TIEBREAKER QUESTION (1 Viewer)

[RBM]

Thanks

 

[code]

Our tiebreaker rules were posted here

 

[midtown luchas]

id like to refer to this post to make my point:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t&p=5968969

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.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Whatever it says in the rules my league agreed upon before the season started.

(Total points)

 

[Marc Levin]

Just like the NFL, it should be H2H if you are in an H2H league. Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system.

We used to do H2H, then division record (since you play every team once, but some teams in your division twice, only division opponents can tie the H2H tiebreaker). Then it would go to common opponents, then points.

A couple years ago, we simplified the process to H2H, and if H2H is a split, then PF.

We did this because the 6th seed in our league's playoffs is the team with the most points for that is not already in the playoffs as a 1-5 seed, regardless of record. That way, a team that had bad luck, but a ton of points for, has a great shot of making the playoffs - and it emphasizes what FF is all about - scoring points.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

id like to refer to this post to make my point:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t&p=5968969

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.

I am not sure how power rankings are figured in the CBS league but the power ranking calculation in MFL is a joke.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Just like the NFL, it should be H2H if you are in an H2H league. Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system.

We used to do H2H, then division record (since you play every team once, but some teams in your division twice, only division opponents can tie the H2H tiebreaker). Then it would go to common opponents, then points.

A couple years ago, we simplified the process to H2H, and if H2H is a split, then PF.

We did this because the 6th seed in our league's playoffs is the team with the most points for that is not already in the playoffs as a 1-5 seed, regardless of record. That way, a team that had bad luck, but a ton of points for, has a great shot of making the playoffs - and it emphasizes what FF is all about - scoring points.

Hypocrite.Is it about scoring points, or winning games head to head?

 

[red]

2 teams tie: HTH > division record > PF > coin toss

3 or more teams tie > HTH; if HTH cannot be determined (i.e. division opponents played each other twice while the third team once or an even split of games > division record > PF > coin toss

 

[Marc Levin]

Just like the NFL, it should be H2H if you are in an H2H league. Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system.

We used to do H2H, then division record (since you play every team once, but some teams in your division twice, only division opponents can tie the H2H tiebreaker). Then it would go to common opponents, then points.

A couple years ago, we simplified the process to H2H, and if H2H is a split, then PF.

We did this because the 6th seed in our league's playoffs is the team with the most points for that is not already in the playoffs as a 1-5 seed, regardless of record. That way, a team that had bad luck, but a ton of points for, has a great shot of making the playoffs - and it emphasizes what FF is all about - scoring points.

Hypocrite.Is it about scoring points, or winning games head to head?

if I'm a hypocrite, you are ignorant for simply grabbing those two stastements and finding them incongruous.

First tiebreaker = H2H

Second tiebreaker = points for.

Whats the problem?

 

[Ned]

2 teams tie: HTH > division record > PF > coin toss3 or more teams tie > HTH; if HTH cannot be determined (i.e. division opponents played each other twice while the third team once or an even split of games > division record > PF > coin toss

its as easy as this folks...

 

[bonscott]

Within the division:

H2H > Division Win % > Total points

For Wildcards across divisions:

Total points > H2H > Division Win %

Why the difference for wildcards? Because not everyone plays every other team outside the division or may play only once. We don't want to award a wildcard spot simply based on one week a team won.

 

[Marc Levin]

2 teams tie: HTH > division record > PF > coin toss

3 or more teams tie > HTH; if HTH cannot be determined (i.e. division opponents played each other twice while the third team once or an even split of games > division record > PF > coin toss

its as easy as this folks...

Exactly why we went to H2H and then PF.

Nothing to think about or calculate - and with decimal scoring, the likelihood of a tied PF is extremely remote.

 

[One]

I think it should always be

1. Record

2. Total Points

3. H2H

Record already has a TON of luck involved, why put even MORE weight on luck?

It seems every year I play my division rival with all my best players on bye. Makes no sense.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Just like the NFL, it should be H2H if you are in an H2H league. Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system.

We used to do H2H, then division record (since you play every team once, but some teams in your division twice, only division opponents can tie the H2H tiebreaker). Then it would go to common opponents, then points.

A couple years ago, we simplified the process to H2H, and if H2H is a split, then PF.

We did this because the 6th seed in our league's playoffs is the team with the most points for that is not already in the playoffs as a 1-5 seed, regardless of record. That way, a team that had bad luck, but a ton of points for, has a great shot of making the playoffs - and it emphasizes what FF is all about - scoring points.

Hypocrite.Is it about scoring points, or winning games head to head?

if I'm a hypocrite, you are ignorant for simply grabbing those two stastements and finding them incongruous.

First tiebreaker = H2H

Second tiebreaker = points for.

Whats the problem?

I was just poking fun because you say "what FF is all about - scoring" but everything you talk about undermines the value of points vs wins. You put head-to-head wins above it in your tiebreakers. you dismissively says "Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system." as if any weekly matchup system that doesn't have head-to-head as the first tiebreaker is worthless and should be changed to a total points league. Your league rules clearly say WINS are what it's all about, not points. The fact that you dismiss any H2H league that uses total points as first tiebreaker further emphasises this. The fact that you can't see how a yearlong measure like total points could possibly be valued over individual H2H results from one week as a tiebreaker shows you are more concerned about wins. There's nothing wrong with that. But if you can't see the disconnect between the bulk of your comments and your own league setup versus your summary assessment of "what FF is all about - scoring points", you're the one who is not paying attention.

Yet I'm the one mods are calling out as ignorant...so never mind.

 

[videoguy505]

We go H2H, Division Record (each team plays 5 division opponents twice, so it's common opponnets), most points scored, most points scored against (harder strenghth of schedule), coinflip.

For the person who asked how Sportsline computes "Power Ranking":

Each team is given a score based on their rank 1-12 in 3 categories, 12 being the highest. Ties are possible and ranks in that case go to half-points (two team tied for the best record are given 11.5 points each, for example). Anyway, the three categories are Record, Total Points, and Breakdown.

Breakdown is each team's record vs. all the other teams every week. So, in a 12 team league that plays 13 weeks in the regular season, Breakdown for team A is computed by making a Win/Loss record for Team A vs the rest of the teams on each week. So, if Team A would have beaten Team B 7 weeks and lost 6 weeks, they have a 7-6 record. This is computed for every team, every week, for 143 total matchups per team. The Winning % is then computed and the best team gets the 12 points for the Power Ranking.

 

[Marc Levin]

Just like the NFL, it should be H2H if you are in an H2H league. Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system.

We used to do H2H, then division record (since you play every team once, but some teams in your division twice, only division opponents can tie the H2H tiebreaker). Then it would go to common opponents, then points.

A couple years ago, we simplified the process to H2H, and if H2H is a split, then PF.

We did this because the 6th seed in our league's playoffs is the team with the most points for that is not already in the playoffs as a 1-5 seed, regardless of record. That way, a team that had bad luck, but a ton of points for, has a great shot of making the playoffs - and it emphasizes what FF is all about - scoring points.

Hypocrite.Is it about scoring points, or winning games head to head?

if I'm a hypocrite, you are ignorant for simply grabbing those two stastements and finding them incongruous.

First tiebreaker = H2H

Second tiebreaker = points for.

Whats the problem?

I was just poking fun because you say "what FF is all about - scoring" but everything you talk about undermines the value of points vs wins. You put head-to-head wins above it in your tiebreakers. you dismissively says "Why have records/H2H at all otherwise? Just go to a pure points system." as if any weekly matchup system that doesn't have head-to-head as the first tiebreaker is worthless and should be changed to a total points league. Your league rules clearly say WINS are what it's all about, not points. The fact that you dismiss any H2H league that uses total points as first tiebreaker further emphasises this. The fact that you can't see how a yearlong measure like total points could possibly be valued over individual H2H results from one week as a tiebreaker shows you are more concerned about wins. There's nothing wrong with that. But if you can't see the disconnect between the bulk of your comments and your own league setup versus your summary assessment of "what FF is all about - scoring points", you're the one who is not paying attention.

Yet I'm the one mods are calling out as ignorant...so never mind.

don't see it - why bother with H2H at all if PF is the tiebreaker?Why not just go to weekly records determined by PF? The half of the league with the highest scores get a win and the bottom half get a loss - then PF as the 1st tiebreaker makes sense.

Your logic above is not appealing to me - if i beat you H2H and we end w/the same record, I should be ahead of you. If we split H2H, or somehow tied or never played each other, PF is the best deciding factor between us.

like i said, if i'm a hypocrite, then you are ignorant for grabbing bits and pieces from my post - since I am not a hypocrite, you are not ignorant.

 

[LTsharks]

id like to refer to this post to make my point:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t&p=5968969

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.

It is more then an interesting idea. In my opinion it is the best way to break a tie between 2 teams. Removes the luck factor of what week or weeks those two teams happened to meet and seems more fair then total points because it rewards consistency as well.For Example:

Team A beat Team B in week 4 (Team B's top RB and WR were on a bye that week) 90-78.

Team A = 1251 total points / Team B = 1247

Head to Head breakdown record = Team B over Team A 9-5

In my opinion, Team B is the better team here and deserves the wildcard.

Edited to add:

For my main league we use this as the third tiebreaker for division winners (3 divisions of 4 teams). head to head is first, followed by division record. We wanted to keep a strong emphasis on our divisional games. When they don't give an answer for a tiebreaker, we figure this is the most fair way to go.

For our wildcard, we start with head to head breakdown in an effor to get the best non division winner in the playoffs. We only have 1 wildcard team.

 

[Marc Levin]

we can throw numbers around all over the place for "fairness" - but the truth of the matter is that we run these things for fun - and part of the fun is beating your buddy - and if I beat my buddy and we have the same record, I'd be pissed if some mathematical formula was used to rank me below him.

I beat his butt in the regular season, I should go to the playoffs over him.

If we are tied in H2H, then overall yearly points for seems the BEST method for deciding between us - one of us made enough good decisions over the course of the year to have put up more fanatsy points than the other guy.

All this b.s. about what if we played every week of the year is, IMO, a real way of doiung this, and not partucularly fair given the vagaries of the NFL from week to week, and the in-season decisions we make based on matchups.

Might as well go to best starter and take ALL the skill out of it if you want to use that method for a tiebreaker. I was smarter than you and/or luckier than you on that given sunday - I get the playoff spot over you.

 

[LTsharks]

we can throw numbers around all over the place for "fairness" - but the truth of the matter is that we run these things for fun - and part of the fun is beating your buddy - and if I beat my buddy and we have the same record, I'd be pissed if some mathematical formula was used to rank me below him.I beat his butt in the regular season, I should go to the playoffs over him.If we are tied in H2H, then overall yearly points for seems the BEST method for deciding between us - one of us made enough good decisions over the course of the year to have put up more fanatsy points than the other guy.All this b.s. about what if we played every week of the year is, IMO, a real way of doiung this, and not partucularly fair given the vagaries of the NFL from week to week, and the in-season decisions we make based on matchups. Might as well go to best starter and take ALL the skill out of it if you want to use that method for a tiebreaker. I was smarter than you and/or luckier than you on that given sunday - I get the playoff spot over you.

How is going to best starter the same thing as head-to-head breakdown record? The breakdown absolutely takes into account all week to week, in season decisions that were used to have the best score every week of the season. Smarter(and like you said, luckier) all year, not just one random week.I agree with actual head to head records and divison records for divisional tiebreakers, there is a larger sample size of games (play each other 2 times, 6 divisional games). I just think the best thing to do is remove some luck from a wildcard tiebreaker where teams only played one time (or maybe not at all, or a different number of times for multiple team tiebreakers, etc)I haven't checked it for this year, but this method does closely follow total points as a tiebreaker. Odds are if you scored 200 more points then your buddy, you beat him in head to head breakdown record.By the way, thanks for the b.s. and nerd comments. Excellent.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

Our tiebreakers -

1. Overall record (first citeria)

2. Divisional record

3. Head to Head

4. Point differential

5. Points scored

6. Coin Flip

In fifteen years we have only had to use point differential one time. Not bad for a 12 team league where 8 teams make the playoffs. Usually things are decided by Divisional record, and occassionally it comes down to head-to-head. However each year you don't play one other team in the league, so if those teams tie in overall record and division record it comes down to differential.

 

[g5jamz]

Head to head UNLESS there is a 3-way tie. Then you do a head-2-head record between all 3. If all 3 games aren't equal in total for each...then it's a total points. If you have a tie after total points...then it's a divisional record. After divisional record...it's total points scored against. If you STILL have a damned tie after that...flip a coin.

 

[Marc Levin]

By the way, thanks for the b.s. and nerd comments. Excellent.

Yer welcome. I don't know how you fail to see this mathematrical nightmare (that probably requires its own computer program for accuracy) as a complete nerd way of making a tiebreaker. The easiest, most simple, least nerdy way to do a H2H tiebreaker in an H2H league is H2H - the second easiest is overall PF - everything else is heading towards nerdsville.

 

[lions327]

If the league is head to head, record is determined by head to head, then head to head MUST be the first tiebreaker.

 

[shuke]

id like to refer to this post to make my point:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t&p=5968969

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.

Then why even bother playing in a head-to-head league anyway?

 

[Marc Levin]

Removes the luck factor of what week or weeks those two teams happened to meet and seems more fair then total points because it rewards consistency as well.

BTW, this rationale is EXACTLY why that methodology is similar to best starter.Why the heck would you WANT to remove the luck factor from the given week that I beat a specific team? You, essentially, having us play each other every week of the year - that is a RIDICULOUS way to create playoff seeding in a H2H league. There are bye week issues, injury issues, WW issues - I may not have started the same lineup against you in week 9 that I played against you in week 5 - see the problem????Like I said, if you are going to do that, why bother having an H2H league?In fact, why not just wait till the end of the year, evaluate how every team would have done every week of the year against every other team, and then do your playoff seeding that way - oh and don't bother with one-week winners in the playoffs- average how each team would have done against each other team every week of the playoffs - whoever was best is your league winner.That certainly removes ALL the luck factor out of it and determines the "best" teams in the league. Yes, I have used hyperbole, but the proposed methodology of determining playoff seeding is the worst thing that could hapen to FF - and favors the hyperbole of removing luck over the skill I used in that week I played you (or all year long, for that matter). It removes ALL of my decisions I may have made in a given week from the equation - which removes ME from the game and just uses the players I happened to have starting the week I played you.

 

[Marc Levin]

id like to refer to this post to make my point:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t&p=5968969

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.

Then why even bother playing in a head-to-head league anyway?

Go to a points league - submit your starting lineup for the week, and the PF over the year is how you create the playoff seeding.

 

[OldMilwaukee]

Should head to head be extended to three teams tied?

Heads to Heads?

 

[GregR_2]

I'd never considered using an all-play record (the record if everyone played everyone every week) as a tie-break, but now that I think about it, it's a better tiebreaker than total points. A team with 1000 total points over 10 weeks who scored 300 one week and 78 every other week is not as good as a team with 1000 who scored 100 every single week, and the all-play record will reflect that better.

I'll definitely be putting this in my dynasty league for next year.

 

[Ned]

2 teams tie: HTH > division record > PF > coin toss

3 or more teams tie > HTH; if HTH cannot be determined (i.e. division opponents played each other twice while the third team once or an even split of games > division record > PF > coin toss

its as easy as this folks...

Exactly why we went to H2H and then PF.

Nothing to think about or calculate - and with decimal scoring, the likelihood of a tied PF is extremely remote.

so you have no divisions?

 

[LTsharks]

By the way, thanks for the b.s. and nerd comments. Excellent.

Yer welcome. I don't know how you fail to see this mathematrical nightmare (that probably requires its own computer program for accuracy) as a complete nerd way of making a tiebreaker. The easiest, most simple, least nerdy way to do a H2H tiebreaker in an H2H league is H2H - the second easiest is overall PF - everything else is heading towards nerdsville.

I fail to see the mathematical nightmare because I simply click on a link and open my eyes (which don't need glasses) - wow, there it is. Hope I didn't strain my fingers dragging that mouse over 4 inches to click on the link to display the record that these here new fangled computers figured up for me.

 

[LTsharks]

I'd never considered using an all-play record (the record if everyone played everyone every week) as a tie-break, but now that I think about it, it's a better tiebreaker than total points. A team with 1000 total points over 10 weeks who scored 300 one week and 78 every other week is not as good as a team with 1000 who scored 100 every single week, and the all-play record will reflect that better.I'll definitely be putting this in my dynasty league for next year.

Another excellent example. It isn't for every league, but for our league it works great and there are no complaints. Be prepared to be bashed in this thread for even suggesting bringing this 'mathematical nightmare' to your league

 

[Marc Levin]

2 teams tie: HTH > division record > PF > coin toss

3 or more teams tie > HTH; if HTH cannot be determined (i.e. division opponents played each other twice while the third team once or an even split of games > division record > PF > coin toss

its as easy as this folks...

Exactly why we went to H2H and then PF.

Nothing to think about or calculate - and with decimal scoring, the likelihood of a tied PF is extremely remote.

so you have no divisions?

Of course we do - the first three seeds are the first three division winners - division winners decided in the case of tied records by H2H and then points.A team that is 9-4, but second in their division, is seeded behind a team that is 8-5, but wins their division.

 

[GregR_2]

I'd never considered using an all-play record (the record if everyone played everyone every week) as a tie-break, but now that I think about it, it's a better tiebreaker than total points. A team with 1000 total points over 10 weeks who scored 300 one week and 78 every other week is not as good as a team with 1000 who scored 100 every single week, and the all-play record will reflect that better.I'll definitely be putting this in my dynasty league for next year.

Another excellent example. It isn't for every league, but for our league it works great and there are no complaints. Be prepared to be bashed in this thread for even suggesting bringing this 'mathematical nightmare' to your league

No mathematical nightmare here... it's a category in the MFL power rank. Which otherwise isn't very meaningful unfortunately, they really need to overhaul that formula. They'll never make everyone happy, but it's just plain bad the way it is and there are a lot of alternatives that woudl be better.

 

[Marc Levin]

I'd never considered using an all-play record (the record if everyone played everyone every week) as a tie-break, but now that I think about it, it's a better tiebreaker than total points. A team with 1000 total points over 10 weeks who scored 300 one week and 78 every other week is not as good as a team with 1000 who scored 100 every single week, and the all-play record will reflect that better.I'll definitely be putting this in my dynasty league for next year.

Another excellent example. It isn't for every league, but for our league it works great and there are no complaints. Be prepared to be bashed in this thread for even suggesting bringing this 'mathematical nightmare' to your league

See above - removing the luck of the results of a given week by then extrapolating my starting lineup from that given week across the entire season is b.s.

 

[LTsharks]

Removes the luck factor of what week or weeks those two teams happened to meet and seems more fair then total points because it rewards consistency as well.

BTW, this rationale is EXACTLY why that methodology is similar to best starter.Why the heck would you WANT to remove the luck factor from the given week that I beat a specific team? You, essentially, having us play each other every week of the year - that is a RIDICULOUS way to create playoff seeding in a H2H league. There are bye week issues, injury issues, WW issues - I may not have started the same lineup against you in week 9 that I played against you in week 5 - see the problem????Like I said, if you are going to do that, why bother having an H2H league?In fact, why not just wait till the end of the year, evaluate how every team would have done every week of the year against every other team, and then do your playoff seeding that way - oh and don't bother with one-week winners in the playoffs- average how each team would have done against each other team every week of the playoffs - whoever was best is your league winner.That certainly removes ALL the luck factor out of it and determines the "best" teams in the league. Yes, I have used hyperbole, but the proposed methodology of determining playoff seeding is the worst thing that could hapen to FF - and favors the hyperbole of removing luck over the skill I used in that week I played you (or all year long, for that matter). It removes ALL of my decisions I may have made in a given week from the equation - which removes ME from the game and just uses the players I happened to have starting the week I played you.

It is a tiebreaker, not the way to run the entire league. We have chosen to try to remove luck from our tiebreakers. Two teams with even records, we are trying to reward skill. Some, like you, want to emphasize luck in a tiebreaker. That is fine, just two different ways of doing it.

 

[Marc Levin]

We have chosen to try to remove luck from our tiebreakers. Two teams with even records, we are trying to reward skill. Some, like you, want to emphasize luck in a tiebreaker. That is fine, just two different ways of doing it.

I'm not emphasizing luck - I am emphasizing the fact that I beat you on that given week - maybe it was luck that week, but just b/c I finished with the same record as you after playing the other 10 teams in the league with the vagaries of weekly NFL games is no reason to use this extrapolation to break a tie between me and you.By removing luck you have also removed my skill on that given week from the equation. You have completely removed skill in favor of a mathematical forumla just for a tiebreaker - it is no more "fair" than the one-week H2H system.Explain to me how it is more "fair" to give you 12 more chances to beat me (you calculate me and you h2H across the entire season as the tiebreaker, right?) after I beat you once?

 

[LTsharks]

I'd never considered using an all-play record (the record if everyone played everyone every week) as a tie-break, but now that I think about it, it's a better tiebreaker than total points. A team with 1000 total points over 10 weeks who scored 300 one week and 78 every other week is not as good as a team with 1000 who scored 100 every single week, and the all-play record will reflect that better.I'll definitely be putting this in my dynasty league for next year.

Another excellent example. It isn't for every league, but for our league it works great and there are no complaints. Be prepared to be bashed in this thread for even suggesting bringing this 'mathematical nightmare' to your league

See above - removing the luck of the results of a given week by then extrapolating my starting lineup from that given week across the entire season is b.s.

Having fun here, but I want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.The lineup from that given week isn't extrapolated across the entire year. The score you get each week (from the lineup you submit in that given week) is compared to the other persons lineup from that same week (team A score week 1 vs team B score week 1 / repeat for each week). that gives you a win/loss recored equal to the number of games in your season. that is the record used.the lineup you use each week generates the score.is this what you were thinking or have we been discussing something different?

 

[Marc Levin]

is this what you were thinking or have we been discussing something different?

Something different.I'll have to think about what you proposed, but my initial response is the same as my last one. Why is it more fair to give you another 12 bites at the apple just b/c it is a playoff seeding tiebreaker?

 

[LTsharks]

is this what you were thinking or have we been discussing something different?

Something different.I'll have to think about what you proposed, but my initial response is the same as my last one. Why is it more fair to give you another 12 bites at the apple just b/c it is a playoff seeding tiebreaker?

That explains a lot then.We are looking to put the best team in the playoffs. As a tiebreaker, I think the head to head breakdown record (terms come from CBS leagues) tells a better story of who the best team was throughout the year. We don't use it first for divisions because we have chosen to place extra importance on those games, but I still think the above is true.All I really wanted to say. I'm not offended if you don't agree, I was just defending it against what I thought was an over the top opposition to another method of tiebreaker.

 

[Killerclown]

1. Head to Head

2. Total Points ( pretty much zero chance it's not settled here)

3. Division Record

 

[Marc Levin]

Gotcha - I just don't see it as anymore fair than simple H2H.

I agree the H2H breakdown removes the one-week luck factor, but why is that desirable? You are heading into a lose and you are out playoff anyway, right?

BTW, I don't play in any CBS leagues anymore b/c they are too expensive for league management software, but if I saw that stat every day whle I was tied with another team for playoff positioning, I might change my mind.

 

[valhallan]

I think it should always be 1. Record2. Total Points3. H2HRecord already has a TON of luck involved, why put even MORE weight on luck?

Same here. The more deserving team usually has more points, so no one complains much about our tie-breakers.

 

[NJ OAK]

id like to refer to this post to make my point:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t&p=5968969

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.

Absolutely agree.

 

[GregR_2]

Gotcha - I just don't see it as anymore fair than simple H2H.I agree the H2H breakdown removes the one-week luck factor, but why is that desirable? You are heading into a lose and you are out playoff anyway, right?BTW, I don't play in any CBS leagues anymore b/c they are too expensive for league management software, but if I saw that stat every day whle I was tied with another team for playoff positioning, I might change my mind.

Isn't having a tiebreaker about determining the most deserving team, the team that had the best performance? Since fantasy teams don't affect their opponents in any way, head to head games isn't as true a measure of those two teams performance like it is in real sports. Let me give a real world example. In that league I talked to you about in PMs, Marc, there are two teams who were in position to potentially tie. One team is 4th in the league in total points and if we played every team every week, they would have been 81-51 for a .614 winning percentage. The other team is 9th in total points and if we played every team every week they would have been 44-88 for a .333 winning percentage. Yet they almost had identical records, and in fact the 2nd team led the 1st team for much of the season. And this in a league that has double and triple-headers where records are more likely to be closer to the all-play record.I hope you'd agree the first team had the better performance over the course of the season, even if they had the same record. If a fantasy defense actually stopped an opponent's fantasy offense from scoring I'd agree that head to head would be a better tiebreaker. But since it doesn't, I'm not really sure how increasing the role of luck is supposed to be a good thing. The 2nd team above already had his amazing luck to be where he is, I don't see why we should continue to incorporate it then when that luck has already been accounted for in getting him to the tie, and now our goal is to find the better team to move on.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Gotcha - I just don't see it as anymore fair than simple H2H.I agree the H2H breakdown removes the one-week luck factor, but why is that desirable? You are heading into a lose and you are out playoff anyway, right?BTW, I don't play in any CBS leagues anymore b/c they are too expensive for league management software, but if I saw that stat every day whle I was tied with another team for playoff positioning, I might change my mind.

Isn't having a tiebreaker about determining the most deserving team, the team that had the best performance? Since fantasy teams don't affect their opponents in any way, head to head games isn't as true a measure of those two teams performance like it is in real sports. Let me give a real world example. In that league I talked to you about in PMs, Marc, there are two teams who were in position to potentially tie. One team is 4th in the league in total points and if we played every team every week, they would have been 81-51 for a .614 winning percentage. The other team is 9th in total points and if we played every team every week they would have been 44-88 for a .333 winning percentage. Yet they almost had identical records, and in fact the 2nd team led the 1st team for much of the season. And this in a league that has double and triple-headers where records are more likely to be closer to the all-play record.I hope you'd agree the first team had the better performance over the course of the season, even if they had the same record. If a fantasy defense actually stopped an opponent's fantasy offense from scoring I'd agree that head to head would be a better tiebreaker. But since it doesn't, I'm not really sure how increasing the role of luck is supposed to be a good thing. The 2nd team above already had his amazing luck to be where he is, I don't see why we should continue to incorporate it then when that luck has already been accounted for in getting him to the tie, and now our goal is to find the better team to move on.

Well, I disagree here Greg because if you're choosing to go H2H to begin with, you're basically saying you're willing to put up with the luck factor issue for the entire season anyway. So in keeping with the theme......it there was a tie between two teams then what should be checked is head to head. If in a league division opponenets played twice and each on won a game, then head to head would be even and then total points the tie breaker.If you are in a league where it's total points and there's a tie, then it would make sense that the first tie breaker be what team has scored the most points.In H2H, you're already saying prior to the start of the season you're really not that concerned about total points......the important issue is who wins each week, not how many points you score. If you're worried about that, then it shouldn't be H2H, it should be a total points league.

 

[Diesel10]

What do you do when 2 teams end up tied record-wise, points-wise, and head-to-head, assuming there are no divisions? What's next? Can't do record against common opponents because everyone should have played everyone. Is it record if you had played the other team's schedule?

 

[videoguy505]

I somewhat agree that in H2H, often owners are willing to forgo points in an individual week to better position themselves for winning games over the long run.

Say I'm playing an owner in week 5 that has bye-week issues. I know coming out of week 4 that he's going to have to pick up a QB, RB and DST off waivers, and that the pickings are slim. So, I may position my team in such a way that I don't make some moves--picking up my own bye-week replacement WR off waivers at the cost of a backup RB or QB, for example--and I decide to go into week 5 with a rather weak team, knowing my opponent is even weaker, so I can hang onto players who have good matchups later on.

By positioning myself to score "just enough to win" some weeks, my overall team may be stronger for H2H playoff matchups later. I just got through this this season, I faced a really easy schedule--just by luck I happened to face every team on their studs' bye or worst matchup--so I didn't make the lineup moves I may have made, nor did I make some trades that would have given me more points in the regular season while costing me points in the playoff weeks.

For example, I've been offered trades at midseason that would have scored me more points in weeks 8-12, but those players had terrible playoff week matchups. Knowing I was likely to score "just enough to win" anyway in 8-12, I passed. If total points mattered, I would have jumped on the trade.

In fact, in an old league, the top 4 of 6 teams in each division made the playoffs. In that league, I knew all I had to do was finish .500 and I'd make it to the playoffs, so I drafted almost soley looking at late season matchups. I took whoever looked like they'd perform well in the post-season, knowing that if I made it that far, I'd be a real threat. All I had to do during the regular season was find the right tweaks to do "just enough to win" and finish at 7-6, then watch my team become a powerhouse when the regular season ended. And I approached all decisions during the season with that outlook, forgoing total points for a better chance at winning when it mattered most.

So, in a H2H league, the idea of using "total points" doesn't always reflect the most deserving team--the savvier owner and the stronger team may trade weakness now for power later.

 

[GregR_2]

...

Well, I disagree here Greg because if you're choosing to go H2H to begin with, you're basically saying you're willing to put up with the luck factor issue for the entire season anyway. So in keeping with the theme......it there was a tie between two teams then what should be checked is head to head. If in a league division opponenets played twice and each on won a game, then head to head would be even and then total points the tie breaker.

If you are in a league where it's total points and there's a tie, then it would make sense that the first tie breaker be what team has scored the most points.

In H2H, you're already saying prior to the start of the season you're really not that concerned about total points......the important issue is who wins each week, not how many points you score. If you're worried about that, then it shouldn't be H2H, it should be a total points league.

I keep seeing this kind of thing said, and I don't understand why you feel that way. Just because we're willing to deal with the role of luck to a point doesn't mean we have to stick with it in every aspect of FF. Even the NFL doesn't use head to head everywhere in their tiebreakers. For example, position in the NFL draft doesn't have head to head in it's tiebreaker, it uses strength of schedule.

It's not a valid statement to say because you accepted luck up to this point, you always have to accept it at every point down the tiebreaker list. There's nothing philosophicaly wrong with saying the first tiebreaker should be the truest measure of a team's achievements compared to the other tied teams just because we accepted weekly games as what led up to the tie.

 

[GregR_2]

What do you do when 2 teams end up tied record-wise, points-wise, and head-to-head, assuming there are no divisions? What's next? Can't do record against common opponents because everyone should have played everyone. Is it record if you had played the other team's schedule?

No matter what you should always have a coin-flip type thing in your tiebreak rules as the last option. But other things you can put in your list would include points at a given position (don't include positions that have a flex), or total TDs scored, or highest score in the last week of the season or just about anything else you want.We used to have total touchdowns scored as a tiebreaker dating back to it having been in the list on the website we originally had used before moving to MFL. I actually had to go through a whole season and count touchdowns for 3 teams one time, and you can be sure it was removed from the list the next year. So think about the amount of work you're going to create for yourself with whatever rules you ad.

 

[LTsharks]

...

Well, I disagree here Greg because if you're choosing to go H2H to begin with, you're basically saying you're willing to put up with the luck factor issue for the entire season anyway. So in keeping with the theme......it there was a tie between two teams then what should be checked is head to head. If in a league division opponenets played twice and each on won a game, then head to head would be even and then total points the tie breaker.

If you are in a league where it's total points and there's a tie, then it would make sense that the first tie breaker be what team has scored the most points.

In H2H, you're already saying prior to the start of the season you're really not that concerned about total points......the important issue is who wins each week, not how many points you score. If you're worried about that, then it shouldn't be H2H, it should be a total points league.

I keep seeing this kind of thing said, and I don't understand why you feel that way. Just because we're willing to deal with the role of luck to a point doesn't mean we have to stick with it in every aspect of FF. Even the NFL doesn't use head to head everywhere in their tiebreakers. For example, position in the NFL draft doesn't have head to head in it's tiebreaker, it uses strength of schedule.

It's not a valid statement to say because you accepted luck up to this point, you always have to accept it at every point down the tiebreaker list. There's nothing philosophicaly wrong with saying the first tiebreaker should be the truest measure of a team's achievements compared to the other tied teams just because we accepted weekly games as what led up to the tie.

agree completely. when it comes to breaking a tie, especially in a wildcard situation, the goal of our league is to send the best team to the playoffs.