Cross-Country Scoring

[alex5444 0]

I read an article about a scheduling option where every team plays every other team in the league EVERY single week. So, with a 14 team league, there is an opportunity to pick up a combination of 13 wins/losses every single week. The thinking behind this was that it eliminates the problem that arises when somebody has a really good week, only to play the high-scoring team of that given week and end up with a loss. It is also meant to give teams more of a reason to follow their teams on a week to week basis, instead of just having the standings reflect the total points that accumulate over the season. This type of schedule is supposed to favor consistency of a team's performance.

 

What does everybody think of this? I'm considering using this format in my league this year. Are there any real faults that I am overlooking?

 

Here is a link to the article that explains the system better....

http://pacifistviking.blogspot.com/2006/07...ay-head-to.html

 

A question I do have in this is how to handle the playoffs with a format like this. Typically, in our head-to-head league, we had the playoffs during weeks 14-16. I don't really like the idea of scrapping the playoffs altogether, so what would be a good option? Would it be favorable to still use a head-to-head playoff schedule or is there a better option?

 

I'd really appreciate any input

[edjr 6,580]

That's an idea similar to the one I created for my league.

 

I'm switching my league from head to head the last 11 years to a NASCAR style of scoring this year.

 

We have 15 teams.

 

and the teams will get X ammount of points by how many points they score that week.

 

1st 17

2nd 15

3rd 13

4th 12

5th 11

6th 10

7th 9

8th 8

9th 7

10th 6

11th 5

12th 4

13th 3

14th 2

15th 1

 

What do you think of that?

 

After 12 weeks the score is cleared and the top 7 go into a playoff and they do it again weeks 13, 14, 15 and 16

[FantasyKing 4]

I read an article about a scheduling option where every team plays every other team in the league EVERY single week. So, with a 14 team league, there is an opportunity to pick up a combination of 13 wins/losses every single week. The thinking behind this was that it eliminates the problem that arises when somebody has a really good week, only to play the high-scoring team of that given week and end up with a loss. It is also meant to give teams more of a reason to follow their teams on a week to week basis, instead of just having the standings reflect the total points that accumulate over the season. This type of schedule is supposed to favor consistency of a team's performance.

 

What does everybody think of this? I'm considering using this format in my league this year. Are there any real faults that I am overlooking?

 

Here is a link to the article that explains the system better....

http://pacifistviking.blogspot.com/2006/07...ay-head-to.html

 

A question I do have in this is how to handle the playoffs with a format like this. Typically, in our head-to-head league, we had the playoffs during weeks 14-16. I don't really like the idea of scrapping the playoffs altogether, so what would be a good option? Would it be favorable to still use a head-to-head playoff schedule or is there a better option?

 

I'd really appreciate any input

 

Yes - this is called an overall points league. ;-)

[edjr 6,580]

Yes - this is called an overall points league. ;-)

 

 

Not really.

 

One week you could be the low team by 1 and get 11 losses and the next week you could be the high by 1 and get 11 wins.

 

overall points you could outscore everyone by 50 one week and the next 3 weeks you could be in last but only 15 points from 1st. Entirely different. in overall points you'd still be in 1st, but with his style you'd be near last.

[FantasyKing 4]

Not really.

 

One week you could be the low team by 1 and get 11 losses and the next week you could be the high by 1 and get 11 wins.

 

overall points you could outscore everyone by 50 one week and the next 3 weeks you could be in last but only 15 points from 1st. Entirely different. in overall points you'd still be in 1st, but with his style you'd be near last.

 

Ok - I dont think if you had a 50 point lead over everyone and then finished last in points the next three weeks that you would be only 15 points out of first place - you'd be down in the bottom half for sure. I know what you are saying though, guess it would be interesting to see how that league would play out compared to an overall points league.

[ieatchickens 0]

This new idea is not much different from a points only league like the above poster said. The standings would be identical.

[edjr 6,580]

Ok - I dont think if you had a 50 point lead over everyone and then finished last in points the next three weeks that you would be only 15 points out of first place - you'd be down in the bottom half for sure. I know what you are saying though, guess it would be interesting to see how that league would play out compared to an overall points league.

Yes, my example isn't perfect, but overall points to me is flawed, I like his idea better, but I like mine even more.

[FantasyKing 4]

Yes, my example isn't perfect, but overall points to me is flawed, I like his idea better, but I like mine even more.

 

Yes I think your league is a better way to do it than the original post.....and I hate Nascar.

[t.j 35]

I don't like the concept and I'll tell you why. Catching opponents on a good day or a bad day is part of competition, in every game, at every level.

 

For example:

The Giants played against Seattle in September, with Matt Hasselbeck and Shaun Alexander. The Seahawks offense rolled for 333 yards in a 42-30 Seahawks victory.

But the Chiefs played against Seattle in October, with Seneca Wallace and Maurice Morris. The Seahawks offense only gained 240 yards in a 28-35 Seahawks loss.

 

That's just how it is. You don't get to play everyone on their worst day and their best day and their average days. If you're lucky, you play more teams on their bad days than on their good days. Ultimately, what it comes down to is your own team has to be good enough and consistent enough to overcome a little bad luck.

[jgcrawfish 232]

I've seen this done and it's particularly effective in odd-numbered leagues (11, 13 teams, etc). CBS Sportslines "Breakdown" is essentially the same thing, it projects you vs everybody else that week. It's a cool concept in that if you put up 150 pts but lose to the high scorer who put up 160, you can still have a week where you go 9-1 (for however many teams you have). The con on the whole thing is that a couple of bad weeks can essentially put you out of playoff contention. Lets say you have two weeks where you were the lowest scoring team in the league. In a normal head to head matchup, you lose two games. But for the rest of the season you win a little over 1/2 of your games. You might still make the playoffs since you were only 2 games back and went over .500 for the rest of the season. However, in the example league, you could actually drop a LOT of games. 10 (or 11, 12, 13, 14) teams x 2 poor weeks = 20, 22, 24, 26 or even 28 losses. That's a big deficit to overcome if you're only gonna go a little over .500 the rest of the way. Yes, some other team will be lowest scorer some other week, but it's still a large chasm to jump.

[Cretins 22]

This new idea is not much different from a points only league like the above poster said. The standings would be identical.

Actually, no, the standings could be quite different. It would be too long to post an entire leagues full season, but let's look at a quick example using 4 teams over 5 weeks of play.

 

Team A Team B Team C Team D

Week 1 92 90 87 91

Week 2 95 90 93 78

Week 3 98 90 85 94

Week 4 93 90 88 89

Week 5 60 90 90 87

 

Total points 438 450 443 439

 

Record 12-3 6-8-1 4-10-1 5-10

 

Rankings by score: B, C, D, A

 

Rankings by record: A, B, D, C

 

The only team in the same position after 5 weeks is team D. All the others have shuffled around, including Team A being severely penalized by a bad score in week 5 (injured QB in the 1st quarter perhaps).

 

I've never liked the pure points method. A single bad week can ruin your entire season, while you can bounce back much easier when it's tied to a win-loss ratio.

 

(grr .. nice tabbed formatting lost in post. sorry for the ugly look!)

[Steel City Blues 0]

The playoffs could be the same format with only the top 4 teams advancing to play against each other over the last 2-4 weeks.

 

Or make it a 4 team eliminator over the last 3 weeks. Lowest scoring team is out from weeks 14 through 16.

 

Either case, the tiebreaker would go to the highest seeded team.