thedanzone 2 Posted April 1, 2004 Realignment into 3 4-team divisions. Play your own division twice, everyone else once. 6+4+4=14 regular season weeks. Division winners + 1 wild card make playoffs, tiebreakers 1st - H2H; 2nd - Total Points Scored. 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3, Championship. Divisions: West: torridjoe, gratefulted, Orgazmo, whoisjgalt Central: Vikings4ever, thedanzone, rurbaniak, Farmer Bernie East: Wilzone, AUKidJoshH, bigmarc27, grandpahoo VOTES FOR: 4 VOTES AGAINST: 7 VOTED: thedanzone, whoisjgalt, Vikings4ever, Wilzone, Orgazmo, Farmer Bernie, bigmarc27, grandpahoo, rurbaniak, torridjoe, AUKidJoshH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 1, 2004 Let me first say that this could require some schedule adjustment. Here's what I'm thinking: The NFL has eight bye weeks. We should play the non-divisional games those weeks. It sucks to lose to a division rival (kinda like two losses) when you've got 3 of your best 5 guys on bye and he's got none on bye. It's less costly when it's a non-divisional game. That would mean playing weeks 3-10 against the other divisions and weeks 1-2 + 11-14 within division. Not playing one divisional opponent until week 11 and then again in week 14 isn't perfect design, but that's what I'm suggesting. This is how I arranged the schedule for Requiem. Ted and Mongo can give an opinion on whether they like that or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 1, 2004 And I'll vote against this one. I like the current structure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vikings4ever 496 Posted April 1, 2004 whoisjgalt: And I'll vote against this one. I like the current structure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Farmer Bernie 0 Posted April 1, 2004 Wilzone: I vote against. me too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 1, 2004 grandpahoo: For. Anything to get away from having to play my team twice, eh? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grandpahoo 9 Posted April 1, 2004 whoisjgalt: Anything to get away from having to play my team twice, eh? For. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigmarc27 24 Posted April 1, 2004 I want to keep 4 divisions of 3, but I'm not opposed to making the divisions different teams to reflect current geographic status. Also, I think we need to make the 2 conferences as well. I think it would be cool to have a conference championship and 1 wildcard from each. Ex: *Assmeg Conference* South Division East Division -- 2 division winners and 1 wildcard *MUA Conference* West Division North Division -- 2 division winners and 1 wildcard *highest record in both conf gets a bye into the conf championship. *MUA winner and Assmeg winner would play for the Championship. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedanzone 2 Posted April 1, 2004 bigmarc27: Also, I think we need to make the 2 conferences as well. I think it would be cool to have a conference championship and 1 wildcard from each. Ex: *Assmeg Conference* South Division East Division -- 2 division winners and 1 wildcard *MUA Conference* West Division North Division -- 2 division winners and 1 wildcard *highest record in both conf gets a bye into the conf championship. *MUA winner and Assmeg winner would play for the Championship. This is the most obvious and logical way to handle it if this goes down the pooper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
torridjoe 0 Posted April 2, 2004 against, but I do like bigmarc's suggestion, and I'd be OK with the original proposal adding 2 wildcards (so it'd be 3 winners, 3 cards). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 2, 2004 torridjoe: against, but I do like bigmarc's suggestion, and I'd be OK with the original proposal adding 2 wildcards (so it'd be 3 winners, 3 cards). Can't do that and play every in-division team twice plus every out-of-division team once (14 weeks) plus three weeks for the playoffs unless the championship game is week 17 - an idea that I hate. I also think we need to play everyone at least once and every division opponent twice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
torridjoe 0 Posted April 2, 2004 How about 2 each for division, 2 each for conference, and one each against a rotating division for the other conference? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 2, 2004 torridjoe: How about 2 each for division, 2 each for conference, and one each against a rotating division for the other conference? I don't understand this one. Are you saying (assuming the same structure as now): I play in conference twice (ted, tofro, org, wilz, hoo) I play one of the two other divisions once (either v4e, danz, rurb or auk, mongo, fb) since you're in the other division in my conference, you'd play the three I don't from the other conference Is that it? If so, then I still don't like not playing three teams. Too much potential advantage in the three you are or aren't stuck playing from the other conference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedanzone 2 Posted April 2, 2004 I like the playing schedule the way it is. I believe our stumbling block is the playoff wildcard spots, right? Our divisions are set right now at 4, 3 teams in each. We had 6 teams in the playoffs last year, but 4 of the teams were from the better conference. Do we want to establish a new wild card rule and mandate 3 teams from each conference? Or do we want to do something entirely different? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 2, 2004 thedanzone:...but 4 of the teams were from the better conference... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedanzone 2 Posted April 2, 2004 whoisjgalt: thedanzone:...but 4 of the teams were from the better conference... I silently predicted that reply. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 2, 2004 thedanzone: whoisjgalt: thedanzone:...but 4 of the teams were from the better conference... I silently predicted that reply. I figured rolleyes was one option or pointing out which conference the league champ came from was the other. Did I choose wisely? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
torridjoe 0 Posted April 2, 2004 whoisjgalt: torridjoe: How about 2 each for division, 2 each for conference, and one each against a rotating division for the other conference? I don't understand this one. Are you saying (assuming the same structure as now): I play in conference twice (ted, tofro, org, wilz, hoo) I play one of the two other divisions once (either v4e, danz, rurb or auk, mongo, fb) since you're in the other division in my conference, you'd play the three I don't from the other conference Is that it? If so, then I still don't like not playing three teams. Too much potential advantage in the three you are or aren't stuck playing from the other conference. correct. As long as you alternate years, it's not a big deal to not play three of the teams, IMO. At least, it's much more important to play games in division and conference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoisjgalt 0 Posted April 2, 2004 thedanzone:Do we want to establish a new wild card rule and mandate 3 teams from each conference? Or do we want to do something entirely different? I'd say we just vote: A) Two best non-division-winners, regardless of conference -or- Best non-division-winner from each conference And then if A), we need a system to allocate two from the same conference (I'd keep it simple and suggest the dice roll we used last year). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AUKidJoshH 0 Posted April 2, 2004 Since this was my idea, I'm going to vote FOR. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
