TheGambinoCrimeFamily 0 Posted September 8, 2007 I nominated a new rule this season and it passed amongt our 12 owners. We have 4 divisions (2 conferences) of 3 teams in each division. So, when the playoffs start, 4 teams from each conference make the playoffs week 14. It has seems too frequently that the #1 seed gets knocked out of the playoffs week 1 by the 4th seed. I proposed that the #1 seed in each conference gets to pick his week 1 playoff opponent amongst the 3rd and 4th seeds, kind of like a home field advantage. Sometimes, that 4th seed either has better playoff matchups or is coming on of late and that 3rd seed looks like a better play. What do you think ? Do you have something like this ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
michael_melhus 0 Posted September 8, 2007 I think it is a fine rule. Do think it does a whole lot though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Me_2006 14 Posted September 8, 2007 Good rule. Mind if I mention that? I know how the upset thing can go, been on both sides, especially with those guys who draft players based on their playoff schedules alone and struggle a bit thru the season while barely making the playoffs and winning the whole thing. May see what my leaguemates think of the idea. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mephisto 15 Posted September 8, 2007 How about a rule where the whole focking league doesn't make the playoffs? This isn't hockey, it's football, you assbag. All division winners should make it... and then perhaps the next best two based upon record/points... 8 teams in the playoffs in a 12-team league is ludicrous. I'm trying to convince my league to pare down to 4. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steel City Blues 0 Posted September 8, 2007 8 teams out of 12 make the playoffs. I do like the rule allowing the #1 seed pick his opponent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheGambinoCrimeFamily 0 Posted September 8, 2007 How about a rule where the whole focking league doesn't make the playoffs? This isn't hockey, it's football, you assbag. All division winners should make it... and then perhaps the next best two based upon record/points... 8 teams in the playoffs in a 12-team league is ludicrous. I'm trying to convince my league to pare down to 4. "Assbag" ? Why dont you eat the corn nuggets out of my CHIT !!!! Ive tried to scale back the # of teams, but I lost the vote. Actually, Im probably glad I did. Ive won our league 3 times and twice was from the Wild Card. Like another poster above, Im one of those guys that pays a lot of attention to playoff matchups. This new rule rewards the 2 owners with the best regular season in their conference, and I think its a good motivating incentive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mephisto 15 Posted September 8, 2007 "Assbag" ? Why dont you eat the corn nuggets out of my CHIT !!!!Ive tried to scale back the # of teams, but I lost the vote. Actually, Im probably glad I did. Ive won our league 3 times and twice was from the Wild Card. Like another poster above, Im one of those guys that pays a lot of attention to playoff matchups. This new rule rewards the 2 owners with the best regular season in their conference, and I think its a good motivating incentive. Are you the Commissioner of this hockey league? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheGambinoCrimeFamily 0 Posted September 8, 2007 Are you the Commissioner of this hockey league? No, I am not And believe this or not, I am the most hated owner in the league and the most feared Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
49ER MAN 0 Posted September 8, 2007 I nominated a new rule this season and it passed amongt our 12 owners. We have 4 divisions (2 conferences) of 3 teams in each division. So, when the playoffs start, 4 teams from each conference make the playoffs week 14. It has seems too frequently that the #1 seed gets knocked out of the playoffs week 1 by the 4th seed. I proposed that the #1 seed in each conference gets to pick his week 1 playoff opponent amongst the 3rd and 4th seeds, kind of like a home field advantage. Sometimes, that 4th seed either has better playoff matchups or is coming on of late and that 3rd seed looks like a better play. What do you think ? Do you have something like this ? It's not something I would personally agree with but it is different and interesting to say the least. I will say nicely done on using creativity in your league. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mangatang 0 Posted September 8, 2007 If you change it to only 6 teams in the playoffs, the two conference champs will get a bye week the first round of playoffs. That's a lot better than picking an oppenent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CLichti 0 Posted September 9, 2007 How about a rule where the whole focking league doesn't make the playoffs? This isn't hockey, it's football, you assbag. All division winners should make it... and then perhaps the next best two based upon record/points... 8 teams in the playoffs in a 12-team league is ludicrous. I'm trying to convince my league to pare down to 4. Ah Mephisto.....it's been a while since I've been around, and I thought you were banned a couple years ago (part of the reason I left). It's so good to read your soothing voice of reason! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
G3-175SE 0 Posted September 9, 2007 I have been the #1 seed a few times and I always lose the first game I play in the playoffs. Your suggestion isn't really that much better than playing according to rank IMO. Winning in the playoffs is as much about luck as skill in picking players. I don't think your chances of winning against your handpicked opponent are any better than playing the lowest ranking team. If I was in your league I would vote against your rule change but that doesn't make it a bad rule. If the majority like it then go for it. I think you have to keep the owners happy as long as the rules aren't too outrageous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lostsoulny 2 Posted September 9, 2007 If you change it to only 6 teams in the playoffs, the two conference champs will get a bye week the first round of playoffs. That's a lot better than picking an oppenent. exactly what we do, give first place teams the bye. That said it seems the higher seeds never win it all... Momentum in the end is better than the beginning I would vote your rule down, if you team is that good you should be able to beat anyone to goto the bigshow just like in the NFL... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thunderbolts 0 Posted September 9, 2007 I nominated a new rule this season and it passed amongt our 12 owners. We have 4 divisions (2 conferences) of 3 teams in each division. So, when the playoffs start, 4 teams from each conference make the playoffs week 14. It has seems too frequently that the #1 seed gets knocked out of the playoffs week 1 by the 4th seed. I proposed that the #1 seed in each conference gets to pick his week 1 playoff opponent amongst the 3rd and 4th seeds, kind of like a home field advantage. Sometimes, that 4th seed either has better playoff matchups or is coming on of late and that 3rd seed looks like a better play. What do you think ? Do you have something like this ? We have a 12 team league. 3 divisions of 4 teams. play 14 games. 3 division champs (east, central, west) make playofffs along with 3 wild card teams. week 15. Top 2 seeds get a bye week. 3rd seed division champ plays lowest seed wild card. The 2 other wild cards play. week 16 Top 2 seeds play 2 winners from last week playoffs. Top seed gets lowest remaining seeded team. week 17 Super Bowl & Runner up bowl (3rd & 4th place). Bottom 6 teams in league play toilet bowl using same format of seeding. All team in playoffs last 3 weeks, top teams for super bowl and bottom teams for toilet bowl. weeks 15, 16 & 17 has 3 weeks most points mini-tornament so any team in league can still win some money (even teams knock out of playoffs). The toilet bowl winner also wins some money. Even teams that start off terrible ( 0-5) can hang around for end of the year toilet bowl & mini-tornament for most points and win back their entry fee in league. This keeps all teams involved in league at year end and avoids dead teams. Dead losing teams by definition give up & usually make no roster moves or submitting lineups when they have nothing to play for anymore. Also if you have your 12 teams in 3 divisions of 4 teams. You then play your 3 other division rivals 2 games each for a total of 6 games. You also play each team outside your division once for a total of 8 games. This add up to 14 game schedue. 2 games against division rivals and 1 game against each team outside division. This allows you to use head to head games as a tie breaker on division leaders and playoff seeds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheGambinoCrimeFamily 0 Posted September 9, 2007 exactly what we do, give first place teams the bye. That said it seems the higher seeds never win it all... Momentum in the end is better than the beginning I would vote your rule down, if you team is that good you should be able to beat anyone to goto the bigshow just like in the NFL... "Just like in the NFL" Is fantasy football just like the NFL ? Shall we create a poll on that very deep point you made ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OuttaLuck 0 Posted September 9, 2007 I think your idea is a very good one. We have 6 teams make the playoffs out of 12 teams (two "wild-cards" play the second-place finisher in each division) before then playing the first place finisher in each division (personally, I believe it should be only 4 play-off teams, but I've been out-voted). Last year I led the league in wins and points but had to play the team with the second-most amount of wins and points. I lost by two points, and would've beaten the Super Bowl winner had I made it there. As far as calling him an "assbag", Mephisto, why does it make sense to refer to him by that ever-so-sophisticated description because his league's rules mandate that a certain number of teams make the playoffs? What makes you think he unilaterally can control that league rule? Also, calling someone an "assbag" is something you probably would never do in person, but because you're behind a computer screen and it's "ok to talk smack" here, you believe that's appropriate? This guy came up with and mentioned a possible good rule change, yet your response was only to criticize him and the existing rules of his league. I realize you post some good thoughts here, Mephisto, but your response here should land you on the And yeah, yeah, I know....the typical response here to a reply such as mine in a situation like this one probably would be "Why the man-love for [the poster to whom I give credit]?"...It's just makes so much more sense to me to address the issue raised by a poster rather than bashing him for an issue he didn't raise and raking him over the coals over a league rule which he cannot control. He came up with a good idea and should be commended for it, not called an "assbag". Ok, my rant is over...the rabies shot just kicked in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheGambinoCrimeFamily 0 Posted September 9, 2007 I think your idea is a very good one. We have 6 teams make the playoffs out of 12 teams (two "wild-cards" play the second-place finisher in each division) before then playing the first place finisher in each division (personally, I believe it should be only 4 play-off teams, but I've been out-voted). Last year I led the league in wins and points but had to play the team with the second-most amount of wins and points. I lost by two points, and would've beaten the Super Bowl winner had I made it there. As far as calling him an "assbag", Mephisto, why does it make sense to refer to him by that ever-so-sophisticated description because his league's rules mandate that a certain number of teams make the playoffs? What makes you think he unilaterally can control that league rule? Also, calling someone an "assbag" is something you probably would never do in person, but because you're behind a computer screen and it's "ok to talk smack" here, you believe that's appropriate? This guy came up with and mentioned a possible good rule change, yet your response was only to criticize him and the existing rules of his league. I realize you post some good thoughts here, Mephisto, but your response here should land you on the And yeah, yeah, I know....the typical response here to a reply such as mine in a situation like this one probably would be "Why the man-love for [the poster to whom I give credit]?"...It's just makes so much more sense to me to address the issue raised by a poster rather than bashing him for an issue he didn't raise and raking him over the coals over a league rule which he cannot control. He came up with a good idea and should be commended for it, not called an "assbag". Ok, my rant is over...the rabies shot just kicked in. Nice. Thanx for the positive feedback . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ready5 0 Posted September 9, 2007 just do total points playoffs... the final game still ends up being head-to-head, obviously. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maddog3819 0 Posted September 9, 2007 Why do some of you guys want less people to make the playoffs? That takes away the excitement for alot of the guys and leads to bad trades and teams simply giving up because they have nothing to play for. We changed or playoff rule and now every team makes the playoffs w/ the top 4 seeds getting a bye week. Everyone in the league loves the idea. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jaxjag 43 Posted September 9, 2007 Why do some of you guys want less people to make the playoffs? That takes away the excitement for alot of the guys and leads to bad trades and teams simply giving up because they have nothing to play for. We changed or playoff rule and now every team makes the playoffs w/ the top 4 seeds getting a bye week. Everyone in the league loves the idea. Do the kids that lose still get a silver star on their report card? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mephisto 15 Posted September 9, 2007 Ah Mephisto.....it's been a while since I've been around, and I thought you were banned a couple years ago (part of the reason I left). It's so good to read your soothing voice of reason! Wow... it's been more than a couple... and I've been hanging for the better part of the last handful of years over at the Geek Board and really only come to this board when the NFL season is upon us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,567 Posted September 9, 2007 8 teams out of 12 make the playoffs. No wonder why they have upsets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
