Playoffs: 7th seed update

[Achon44]

After reading Amish's post I do feel we may be better off moving to all play record as our tie breaker for draft order and everything else we use power rank to decide.

[braven112]

After reading Amish's post I do feel we may be better off moving to all play record as our tie breaker for draft order and everything else we use power rank to decide.

I would be good with this.

[bonscott]

After reading Amish's post I do feel we may be better off moving to all play record as our tie breaker for draft order and everything else we use power rank to decide.

I would be good with this.

I just checked on my test league and All Play Win % is available as a tiebreaker. Also, Habman's playoff app also supports it.

So the simple thing would be to just replace Power Rank with All Play wherever it's used. Could also be a good time to look into the tiebreakers as a whole and see if they can (or should) be simplified (they are pretty complicated now with various different scenarios).

------------------------------------

By the way Brandon, don't know if you saw but Habman updated his playoff generator to use JSON and it's faster now.

http://forums.myfantasyleague.com/forum ... opic=34596

Basically just make sure you have a JQuery library loaded as well as his JSON (he has this code posted in that post) and then regenerate the playoff code and replace.
I've noticed that he also has on the generator a draft order module and an All Play report which may be useful for this league. I'd also suggest having these modules up all year round, no reason not too and less work on your part every year.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

I played in a league that went out of their way to try to take all the luck out of fantasy football. For me it only took out all the fun. I even made the playoffs in that league because of this type of rule. I was so far a head in total points the last couple weeks didn't matter despite my poor record, I was virtually locked into that final wild card spot.

This is a great point. Don't forget that if I would have lost two game's w/ the back-to-back 70pt wins I got "lucky" I believe we would have had a four team tie for the last playoff spot late in the season and I was still only one game up on three teams after that week, so it was pretty exciting heading in to the stretch. That all could have been lost with a different system.

Fixed

IMO using All-Play for that final playoff spot may keep MORE teams interested in staying competitive in comparison to the current system. You'd have 3 chances to get in via W/L if you win your division or one end up w/ of the two W/L wildcards. I don't see why that opening up 1 playoff spot to the top team outside of the top W/L records would make it less fun? If seeding is the issue, then seed the wild cards based on All Play instead of W/L? That would determine the actual "strength" of the team.

I can only relate to my experience, but my team started off slow at 2-5. I had a huge hole to dig out of. My All-Play record to start the season was bad, my season looked like it was going to be wasted because of all of the crap luck my team had w/ injuries and suspensions. I could have said "Fuck it" and waved the white towel as happens a lot of times here and tried to sell off whatever I could for next season, but I didn't. I tried to stay competitive made my trade w/ DD down the stretch because I thought that despite all the terrible luck my team had gone thru it could still win, and it did. The crappy part is that my Ws didn't matter because the teams ahead of me were getting Ws even though they were performing at a level much below mine.

All-Play can give you another way of winning a playoff spot and to try and make your team as competitive as it can be. Put out the best team you can every week and see what happens. My squad was on the rise while everyone elses started to fade in the late half of the season, yet the ground could never be gained due to the matchups never working in my favour. My team on a weekly basis outperformed my competition for a playoff spot, but that slow start put me at a massive disadvantage.

I don't come into a season saying to myself "I'm playing to get that last playoff spot!". I'm trying to put together the best team I can so that I can try and win the whole thing. I'm not creating this proposal because I want to earn that last playoff spot. I want to see the top teams in the playoffs.

It's 1/16 draft spots we're talking about. The regular season is a grind. Make grinding it out and competing all season worth it. It may convince teams not give up so early.

[Achon44]

So, should we get rid of divisions as well seeing it can give a team in a weaker division an advantage over a team in a strong division?

[Wascawy Wabbits]

So, should we get rid of divisions as well seeing it can give a team in a weaker division an advantage over a team in a strong division?

*sigh*

[Achon44]

So, should we get rid of divisions as well seeing it can give a team in a weaker division an advantage over a team in a strong division?

*sigh*

The reason I ask is because I've been playing FF for a long time and the only time I ever feel it's appropriate to use something like total points or overall W-L to determine a playoff spot is if everyone plays everyone an equal amount of times. I was in a 14 team league with one division and we awarded the last (7th) playoff spot to the bottoms 8 team with highest total points and I was totally on board with it, because it was a totally even playing field.

[bonesman]

So, should we get rid of divisions as well seeing it can give a team in a weaker division an advantage over a team in a strong division?

*sigh*

The reason I ask is because I've been playing FF for a long time and the only time I ever feel it's appropriate to use something like total points or overall W-L to determine a playoff spot is if everyone plays everyone an equal amount of times. I was in a 14 team league with one division and we awarded the last (7th) playoff spot to the bottoms 8 team with highest total points and I was totally on board with it, because it was a totally even playing field.

That's exactly what would be happening for that last spot. The divisional winners and two WC teams would make it in as usual... and then the team who has the best record if everyone played everyone an equal amount of times, would get the last spot.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

So, should we get rid of divisions as well seeing it can give a team in a weaker division an advantage over a team in a strong division?

*sigh*

The reason I ask is because I've been playing FF for a long time and the only time I ever feel it's appropriate to use something like total points or overall W-L to determine a playoff spot is if everyone plays everyone an equal amount of times. I was in a 14 team league with one division and we awarded the last (7th) playoff spot to the bottoms 8 team with highest total points and I was totally on board with it, because it was a totally even playing field.

I don't think we need or should get rid of divisions. Each division is it's own "ecosystem" and we award a team for being tops in their division. I was cheering on Kev (RTD) the past few weeks sending him DM's over twitter about his chances at making the playoffs.

In All-Play you are playing every team every week (13weeks x 15teams = 195 games). Your total points from one week have no corresponding value to the next. You could go 8-7 one week, 15-0 the next, 3-12 the next etc... It's similar to you being in favour of awarding a team in the bottom 8 of your 14 team league a spot in the playoffs by total points. The big difference here is those points don't carry, just your cumulative weekly W-L record against the entire league. I don't think you can get a more even playing field. Divisions won't matter if the final playoff spot is awarded thru All-Play Win %. A team would get their 70pt win to go towards obtaining a top 6 playoff spot and the other team gets their 14-1 All Play record for losing as the 2nd highest scoring team that week.

How tiebreakers would work, I don't know. That's a completely different discussion if this even makes it to vote and passes that first vote to explore further.

[Achon44]

The reason I ask is because I've been playing FF for a long time and the only time I ever feel it's appropriate to use something like total points or overall W-L to determine a playoff spot is if everyone plays everyone an equal amount of times. I was in a 14 team league with one division and we awarded the last (7th) playoff spot to the bottoms 8 team with highest total points and I was totally on board with it, because it was a totally even playing field.

That's exactly what would be happening for that last spot. The divisional winners and two WC teams would make it in as usual... and then the team who has the best record if everyone played everyone an equal amount of times, would get the last spot.

In this scenario a team who finished with the 6th highest Head to Head Win percentage and a .590 All Win percentage gets knocked out of the playoffs while a team with a .500 Head to Head Win percentage and a .405 All Win percentage still gets in do to playing in a very weak division. At the end of the day no matter how you figure it out somebody always gets screwed....that's life.

[braven112]

Maybe instead of the weekly high score prize, which is $3 per week, we pool that money and give it to the less fantasy fortunate.

So the team with the best all-play record that didn't make the playoffs gets $39 ($3 x 13 weeks).

[bonesman]

Maybe instead of the weekly high score prize, which is $3 per week, we pool that money and give it to the less fantasy fortunate.

So the team with the best all-play record that didn't make the playoffs gets $39 ($3 x 13 weeks).

Fk that... they already have a shot at the toilet bowl pick or w/e. This isn't about feeling sorry for anyone or a handout or a participation trophy.

It's about fostering the best competition possible.

[bonscott]

Maybe instead of the weekly high score prize, which is $3 per week, we pool that money and give it to the less fantasy fortunate.

So the team with the best all-play record that didn't make the playoffs gets $39 ($3 x 13 weeks).

Fk that... they already have a shot at the toilet bowl pick or w/e. This isn't about feeling sorry for anyone or a handout or a participation trophy.

It's about fostering the best competition possible.

Yea, I don't like that at all. Frankly I think we pay out too far as it is, I think we pay out to 6th place or something. Should probably only pay out top 4 at most.

Anyway...no matter what you do for tiebreakers or determining playoff spots someone will always feel like they are screwed. I'm sure we could come up with an example every year of someone who could have made it under a different system. Heck, you can do that if you just switch the schedule around a little bit. H2H (IMO) is what makes this game fun.

We can certainly vote on it but I think the playoffs are fine as it is. Win your games and you're in, done. I'm not totally against using something like total points or best all play for the last spot so I wouldn't care if the league voted that in.

I do like the side thread that came out of this in replacing the Power Ranking for tie breaks with something like All Play as I think the Power Rank is a bit flawed in how it's calculated. I don't think it would make a huge difference but I personally would feel better with it.

[braven112]

Maybe instead of the weekly high score prize, which is $3 per week, we pool that money and give it to the less fantasy fortunate.

So the team with the best all-play record that didn't make the playoffs gets $39 ($3 x 13 weeks).

Fk that... they already have a shot at the toilet bowl pick or w/e. This isn't about feeling sorry for anyone or a handout or a participation trophy.

It's about fostering the best competition possible.

LOL, I wasn't really serious. The other option I was going to suggest is we take that $39 and we buy a participation trophy. To me, that's what this feels like.

I'd rather get rid of the 7th playoff spot before changing it to something other than H2H. We spend a 13 weeks, determining who the best team is and then nearly half the league makes the playoffs anyway. I think we need to ensure that the top 2-3 teams have the best chance at making it to the championship game rather than trying to figure out how the 7th best team is determined.

[Achon44]

Maybe instead of the weekly high score prize, which is $3 per week, we pool that money and give it to the less fantasy fortunate.

So the team with the best all-play record that didn't make the playoffs gets $39 ($3 x 13 weeks).

Fk that... they already have a shot at the toilet bowl pick or w/e. This isn't about feeling sorry for anyone or a handout or a participation trophy.

It's about fostering the best competition possible.

LOL, I wasn't really serious. The other option I was going to suggest is we take that $39 and we buy a participation trophy. To me, that's what this feels like.

[bonscott]

I'd rather get rid of the 7th playoff spot before changing it to something other than H2H. We spend a 13 weeks, determining who the best team is and then nearly half the league makes the playoffs anyway. I think we need to ensure that the top 2-3 teams have the best chance at making it to the championship game rather than trying to figure out how the 7th best team is determined.

So I've always wondered why we have the 8th/9th team as a "play in" type game where the winner goes into a consolation bracket in the playoffs and the loser to a consolation bracket in the toilet bowl. I've always hated being in this play in game as it's like kissing your sister, unless maybe she's hot. You have no chance at the top prize either way.

Why don't we simplify even this by just doing a straight top 8 to the playoffs and bottom 8 to the toilet bowl. The downside is no bye weeks but we only give out one bye each now plus no danger of a team trying to tank some year to get the toilet bowl bye (not sure if that has ever happened anyway). Then again, it was exciting to have 3 teams in the running for the bye this year going down to the last week.

Could go hardcore and do just 6 in the playoffs, top 2 with a bye. But then the toilet bowl with 10 teams is a mess, not sure how brackets would work there. Could do bottom 6 play for 1.17 and the top 4 play for 2.17. But that could encourage tanking to get into the bottom 6 so that's prolly no good. Be easiest to just do 8 and 8.

Just speaking off the top of my mushy brain.

[braven112]

I'd rather get rid of the 7th playoff spot before changing it to something other than H2H. We spend a 13 weeks, determining who the best team is and then nearly half the league makes the playoffs anyway. I think we need to ensure that the top 2-3 teams have the best chance at making it to the championship game rather than trying to figure out how the 7th best team is determined.

So I've always wondered why we have the 8th/9th team as a "play in" type game where the winner goes into a consolation bracket in the playoffs and the loser to a consolation bracket in the toilet bowl. I've always hated being in this play in game as it's like kissing your sister, unless maybe she's hot. You have no chance at the top prize either way.

Why don't we simplify even this by just doing a straight top 8 to the playoffs and bottom 8 to the toilet bowl. The downside is no bye weeks but we only give out one bye each now plus no danger of a team trying to tank some year to get the toilet bowl bye (not sure if that has ever happened anyway). Then again, it was exciting to have 3 teams in the running for the bye this year going down to the last week.

Could go hardcore and do just 6 in the playoffs, top 2 with a bye. But then the toilet bowl with 10 teams is a mess, not sure how brackets would work there. Could do bottom 6 play for 1.17 and the top 4 play for 2.17. But that could encourage tanking to get into the bottom 6 so that's prolly no good. Be easiest to just do 8 and 8.

Just speaking off the top of my mushy brain.

The current format is how it is because when we started the league I was adamant about not doing 8 in the playoffs. I really wanted 6 just like the NFL and to give some credit for the best 2 teams. It also gives all playoff teams something to play for. So we compromised and landed at 7 and still gave the top 9 teams a chance at some money.

8 teams would be simpler way of doing it but I think it's more important to make the regular season matter more. What's fair to me is a system that rewards the best 2 teams all year while still allows a few others to have a chance.

If we ever changed the number of teams in the playoffs I'm sure we could come up with a solution for the toilet bowl. That setup is secondary to the real playoffs IMO.

The other league I commish only 8 out of 24 make the playoffs and the other 16 battle it out for a chance to win their entry fee back.

[bonesman]

Let's eliminate the 7th seed then. I'm all for that.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

The reason I ask is because I've been playing FF for a long time and the only time I ever feel it's appropriate to use something like total points or overall W-L to determine a playoff spot is if everyone plays everyone an equal amount of times. I was in a 14 team league with one division and we awarded the last (7th) playoff spot to the bottoms 8 team with highest total points and I was totally on board with it, because it was a totally even playing field.

That's exactly what would be happening for that last spot. The divisional winners and two WC teams would make it in as usual... and then the team who has the best record if everyone played everyone an equal amount of times, would get the last spot.

In this scenario a team who finished with the 6th highest Head to Head Win percentage and a .590 All Win percentage gets knocked out of the playoffs while a team with a .500 Head to Head Win percentage and a .405 All Win percentage still gets in do to playing in a very weak division. At the end of the day no matter how you figure it out somebody always gets screwed....that's life.

In your 14 team league, there could be multiple teams with higher total scoring output than the teams that had the 5 best W-L records?

I'm still a bit confused what the difference is between you being "totally on board" with awarding a final seed in your playoffs based on total points and completely opposed to awarding a team a playoff spot based on All-Play %? Both hold no bias towards H2H matchups, weaker divisions, etc. Both reward teams based on how they performed against the rest of the league.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

So to summarize thus far based on responses

The "put it up to vote" responses
- W-L isn't a perfect gauge for a teams season long performance
- Historically, the team that "earned" the 7th seed did not perform well when sorted by All-Play % and was bested by one-to-many teams
- Mitigates the impact of losing a high scoring game
- Adds an alternates means of earning a playoff spot
- Holds no bias towards easy matchups or weak divisions
- Totals Points won't matter, just your cumulative W-L against the entire league
- It's about fostering the best competition possible

The "opposed" responses
- Is that how they do it in the CFL?
- "We Play to Win the game"
- "Just win baby"
- It will become less fun
- fantasy football is fun, not fair
- the #2 seed would likely face a tougher opponent than the #3 seed
- $$ prize for the less fortunate / participation trophy
- get rid of the 7th spot instead of changing it from H2H
-
- somebody always gets screwed
- The top 2-3 teams deserve an easier road to the championship

[Wascawy Wabbits]

Let's eliminate the 7th seed then. I'm all for that.

Even w/ eliminating the 7th seed, I don't think it changes the primary issue raised in this thread which is about awarding the final playoff seed to the "best" team outside of W-L records.

[braven112]

So to summarize thus far based on responses
The "opposed" responses
- Is that how they do it in the CFL?
- "We Play to Win the game"
- "Just win baby"
- It will become less fun
- fantasy football is fun, not fair
- the #2 seed would likely face a tougher opponent than the #3 seed
- $$ prize for the less fortunate / participation trophy
- get rid of the 7th spot instead of changing it from H2H
-
- somebody always gets screwed
- The top 2-3 teams deserve an easier road to the championship

I love the summary!! I would like to add one more...

https://www.youtube.com/embed/s2R2sH2ScBM

[bonscott]

The current format is how it is because when we started the league I was adamant about not doing 8 in the playoffs. I really wanted 6 just like the NFL and to give some credit for the best 2 teams. It also gives all playoff teams something to play for. So we compromised and landed at 7 and still gave the top 9 teams a chance at some money.

8 teams would be simpler way of doing it but I think it's more important to make the regular season matter more. What's fair to me is a system that rewards the best 2 teams all year while still allows a few others to have a chance.

If we ever changed the number of teams in the playoffs I'm sure we could come up with a solution for the toilet bowl. That setup is secondary to the real playoffs IMO.

The other league I commish only 8 out of 24 make the playoffs and the other 16 battle it out for a chance to win their entry fee back.

I'll admit, it does work in a weird way.

I'm all for going hardcore and just the top 6 make it, top 2 have a bye which meets your criteria.

Then we can figure out what to do with the Bottom 10.

[Achon44]

I'm still a bit confused what the difference is between you being "totally on board" with awarding a final seed in your playoffs based on total points and completely opposed to awarding a team a playoff spot based on All-Play %? Both hold no bias towards H2H matchups, weaker divisions, etc. Both reward teams based on how they performed against the rest of the league.

Because the 14 team league doesn't have divisions.

[Achon44]

Let's eliminate the 7th seed then. I'm all for that.