2005 Suggestion Thread: Non-Fundamental

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:03 am

Originally posted by BillyWaz:

The point is that the playoffs all come down to who gets on a "hot streak" and has the prime matchups for Weeks 14-16, and it in NO WAY determines the best team all year. Don't get me wrong, I understand the setup, but maybe DOUBLE the weekly average (or something similar), so that someone like Team NEW has a TRUE advantage before the playoffs begin. Well said BWAZZ. I brought this up 3 weeks ago. Glad it's finally being acknowlegded.

RC

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:12 am

Originally posted by Route C:
I brought this up 3 weeks ago. Glad it's finally being acknowlegded.

RC looks like it's a GO. well done.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:12 am

Originally posted by Route C:

Against a 1 week playoff. In favor of a 3 week playoff.

RC understood. 3 week playoff does it.

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:17 am

BWazz

One more thing to bring you up to speed. GG didn't say the power ranking wasn't gonna happen on his own credentials. I believe he was quoting Greg from a previous thread. That's how I took it at least.

RC

skipman · Post by **skipman** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:27 am

I would like to add a few things here. First, GG's wildcard spots for high scorer was actually a recycling of an idea that I posted on one of the Gekko rule change strings earlier this year.

Second, I think worrying about hurting the 3rd place finishers feels is misguided. Does anyone actually sign up saying, "well if i finish 3rd out of 14 I get half my money back." 3rd place should get a kick in the ass and a good ole bronx cheer on the way out.

Third, Tom instead of multipying the average weekly score by 2 and carrying that to playoff, what about dividing total points by 6.5. I think that is more fair.

Last, for all the people talking about the 32 team playoff being a crap shoot, I am suprised that my proposal of a one game play-in between the league winner and high scorer isn't getting more support. I much prefer the prospect of beating one team and then facing 16 to 20 in a two game playoff as opposed to a 40 team 3 weeks crap shoot. And I know some idiot is going to claim that I am for this because my team was high score and division winner. Save your breath, I am not proposing that we make it retroactive to this season.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:28 am

Originally posted by Route C:
BWazz

One more thing to bring you up to speed. GG didn't say the power ranking wasn't gonna happen on his own credentials. I believe he was quoting Greg from a previous thread. That's how I took it at least.

RC at least one person can think on their feet.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:29 am

Originally posted by skipman:
I would like to add a few things here. First, GG's wildcard spots for high scorer was actually a recycling of an idea that I posted on one of the Gekko rule change strings earlier this year.
it was? sorry if i stepped on your toes. can you provide the link. if so, you really deserve the credit. thanks.

skipman · Post by **skipman** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:41 am

I would like to add a few things here. First, GG's wildcard spots for high scorer was actually a recycling of an idea that I posted on one of the Gekko rule change strings earlier this year.

Second, I think worrying about hurting the 3rd place finishers feels is misguided. Does anyone actually sign up saying, "well if i finish 3rd out of 14 I get half my money back." 3rd place should get a kick in the ass and a good ole bronx cheer on the way out.

Third, Tom instead of multipying the average weekly score by 2 and carrying that to playoff, what about dividing total points by 6.5. I think that is more fair.

Last, for all the people talking about the 32 team playoff being a crap shoot, I am suprised that my proposal of a one game play-in between the league winner and high scorer isn't getting more support. I much prefer the prospect of beating one team and then facing 16 to 20 in a two game playoff as opposed to a 40 team 3 weeks crap shoot. And I know some idiot is going to claim that I am for this because my team was high score and division winner. Save your breath, I am not proposing that we make it retroactive to this season.

skipman · Post by **skipman** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:51 am

Gekko, I don't know what happened to the post you just put up asking me to prove that I had first mentioned the wild card spots for high scorers, but to answer your question, look at your Nov 9 string "Playoff Teams Make Sense?" on page two you will see the following posted by me:

"I think there is no reason to add more spots to the playoffs. If the concern is that some truely good teams will get jobbed then how about this. Any top 20 team that does not make the playoffs with the current system would get a wild card. That way you dont open the playoffs to bad #3 teams, but any top team that got a bad break with scheduling or what have you would get in."

And unless you go delete this also, the next posting was from one Gordon Gekko,

"ya, something like what Greg or you proposed may be a good idea. i would think the # would have to be proportional to the # of teams in the event. i have a feeling that a lot of #3 teams (as you call them) would have more points than the #1 teams."

Now I will give you credit, you changed top 20 to top 10% thereby adding 4 more teams for consideration.

[ December 16, 2004, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: skipman ]

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:58 am

Originally posted by skipman:
Third, Tom instead of multipying the average weekly score by 2 and carrying that to playoff, what about dividing total points by 6.5. I think that is more fair.Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Math not your specialty?

2000 total points
1900 total points

2000 / 13 x 2 = 307.69
1900 / 13 x 2 = 292.31
difference of 15.38

2000 / 6.5 = 307.69
1900 / 6.5 = 292.31
difference of 15.38

[ December 16, 2004, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: King of Queens ]