Tie Breakers Multiple Teams (3+)

[bobjay00 22]

THE SITUATION;

 

2 divisions of 6 teams each

4 teams tied at 6-7 for 5th & 6th seeds

 

TIEBREAKERS

1. winning percentage (not app)
2. head to head
3. division record
4. total points scored

head to head common opponents, the results

• tm A 2-1 - awarded 5th seed
• tm B 1-1 - next tiebreaker -div record 4-6 -Wins 6th seed by total points
• tm C 1-1 - next tiebreaker -div record 4-6
• tm D 1-2 - out

Because of the uneven H2H match-ups (2 played 3 games and 2 played 2 games). Is there a better way to decide who gets in? Skip this tiebreaker when uneven number of match-ups?

 

Thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[TheUsualSuspect 207]

Of course, coin toss.

[shredhead 21]

Division record shouldn't be a tie breaker for wild card berths because the teams that are tied might not be in the same division.

[Phil Simms 11 127]

You should follow the rules as set forth.

 

And for next season use "breakdown" which calculates each teams record if they played every team every week. Use the breakdown and points scored to figure out the teams in the playoffs.

 

I am in playoffs against a team with a record of 5-8. They have had worst schedule in the league but made playoffs because the team scored enough points and had good breakdown record.

[Drizzay 644]

Total points for.

[cyclone24 1,799]

Total points for.

We went to that a year or two ago. Makes things much easier. Sucks explaining to a guy who beat the guy going to the playoffs that he's not going because he doesn't have enough points but is what it is

[seafoam1 1,878]

Total points. That is all you will need and reflects the most of how good your team is vs. the rest of the league. If that ties, that would be crazy. Let them both in.

[brotherbock 349]

Coolest Team Name

[CornKobb 48]

total points is always the way to go. The better team generally has most points over 13 weeks, not a stupid head to head 1week. this is fantasy football not nfl. ok rant over

[brotherbock 349]

total points is always the way to go. The better team generally has most points over 13 weeks, not a stupid head to head 1week. this is fantasy football not nfl. ok rant over

 

Eh.

 

I play a lot of board games. There are board games that have two people competing without interacting with each other--competing against the game rules to separately try to achieve the most points, but your actions don't affect my points and vice versa. And there are games that have the players interacting with each other as they play, the actions of each player affecting the points of the other players.

 

Each kind of game has its merits, and are enjoyable for different reasons. It's just silly to tell people who like one kind of game that their kind of game "isn't as good".

 

A lot of people like head to head FF because of the head to head factor. If you don't, that's cool. But it's a bit baffling to see so many people trying to 'convert' people away from a format that they enjoy and want to play, just because other people don't enjoy it. I'd be bored with FF that wasn't head to head.

[CornKobb 48]

 

Eh.

 

I play a lot of board games. There are board games that have two people competing without interacting with each other--competing against the game rules to separately try to achieve the most points, but your actions don't affect my points and vice versa. And there are games that have the players interacting with each other as they play, the actions of each player affecting the points of the other players.

 

Each kind of game has its merits, and are enjoyable for different reasons. It's just silly to tell people who like one kind of game that their kind of game "isn't as good".

 

A lot of people like head to head FF because of the head to head factor. If you don't, that's cool. But it's a bit baffling to see so many people trying to 'convert' people away from a format that they enjoy and want to play, just because other people don't enjoy it. I'd be bored with FF that wasn't head to head.

 

would you say the way to judge a team is over 1 week head to head or over a 13 week season with total points.

 

we had three guys tied for the final playoff spot last year. One guy had 300 more points than the other two guys and had a 6-7 record. He was #2 in total points overall but just had horrible luck with who he played on a weekly basis. He had most points against. He lost head to head to the two guys he was tied with record wise. Total points as you know is our 2nd tiebreaker after record.

 

He had David Johnson and Tom Brady on his team and went on to get 2nd place out of 12 teams.

 

not here to argue but total points is unquestionably the only way to go to get the best teams in the Playoff tournament. this was a perfect example. Cheers.

[weepaws 2,452]

You can only base it on total points.

 

You can't go by h2h with two teams playing one less game vs the others.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

You should follow the rules as set forth.

 

And for next season use "breakdown" which calculates each teams record if they played every team every week. Use the breakdown and points scored to figure out the teams in the playoffs.

 

I am in playoffs against a team with a record of 5-8. They have had worst schedule in the league but made playoffs because the team scored enough points and had good breakdown record.

The breakdown is a pretty great way to determine which team is consistently one of the top teams. Total points for is okay, but a lot of times the difference between two teams is simply who had the best single week. Does the fact that a team was able to rip off a 170 points in its best week, and the other teams best week is only 130, really mean that the first team is better?

[shredhead 21]

 

Eh.

 

I play a lot of board games. There are board games that have two people competing without interacting with each other--competing against the game rules to separately try to achieve the most points, but your actions don't affect my points and vice versa. And there are games that have the players interacting with each other as they play, the actions of each player affecting the points of the other players.

 

Each kind of game has its merits, and are enjoyable for different reasons. It's just silly to tell people who like one kind of game that their kind of game "isn't as good".

 

A lot of people like head to head FF because of the head to head factor. If you don't, that's cool. But it's a bit baffling to see so many people trying to 'convert' people away from a format that they enjoy and want to play, just because other people don't enjoy it. I'd be bored with FF that wasn't head to head.

What are some of your favorite board games? I'm fairly new to the gaming community, but I'm hooked. Some friends got me playing Aeon's End.... so much fun.......

[seafoam1 1,878]

 

would you say the way to judge a team is over 1 week head to head or over a 13 week season with total points.

 

we had three guys tied for the final playoff spot last year. One guy had 300 more points than the other two guys and had a 6-7 record. He was #2 in total points overall but just had horrible luck with who he played on a weekly basis. He had most points against. He lost head to head to the two guys he was tied with record wise. Total points as you know is our 2nd tiebreaker after record.

 

He had David Johnson and Tom Brady on his team and went on to get 2nd place out of 12 teams.

 

not here to argue but total points is unquestionably the only way to go to get the best teams in the Playoff tournament. this was a perfect example. Cheers.

One reason I support total points is because of bye weeks. In the NFL, bye weeks just mean a team doesn't play. No win, no loss. In FF, one teams starting roster may be cut in half, while the team they are playing doesn't have anyone on bye. All teams lose players because of bye weeks, but on any given bye week, one team may be hit way harder than the other. Why should that factor into tiebreaker scenarios?

 

I had one game this year that I had 6 starters on bye, and the team I played had none.

[Quickolas1 80]

Total points. That is all you will need and reflects the most of how good your team is vs. the rest of the league.

 

 

All-Play Record (or "Breakdown") would be better based on your "team vs rest of league" desired criteria. It incorporates points AND weekly variation whereas points alone do not.

 

But for the OP question... a Commish shouldn't be deciding on tie-breakers now. It should be comprehensively thought-out before a season begins.

[brotherbock 349]

 

would you say the way to judge a team is over 1 week head to head or over a 13 week season with total points.

 

we had three guys tied for the final playoff spot last year. One guy had 300 more points than the other two guys and had a 6-7 record. He was #2 in total points overall but just had horrible luck with who he played on a weekly basis. He had most points against. He lost head to head to the two guys he was tied with record wise. Total points as you know is our 2nd tiebreaker after record.

 

He had David Johnson and Tom Brady on his team and went on to get 2nd place out of 12 teams.

 

not here to argue but total points is unquestionably the only way to go to get the best teams in the Playoff tournament. this was a perfect example. Cheers.

 

I'm not saying total points can't be some part of the tie-breaking process. You need a bunch of tie breaking factors on the list, right, just in case.

 

But the NFL doesn't care about total points more than they care about head to head records. There have been plenty of times that the 'better team' has lost because they weren't better that day. That's how it goes. And frankly, I do enjoy that--it's part of what makes the game enjoyable for me. The fact that an underdog team, struggling all season, can pull off a miraculous playoff run. H2H as an overall league system is more enjoyable for me, as it basing significant tie-breaking on it. Doesn't always turn out in my favor, of course. But total points often leaves the season and playoffs fun for only half the league.

 

One reason I support total points is because of bye weeks. In the NFL, bye weeks just mean a team doesn't play. No win, no loss. In FF, one teams starting roster may be cut in half, while the team they are playing doesn't have anyone on bye. All teams lose players because of bye weeks, but on any given bye week, one team may be hit way harder than the other. Why should that factor into tiebreaker scenarios?

 

I had one game this year that I had 6 starters on bye, and the team I played had none.

 

Planning for bye weeks should be part of a drafting strategy if your league is run that way, then. Plenty of years I've put together a great team and just looked forward to writing off one week as a tradeoff for that particular roster. If I didn't like that tradeoff, I'd draft differently. I don't mind this at all, just part of that style of play.

 

There's a lot of argument about what 'should' or 'shouldn't' affect the game. But there's no objective fact about how FF should be played. There is no 'should', only 'how people do play it'. Play the game how you enjoy it

[brotherbock 349]

What are some of your favorite board games? I'm fairly new to the gaming community, but I'm hooked. Some friends got me playing Aeon's End.... so much fun.......

 

Haven't played that one. A lot of my favorites are 'old' standbys, something like Stone Age or Memoir 44.

 

I was thinking about a game like Dominion for this topic--depending on which cards you choose to play with, that game can be interactive, or just people around the table dealing their own cards and racing against each other, no interaction. I like interaction better

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Total points for tie-breakers. Anything else makes no sense to me. Even "Breakdown" or "All Play" records.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

Total points for tie-breakers. Anything else makes no sense to me. Even "Breakdown" or "All Play" records.

You must value big weeks vs quality, consistent play.

[seafoam1 1,878]

 

Planning for bye weeks should be part of a drafting strategy if your league is run that way, then. Plenty of years I've put together a great team and just looked forward to writing off one week as a tradeoff for that particular roster. If I didn't like that tradeoff, I'd draft differently. I don't mind this at all, just part of that style of play.

 

There's a lot of argument about what 'should' or 'shouldn't' affect the game. But there's no objective fact about how FF should be played. There is no 'should', only 'how people do play it'. Play the game how you enjoy it

 

I don't know anyone who has ever talked about a drafting strategy to include bye weeks except for maybe backup QB or Def. As you say, maybe just accept a write off of one week, but I look at it is more of a WW strategy to look at a few weeks before a bye week. That said, sure, no problem with just drafting a team and just knowing you may have one bad bye week, but, that's exactly why I think head to head is not a good tie-breaker category. If you seriously take into account bye weeks, you would have to track your schedule for bye weeks, and then track all the teams you play for those bye weeks monitoring which players are on their teams will be out those weeks while tracking your own players bye weeks, then adjust your draft picks on the fly and determine if focusing on those picks gains you an advantage over other possible picks. And even then you don't know yet what those other teams starting lineups will be in the end. Too many variables to gain an edge I think given the amount of time between picks.

 

But all that said, I in no way put down what other leagues want to do, unless someone is complaining about league rules, then usually I just say, leave the league.

I don't even care if people play TD only leagues, as long as they are having fun.

[Phil Simms 11 127]

You must value big weeks vs quality, consistent play.

 

Breakdown is absolutely the best.

 

But it is unlikely One-week high score would win anybody a points battle. Wouldn't they have had multiple decent weeks to even be in total points conversation, albeit 5-6th position total points.

[seafoam1 1,878]

You must value big weeks vs quality, consistent play.

Over a 14 week season I don't think this matters. One or two big weeks on a mediocre team does not win them a points or standings championship from my experience. In my league over the last 10-12 years, it's usually only one team that sits outside the playoffs with more points than the teams just in front of them, and they are only up by maybe 50-80 points or so. But then again, we play two games a week. One against opponent and one against league team average for that week so the win/loss % usually evens out fairly in my eyes..

[Brutal Brutus 182]

Over a 14 week season I don't think this matters. One or two big weeks on a mediocre team does not win them a points or standings championship from my experience. In my league over the last 10-12 years, it's usually only one team that sits outside the playoffs with more points than the teams just in front of them, and they are only up by maybe 50-80 points or so. But then again, we play two games a week. One against opponent and one against league team average for that week so the win/loss % usually evens out fairly in my eyes..

I was interested to see how this plays out. In my league we have four teams still alive for the last two playoff spots, and we use a two win a week system, 1 for head to head, 1 for top six points, with the playoff tie breaker being total points for. I'm #1 in the league in total points, #1 in the breakdown, yet sitting 5th as of now, clearly just an unlucky year for me in H2H, but our two weekly win system keeps me alive. As for the other three teams, the team that currently has the 6th spot, has the total points on the other two by 30-35 points. He is behind both teams in the breakdown, but he happens to have the biggest week in our league with 172 points. The other two teams best weeks are 139, and 117. So his one week is very much the deciding factor, despite being a less consistent team in the breakdown. Maybe this is just an outlier, and weird year, but it helps make my argument so I'm going with it.

[brotherbock 349]

 

I don't know anyone who has ever talked about a drafting strategy to include bye weeks except for maybe backup QB or Def. As you say, maybe just accept a write off of one week, but I look at it is more of a WW strategy to look at a few weeks before a bye week. That said, sure, no problem with just drafting a team and just knowing you may have one bad bye week, but, that's exactly why I think head to head is not a good tie-breaker category. If you seriously take into account bye weeks, you would have to track your schedule for bye weeks, and then track all the teams you play for those bye weeks monitoring which players are on their teams will be out those weeks while tracking your own players bye weeks, then adjust your draft picks on the fly and determine if focusing on those picks gains you an advantage over other possible picks. And even then you don't know yet what those other teams starting lineups will be in the end. Too many variables to gain an edge I think given the amount of time between picks.

 

But all that said, I in no way put down what other leagues want to do, unless someone is complaining about league rules, then usually I just say, leave the league.

I don't even care if people play TD only leagues, as long as they are having fun.

 

I do use waivers as a draft tie breaker--if I'm looking at two guys to fill my WR3 spot, both fairly even in my rankings, I will take bye weeks into account. If my WR1&2 both have the same bye week, and one of the two generally even guys I'm looking at has that very same bye week, it's a least a reason (one among many) to pick the other guy.

 

I agree about complaining--it makes sense if someone is complaining about H2H to suggest they try something else Although there are seasons when I can be heard to be b!tching about H2H just because I missed a first round bye--but that doesn't mean I don't actually still like it

 

(I was about to talk about seasons when I've just missed the playoffs, but I realized that I can't think of a season in any league where I've just missed. Maybe one. Typically, when I miss the playoffs, I miss big.)

[thePRO 78]

My league is points scored.

 

My other 2 $$$ leagues I'm in play H2H tiebreaker and I hate it. I'm going to finish with the 1 or 2 seed and there are about five to six teams that could finish 7-7.

 

Because of H2H I may face a team that is 3rd in points forced. So basically as the 1 or 2 seed I'm technically playing the 3rd best team. Meanwhile the 4th seed is probably facing the 7th or 8th best team according to points scored.

 

H2H is stupid because maybe the week that a team lost was because he had 2-3 players on bye. I don't know. I prefer points scored TB.

[neil2222 1]

Why not do total points against rather than points for? Give the tiebreaker to the person that had the most points scored against them since it is wholly outside of their control. Give the playoff position to the person that just had the bad luck of going up a tougher schedule. It's not like you can play defense to limit how many points the other team scores. It's the one thing that is completely outside of an owner's control that has a significant impact on the results.

[brotherbock 349]

Why not do total points against rather than points for? Give the tiebreaker to the person that had the most points scored against them since it is wholly outside of their control. Give the playoff position to the person that just had the bad luck of going up a tougher schedule. It's not like you can play defense to limit how many points the other team scores. It's the one thing that is completely outside of an owner's control that has a significant impact on the results.

 

Interesting.

 

My first reaction is that, even though I'm a H2H guy, I'd prefer the tiebreaker to be about something even marginally in my control. The guy with the tougher schedule may also have done very little managing all season as well. I'm less sympathetic to him than to the owner trying hard and getting tons of points scored against.

 

What about For/Against Differential? Subtract Points Against from the Points For, and go with the lower number.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

You must value big weeks vs quality, consistent play.

 

It is a tiebreaker, not the entire basis of the season, although there are leagues that just do it by points.

 

Over the course of 13 weeks, the outliers typically don't have that much of an impact.

[neil2222 1]

 

Interesting.

 

My first reaction is that, even though I'm a H2H guy, I'd prefer the tiebreaker to be about something even marginally in my control. The guy with the tougher schedule may also have done very little managing all season as well. I'm less sympathetic to him than to the owner trying hard and getting tons of points scored against.

 

What about For/Against Differential? Subtract Points Against from the Points For, and go with the lower number.

Differential is a good compromise. My favorite playoff tiebreaker is Def/ST points... Because Defense Wins Championships.

[brotherbock 349]

Differential is a good compromise. My favorite playoff tiebreaker is Def/ST points... Because Defense Wins Championships.

 

I like the DEF addition.

 

The differential would seemingly potentially reward both the guy who scores a ton of points, but also potentially give some reward to the guy who's been getting pounded each week. If I score enough points, then it might not matter how badly you were getting beaten, and vice versa.

 

It might be cool to have a random category as a tie-breaker. Have a bunch of possible qualifications--DEF points, most TDs all season, most posts on league forums (ha!)--and for the tie-breaker one gets chosen at random. Replace the final 'coin flip' with something like that. Still somewhat random. But if you've got the overall better team in most categories (or were more active in the league for the posts one), you have a better chance.

[tanatastic 2,061]

Total points is the only tiebreaker that should ever be used.

[seafoam1 1,878]

Here's a thought:

 

Tie breaker goes to best coaching decisions made throughout the year.

 

Let's say after each week you calculate the best possible lineup that could have been played based on a team's full roster. This is based on the WHOLE team roster. Then calculate the difference between the points scored for what the best possible starters would have scored for that week, and what the actual starters scored . Then the smallest differential added up for each week over the regular season, wins the tie break. This actually would outline the skill of the person who is setting the lineup each week based upon the roster they have.

 

For instance, if I start my 8 players for week 1, and the team scores me 120 points, but if I started certain other players I would have had 145 for that week, then I get -25 for that week coaching differential. If actual meets best, then you get a 0 differential, which is the best.

 

So if team A and team B are tied for 4th place at the end of the regular season, then whoever has the lowest point differential in roster starting decisions over the coarse of the year, is the "smarter coach" of their team, and wins the tie break. Why reward someone who constantly makes mistakes on their own weekly lineups? And remember, this is just for tie break between two equal teams trying to get into the playoffs or have a better seed. It has no effect on crappy teams trying to just screw around with their rosters.

 

RTsports has this feature and it's cool because you can click on actual vs. best for each team once the game goes final.

[LunaTick 29]

THE SITUATION;

 

2 divisions of 6 teams each

4 teams tied at 6-7 for 5th & 6th seeds

 

TIEBREAKERS

1. winning percentage (not app)
2. head to head
3. division record
4. total points scored

head to head common opponents, the results

• tm A 2-1 - awarded 5th seed
• tm B 1-1 - next tiebreaker -div record 4-6 -Wins 6th seed by total points
• tm C 1-1 - next tiebreaker -div record 4-6
• tm D 1-2 - out

Because of the uneven H2H match-ups (2 played 3 games and 2 played 2 games). Is there a better way to decide who gets in? Skip this tiebreaker when uneven number of match-ups?

 

Thoughts would be appreciated.

 

Division Record should only apply to selecting the Division winner

 

Winning percentage? I suppose there might be a scenario with ties vs wins. But seems like an irrelevant item. Scrub that

 

Overall Record

H2H

Points

 

I will use my league tiebreaker for WC1/WC2 involving 3 teams.

 

All had same record.

 

move on

 

team A played Team B twice and won both

Team B played Team C once and won

Team C played Team A once and won.

 

cyclical. no change

 

Then total points score, Broken

 

Let's go back to this.

 

Say A and B split,

Isn't it still cyclical. no change

 

PROBLEM HERE IS WE DO NOT KNOW WHO PLAYED Played who to determine the H2H.

 

Assuming is cyclical. You moved on down to points

[LaChup 154]

I would seriously consider cash offers.

[bobjay00 22]

WOW! thanks for the responses, some great ideas. I will consider them all. I think I hit "Like This" 4/5 times. I had the same thing happen in CBS Baseball a couple of years ago. We just did the following.."if 3 or more teams are tied and have not played the same number of common opponents in the H2H tiebreaker it went to total points scored"

[LunaTick 29]

One more thing

 

It maybe necessary for a random draw to determine the outcome or have some other stat. Like most TD's scored .....

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

Last year, my keeper league converted over to using CBS's Power Ranking chart to determine playoff seeding. Much easier that way.

[Quickolas1 80]

Last year, my keeper league converted over to using CBS's Power Ranking chart to determine playoff seeding. Much easier that way.

 

Should take out the 1/3 for H2H record, as it's duplicative. Just use 1/2 weighting for each of total points and all-play record (aka breakdown).

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

 

Should take out the 1/3 for H2H record, as it's duplicative. Just use 1/2 weighting for each of total points and all-play record (aka breakdown).

 

The group didn't want to do that. Since we play head-to-head every week, they wanted to keep that a part of the equation. Plus they felt better about having that as a last ditch tie-breaker.