Tie breaker help

[Chasgh 0]

I need some help with a tie breaker in our Final Four. We've never had this come up before but two teams are tied and the winner goes to the Fantasy Bowl. Our tiebreaker is reserve points. Both teams have the same number of reserve points and we have no backup tie breaker. Any suggestions on how to break this? What a dilemna!

[Vikings4ever 550]

Higher seed gets home field advantage, and the tie breaker.

[idiotekniQues 0]

as commish, in my league, i use points for, season wise, if there is no h2h record.

 

but this is my first year as a commish, so maybe i am just a noob without a clue

[Mad Brad 0]

In my league it's your starters total points 1st, then the total bench points 2nd, then starting QB points 3rd... and finally a coin toss 4th... MB

 

ps. never made it past 2 in 10 years thankfully...

[Chasgh 0]

This is such a mess!

[scherber830 0]

total TDs is our tiebreaker

[patweisers44 845]

In a couple leagues i am commish in, the higher seeded team get 1/2 point (in a league without decimal scoring) and .01 (in a league with one decimal place scoring) "home field advantage" . I guess as a reward for the better regular season.

[FSW Mephisto 0]

Starting last year, I didn't use things like "bench roster tiebreakers" or the LUDICROUS "home-field advantage tiebreakers."

 

Both teams advance. The league loves it. In fact, last year, the Championship Game in my league resulted in a tie - and both teams played each other in week 17 for the tiebreaker.

 

It is my new playoff tiebreaking scheme.

 

In the event of a tie, BOTH teams "advance" and effectively, two games are played at the same time. The winner of the two teams that tied is the team that "won" the previous game and his score is put up against the other team that advanced.

[FlaHawker 24]

Use decimal scoring next year--problem solved.

 

As for this year, I would have a three way SB--highest points wins. You can't decide a tie breaker now. That has to be done before the season starts.

[Borat33 17]

Starting last year, I didn't use things like "bench roster tiebreakers" or the LUDICROUS "home-field advantage tiebreakers."

 

Both teams advance. The league loves it. In fact, last year, the Championship Game in my league resulted in a tie - and both teams played each other in week 17 for the tiebreaker.

 

It is my new playoff tiebreaking scheme.

 

In the event of a tie, BOTH teams "advance" and effectively, two games are played at the same time. The winner of the two teams that tied is the team that "won" the previous game and his score is put up against the other team that advanced.

 

 

I like this, seems like the fairest way to do things.

[FSW Mephisto 0]

I like this, seems like the fairest way to do things.

 

It is. I'm a big "your starting lineup decides games" guy.

 

When I brought this scenario up last year, a few morons trashed on it claiming "it's not fair, the one guy has to play TWO guys."

 

 

No he doesn't. He has to play one guy... the guy who wins the tiebreaker using the next week of the playoffs to do it.

 

It was fortunate that I never had a tie in the playoffs before in the decade+ I've been doing this, though I did have a 1-point Mephisto Bowl about 5-years ago. Something was eating at me just before the playoffs started last year and I came up with that plan and told the league, "we don't have a playoff tiebreaking scenario so [this] is going to be it from now on..." They accepted it. How bizarre that our Mephisto Bowl ended up with a tie (even with fractional scoring). If there is another tie in Week 17 - there are co-Champs and the prize money is split.

 

A while ago, before I decided to just allow regular season ties to remain so, I had a rule in place (since the kickers usually decide the outcome of OT games in the NFL) that the highest scoring starting kicker broke the tie... and if the kickers were tied, the game would remain a tie.

[frank 2,305]

The ONLY fair thing is to find something both guys will agree to. It might have to be based on next weeks performance.

 

Next year, have better tie breakers planned as well as a rule covering any situation not already covered in the rules. For example, league discussion and vote decides.

[PatsFanatic 0]

Use decimal scoring next year--problem solved.

 

As for this year, I would have a three way SB--highest points wins. You can't decide a tie breaker now. That has to be done before the season starts.

 

Seriously, I can't believe people don't use decimal scoring. Makes no sense whatsoever. This is the best idea though.

 

The bench scoring is crap because you have different positions and some backups. If you had a bench of all QB's that start you would win the tiebreaker which is dumb.

[tubby_mcgee 701]

I need some help with a tie breaker in our Final Four. We've never had this come up before but two teams are tied and the winner goes to the Fantasy Bowl. Our tiebreaker is reserve points. Both teams have the same number of reserve points and we have no backup tie breaker. Any suggestions on how to break this? What a dilemna!

 

 

Because you didn't have something figured out ahead of time, the only fair way to do it, is a coin flip--or something random, something not related to what has already happened in your league.

 

Otherwise, one of the owners will be getting focked.

 

You can't say "Well, we're going to go by who had the single highest week" or "total points", etc...because whoever doesn't win that particular category will ask "Why did you choose that category? Why didn't you choose______ category?" (the one he would have won).

[tubby_mcgee 701]

The ONLY fair thing is to find something both guys will agree to. It might have to be based on next weeks performance.

 

 

That's not fair either.

 

Team A -- Already in Fantasy Bowl

Teams X & Y -- Tied, and fighting to be in Fantasy Bowl.

 

If you do it based on NEXT weeks performance, Team A is getting focked. It means they have to beat BOTH Teams X & Y.

 

Unless........perhaps your "next weeks performance" would be something like "Kicker vs. Kicker" or they have to keep their same rosters as last week, then use "Bench scoring" again. I actually like that idea, as "bench scoring" next week, would have no bearing on Team A having to beat both teams.

[The Next Generation 10]

In a couple leagues i am commish in, the higher seeded team get 1/2 point (in a league without decimal scoring) and .01 (in a league with one decimal place scoring) "home field advantage" . I guess as a reward for the better regular season.

 

Why not give the decimal scoring league guy .5 pts since that equals 1/2? Anyway...

 

Starting last year, I didn't use things like "bench roster tiebreakers" or the LUDICROUS "home-field advantage tiebreakers."

 

I don't think it's ludicrous at all to use the better seed (i.e. home team) as a 2nd or 3rd tiebreaker. They played all year long and earned the higher seed, so it's perfectly valid IMO.

[patweisers44 845]

The ONLY fair thing is to find something both guys will agree to. It might have to be based on next weeks performance.

i dont think this is cool for the team that has to face the winner of this. Basically they will have to beat two teams in the finals instead of just one?

[patweisers44 845]

Why not give the decimal scoring league guy .5 pts since that equals 1/2? Anyway...

The gist of the thing is to go beyond the regular scoring system by one decimal place to insure that no ties occur.

[The Next Generation 10]

The gist of the thing is to go beyond the regular scoring system by one decimal place to insure that no ties occur.

 

Ahhh... ...now I get it.

[patweisers44 845]

Ahhh... ...now I get it.

yeah...i think its the fairest way that doesnt include bench players, most TDs, or any other thing outside the body of a starting lineup for the week.

[tubby_mcgee 701]

i dont think this is cool for the team that has to face the winner of this. Basically they will have to beat two teams in the finals instead of just one?

 

 

I already said that....but in his defense, he didn't say "face the winner", he said "based on performance..." and...that "performance" could be a smaller sub-category, like bench scoring.

[frank 2,305]

That's not fair either.

 

Team A -- Already in Fantasy Bowl

Teams X & Y -- Tied, and fighting to be in Fantasy Bowl.

 

If you do it based on NEXT weeks performance, Team A is getting focked. It means they have to beat BOTH Teams X & Y.

 

Unless........perhaps your "next weeks performance" would be something like "Kicker vs. Kicker" or they have to keep their same rosters as last week, then use "Bench scoring" again. I actually like that idea, as "bench scoring" next week, would have no bearing on Team A having to beat both teams.

 

Right. I meant something like this week 15 bench players vs each other in week 16.

[FSW Mephisto 0]

When I brought this scenario up last year, a few morons trashed on it claiming "it's not fair, the one guy has to play TWO guys."

 

 

No he doesn't. He has to play one guy... the guy who wins the tiebreaker using the next week of the playoffs to do it.

 

 

That's not fair either.

 

Team A -- Already in Fantasy Bowl

Teams X & Y -- Tied, and fighting to be in Fantasy Bowl.

 

If you do it based on NEXT weeks performance, Team A is getting focked. It means they have to beat BOTH Teams X & Y.

 

 

LMAO... no they don't have to beat "BOTH TEAM X&Y" you frigging moron.

[patweisers44 845]

LMAO... no they don't have to beat "BOTH TEAM X&Y" you frigging moron.

Team A scores 50 points.

 

Team X scores 60 points.

 

Team Y scores 40 points.

 

Under your scenario team X is champion.

[Guest RenoZ]

LMAO... no they don't have to beat "BOTH TEAM X&Y" you frigging moron.

 

Ummmm....ya, they would.

 

Team X is awaiting a winner.

 

Team A and B trying to figure out who is "in." Team A scores 105 points and is "beatable" and Team B scores 187 points and is "unbeatable."

 

If this were decided last week, he may have only had to face the lower scoring guy. He, in essence, has to beat the highest scoring of the two.

 

Ya friggin moron.

 

[Dr. Octopus 0]

Ummmm....ya, they would.

 

Team X is awaiting a winner.

 

Team A and B trying to figure out who is "in." Team A scores 105 points and is "beatable" and Team B scores 187 points and is "unbeatable."

 

If this were decided last week, he may have only had to face the lower scoring guy. He, in essence, has to beat the highest scoring of the two.

 

Ya friggin moron.

 

 

 

Allow me to tell you how this will play out.

 

You'll continue to state your position logically and Mephisto will come back repeatedly with "YOU'RE WRONG MORON HE'S ONLY PLAYING ONE TEAM MORON".

 

Delete your post now and save the bandwidth.

[swirvenirvin 25]

Starting last year, I didn't use things like "bench roster tiebreakers" or the LUDICROUS "home-field advantage tiebreakers."

 

Both teams advance. The league loves it. In fact, last year, the Championship Game in my league resulted in a tie - and both teams played each other in week 17 for the tiebreaker.

 

It is my new playoff tiebreaking scheme.

 

In the event of a tie, BOTH teams "advance" and effectively, two games are played at the same time. The winner of the two teams that tied is the team that "won" the previous game and his score is put up against the other team that advanced.

 

Another fishing trip already???

[swirvenirvin 25]

Before this thread gets out of control again.

 

We have it where we do not use decimal scoring at all, but if there is a tie in the playoffs, then the commish breaks down the scores as if decimal scoring was used.

[FSW Mephisto 0]

Wow, this place is full of insane idiots.

 

You people act like you're actually playing someone when all you're doing is putting out a lineup to score the highest amount of points and hope that it outscores whoever puts forth a lineup with the same intention.

 

Argue that point and reserve your seat on the short bus.

 

While Owner 1 doesn't know who wins the tiebreaker, it doesn't matter. Whoever loses the tiebreaker hasn't actually advanced - only the person who wins the tiebreaker has.

 

Why is this so hard for some of you mushroom brains to comprehend?

 

 

Try to think a bit more intelligently before arguing to the contrary. You will lose this argument because I said so.

 

Break the tie however you want, but don't argue with me that he is playing two teams... he's not. He's playing ONE team, the one that advances when the tie is broken... no matter which methodology you choose.

 

Think of it as flipping a coin. If I don't flip a coin until after the games are completed the following week, no one has truly advanced for the other spot until the coin has been flipped and the tie broken.

 

If that's too much trouble for you - just flip the coin.

[huskerinct 1]

Just give everyone their money back.

[jgcrawfish 232]

I'm gonna side w/ Mephisto here...

 

X and Y are playing each other first, and technically playing team A second. The first question is "Who scored more, X or Y?" followed by "did whoever scored more also score more than team A?" No matter what, Team A is guaranteed at least a 2nd place finish on the season, because he's already in the big game.

 

Scores could actually be like this:

 

Team X 172

Team Y 173

Team A -2

 

But the order would be:

 

#1 Team Y

#2 Team A

#3 Team X

 

Team X and Y are playing for the right to face A, and facing A, at the same time, but only the one with the higher score technically faces Team A. The other one technically lost "last week". It's really not that hard...

 

The most fair suggestion is to go to decimal scoring, but since we're in still in season, a rule change isn't necessarily gonna fly. Mephisto's way gives each team a chance.

[huskerinct 1]

On a serious note, maybe use the higest individual scorer in the starting line up, or highest individual scorer on the bench? Kinda lilke determining a flush hand in poker.

[patweisers44 845]

I'm gonna side w/ Mephisto here...

 

X and Y are playing each other first, and technically playing team A second.

 

X and Y played each other in week 15 with the winner playing team A in week 16.

[FSW Mephisto 0]

I'm gonna side w/ Mephisto here...

 

X and Y are playing each other first, and technically playing team A second. The first question is "Who scored more, X or Y?" followed by "did whoever scored more also score more than team A?" No matter what, Team A is guaranteed at least a 2nd place finish on the season, because he's already in the big game.

 

Scores could actually be like this:

 

Team X 172

Team Y 173

Team A -2

 

But the order would be:

 

#1 Team Y

#2 Team A

#3 Team X

 

Team X and Y are playing for the right to face A, and facing A, at the same time, but only the one with the higher score technically faces Team A. The other one technically lost "last week". It's really not that hard...

 

The most fair suggestion is to go to decimal scoring, but since we're in still in season, a rule change isn't necessarily gonna fly. Mephisto's way gives each team a chance.

 

You've overcomplicated the situation though with a relatively accurate explanation.

 

Bottom line is, one of team X or Y never advanced. It's Team A against the winner of the "OVERTIME GAME" between X and Y.

 

Morons here like to believe that they are playing real people when they are simply posting what they believe will be their best starting lineup for Week 16. So are the other two. Team A's score will be put against the winner of the OT game between X and Y.

[patweisers44 845]

Team A's score will be put against the winner of the OT game between X and Y.

using the winners score from said OT game.

[jgcrawfish 232]

You've overcomplicated the situation though with a relatively accurate explanation.

 

Bottom line is, one of team X or Y never advanced. It's Team A against the winner of the "OVERTIME GAME" between X and Y.

 

Morons here like to believe that they are playing real people when they are simply posting what they believe will be their best starting lineup for Week 16. So are the other two. Team A's score will be put against the winner of the OT game between X and Y.

 

I got you, and like the idea. There's no absolutely fair way to do it, and this seems like the most reasonably fair way. Plus it gives both teams a reason to be interested this weekend.

[FSW Mephisto 0]

using the winners score from said OT game.

 

Because the winner of the overtime game advanced. Prove to me you're not so stupid that you cannot grasp this.

[swirvenirvin 25]

Although you are only playing one team, the team that moved on. You are playing the team that scores the most points the following week, which is unfair to the team who advanced before without the tie

[FSW Mephisto 0]

Although you are only playing one team, the team that moved on. You are playing the team that scores the most points the following week, which is unfair to the team who advanced before without the tie

 

 

If I flip a coin this week to break the tie, aren't I playing the team that "scores the most points the following week?"

 

If I use bench points to break the tie, aren't I playing the team that "scores the most points the following week?"

 

If I use the highest scoring kicker to break the tie, aren't I playing the team that "scores the most points the following week?"

 

You ass-holes get so hung up on the fact that two teams appear to advance, you can't see it for what it is... one team advancing on the tiebreaker.

 

In ANY tiebreaker scenario - including the one I floated out - the team that "advanced without the tiebreaker" is playing the person scoring the most points in their tiebreaker... whether it's bench points, highest starting player, kicker points, or my scenario.

 

NO amount of your arguing to the contrary is changing that reality... but feel free to keep trying.

[mozzy84 0]

Use decimal scoring next year--problem solved.

 

As for this year, I would have a three way SB--highest points wins. You can't decide a tie breaker now. That has to be done before the season starts.

we had a tie last weekend and we use decimal scoring--

 

As for the OP I would just flip a coin, no other way to do it to make it fair. Why should the third team have to play against two teams for the title, thats not fair at all to him.