply judging something that normally gets judged, but is only ignored b/c the scoring system truncates the decimal for each player.

 

[Varmint]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules.

There are no "imbalanced schedules" in a 14-team, 13-Week season...eveybody plays everybody once.AND....since the "decimal" in a decimal scoring league ususally comes from yardage.....

Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's

That is one particular league where that is true.

Which is one reason why I formed my league in this format.No whining like "He had an easier schedule than I did!!"

 

[Shrek]

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

You play all season for the higher seed in the playoffs...why?

Because the higher seed takes any ties during the playoffs.

How else could the seeding be of benefit to anyone?

No, because the higher your seed is , the lower of a seed you will play against at the start. The whole point of seeding is to prevent the two best teams from having to face each other in the first round of the playoffs. Edit: To explain further, it rewards a team who does well during the regular season by creating a presumably easier path for them to the championship.As I said before, allowing a higher seed to win in the event of a tie is fine, as long as you have this spelled out before the situation actually arises. To impose this rule after the fact is practically cheating.

 

[Varmint]

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

You play all season for the higher seed in the playoffs...why?

Because the higher seed takes any ties during the playoffs.

How else could the seeding be of benefit to anyone?

No, because presumably, the higher your seed is , the lower of a seed you will play against at the start. The whole point of seeding is to prevent the two best teams from having to face each other in the first round of the playoffs.As I said before, allowing a higher seed to win in the event of a tie is fine, as long as you have this spelled out before the situation actually arises. To impose this rule after the fact is practically cheating.

I wholeheartedly agree with your last statement...ANY rule concerning ties MUST be spelled out BEFORE the seaon starts...I halfheartedly agree with your first comment.

While I do agree that it offers the best chance of the best teams meeting at the end...it also gives teams a reason to win and not to "tank" at the end of the season to keep someone out of the playoffs.

It happened in 2001 in our league.

A team's players were on fire at the end of the season and all he had to do was to win while another team lost.

The current #1 team really didn't want to face this team and his matchups in the first round of the playoffs so he tanked Week 13 (the final week).

It worked.

That other team won his game but since the other team won he didn't make the playoffs.

It also dropped the team who tanked from #1 to #3 in the seedings.

His Week 14 game ended in a tie with the #2 ranked team and since the rules were in place...he made an early exit from the playoffs.

Believe me...it works.

 

[PosterNutBag]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules.

There are no "imbalanced schedules" in a 14-team, 13-Week season...eveybody plays everybody once.AND....since the "decimal" in a decimal scoring league ususally comes from yardage.....

Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's

That is one particular league where that is true.

Which is one reason why I formed my league in this format.No whining like "He had an easier schedule than I did!!"

Why do you keep taking parts of my posts out of context? If you reread only the history you are quoting me with, you miss my full explanation and point I was making in each instance. You are sidetracking the discussion with the way you are posting here. This discussion isn't about what is the best way to do things. It's about what what is the most fair way to decide a tie when your rules didn't plan for it ahead of time.That's nice you formed your league like that and with that format. Unfortunately the league mentioned in the OP didn't have the foresight to decide a playoff tiebreaker ahead of time and in this thread we are discussing what the best solution would be to resolve this issue in the most fair and unbiased manner.

 

[cylenz]

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

You play all season for the higher seed in the playoffs...why?

Because the higher seed takes any ties during the playoffs.

How else could the seeding be of benefit to anyone?

No, because the higher your seed is , the lower of a seed you will play against at the start. The whole point of seeding is to prevent the two best teams from having to face each other in the first round of the playoffs. Edit: To explain further, it rewards a team who does well during the regular season by creating a presumably easier path for them to the championship.As I said before, allowing a higher seed to win in the event of a tie is fine, as long as you have this spelled out before the situation actually arises. To impose this rule after the fact is practically cheating.

That's the whole reason for my question. There were no rules for breaking the tie. picking a rule is a commissioner right, all i am asking is what would you do? seeding in our league gives the top 2 seeded teams a bye week (seeding is determined by record and pts scored). if ties were to be broken by seeding or pts scored it would seem to give WAY too much advantage to the higher seeded teams.again, seems like if you just calculated the scores to the tenths that all this would be solved, i can't understand why the commish didn't even want to consider it...

 

[Varmint]

How are ties determined for playoff seeding? You don't need to reinvent the wheel.

During the playoffs the ONLY tie-breaker should be the seeding..

Otherwise..what's the use of playing for a higher seed?

Using seeding can many times perpuate the results from imbalanced schedules.

There are no "imbalanced schedules" in a 14-team, 13-Week season...eveybody plays everybody once.AND....since the "decimal" in a decimal scoring league ususally comes from yardage.....

Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's

That is one particular league where that is true.

Which is one reason why I formed my league in this format.No whining like "He had an easier schedule than I did!!"

Why do you keep taking parts of my posts out of context? If you reread only the history you are quoting me with, you miss my full explanation and point I was making in each instance. You are sidetracking the discussion with the way you are posting here. This discussion isn't about what is the best way to do things. It's about what what is the most fair way to decide a tie when your rules didn't plan for it ahead of time.That's nice you formed your league like that and with that format. Unfortunately the league mentioned in the OP didn't have the foresight to decide a playoff tiebreaker ahead of time and in this thread we are discussing what the best solution would be to resolve this issue in the most fair and unbiased manner.

The flip a damn coin...sit down at the computer and type out rules.Without the discussion...it would be a two post thread.

There is no way you can implement ANY rule at this point and make it fair.

 

[LionsFan78]

As I said before, allowing a higher seed to win in the event of a tie is fine, as long as you have this spelled out before the situation actually arises. To impose this rule after the fact is practically cheating.

Moral of the story right there. I can't believe how many threads come up about this every day around here. Any worthwhile commish needs to spell these rules out before kickoff of the very first game of the season...period.

 

[PosterNutBag]

The flip a damn coin...sit down at the computer and type out rules.Without the discussion...it would be a two post thread.There is no way you can implement ANY rule at this point and make it fair.

I agree that any decision made is going to be considered unfair by someone. Your last few posts in quoting me were steering the discussion off topic, that's all. I agree, your approach for setting up a league ahead of time (with those tiebreakers) ends a lot of arguments before they would otherwise begin. That's just off topic, though, since this thread is about deciding what to do in a totally different situation.

 

[runner06]

Either decimal scoring or a coin flip.

 

[Flipper Rules]

If there is no rule breaking ties in the regular season, then the only fair way to do this is randomly. I would vote coin flip.

In one of my leagues, for the playoffs you have to rank an "order" of your starters. Whoever has the highest #1 points wins, #2 if needed, on down the line.

Should neither team provide a tiebreaker ranking, I, as commish, randomly draw a position and whoever has the most points at that position is declared the winner.

The "higher seed" theory pre-determines who wins a tie, and that's fine if it's in the rules but it's kind of dumb. Would the NFL dictate a higher seed team wins all ties? Seeding is really more about the matchups than about helping to determine a winner in the playoffs.

Bench scoring isn't fair as you could obviously do different things with your roster during the season if you know that's a tiebreaker.

The only true fair thing is to do something randomly. I like the "pick a position" rule we have as it still involves scoring in some way, but no matter what this commish does it should be done randomly.

 

[footballnerd]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...decimal scoring sucks.Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

The funny thing about this is he basically goes to decimal pt scoring to break ties. Why not just do it before any ties?

That's what I meant. Every league should HAVE decimal points to prevent ties. (does it say go to?)That being said, I'm with the coin flip since rules weren't established prior to the season.

 

[Varmint]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.

If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...decimal scoring sucks.Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

:X

The funny thing about this is he basically goes to decimal pt scoring to break ties. Why not just do it before any ties?

That's what I meant. Every league should HAVE decimal points to prevent ties. (does it say go to?)That being said, I'm with the coin flip since rules weren't established prior to the season.

What is this? Gymnastics?No league should have decimal point scoring.

Our league scored yardage points in blocks...not individually.

QB....1 pts @ 250 passing yds then 1 pt for every 25 yds thereafter.

RB....2 pts @ 100 yards from scrimmage...then 1 pt for every 25 yds thereafter

WR/TE....1 pt @ 75 yds receiving...then 1 pt for every 25 yds thereafter.

We use total yards from scrimmage to break ties

Total yardage should be the varialble used to break ties...not to determine the final score and I prefer final scores to be within reason of a football game...not a basketball game.

Our league's average pts per game was 31.5

 

[cylenz]

This is to determine a tie in the game right? Should be the same as the regular season tie determinations. Every league should have decimal points to prevent ties.

If its a tie in standings then the next tie breaker should be YTD points to determine who makes the playoffs.

Negative...decimal scoring sucks.Ties in a regular season game and the championship should be the total yds from scrimmage for all position players...ie...QB, RB's, WR/TE's.

The funny thing about this is he basically goes to decimal pt scoring to break ties. Why not just do it before any ties?

That's what I meant. Every league should HAVE decimal points to prevent ties. (does it say go to?)That being said, I'm with the coin flip since rules weren't established prior to the season.

What is this? Gymnastics?No league should have decimal point scoring.

Our league scored yardage points in blocks...not individually.

QB....1 pts @ 250 passing yds then 1 pt for every 25 yds thereafter.

RB....2 pts @ 100 yards from scrimmage...then 1 pt for every 25 yds thereafter

WR/TE....1 pt @ 75 yds receiving...then 1 pt for every 25 yds thereafter.

We use total yards from scrimmage to break ties

Total yardage should be the varialble used to break ties...not to determine the final score and I prefer final scores to be within reason of a football game...not a basketball game.

Our league's average pts per game was 31.5

i understand and that makes sense to some degree. but the original point of my question was, what would you do to break a tie when NO tie breaker was established by the commish.

 

[Great White Hope]

Even though I originally voted for bench points, the more I think about it, the fairest way would be to use the YTD points for the season. The team that scored the most points during the season is IMO the better team and therefore should advance to the next round. If this was a championship game, then play another week to determine the winner.

 

[Don Quixote]

Why not just advance both teams to the finals and have a three-way final? Guarantee the other semifinal winner no worse than 2nd place winnings.

 

[cylenz]

Why not just advance both teams to the finals and have a three-way final? Guarantee the other semifinal winner no worse than 2nd place winnings.

someone actually did suggest that, but the commish didn't buy it. for some reason he thought bench points was the best solution. wacked out commish in my opinion...but he is the commish what can you do?