Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
i have a feeling that a lot of #3 teams (as skipman would call them) would have more points than the #1 teams. you know i'd do the research. if the playoffs started today, currently 31 NON-playoff teams (14%) have scored more points than the "worst" #1 team to make the playoffs.
here are the top point scoring teams that would get left out of the big dance...obviously these #'s will change as the season wears on, so don't get too excited.
Overall Pt Rank 21 Mullet Men 1079.35
Overall Pt Rank 25 Poop in the Closet 1072.4
Overall Pt Rank 26 Doomsday Express 1065.8
Overall Pt Rank 27 RotoWorld.com 1062.3
Overall Pt Rank 28 gigglin marlin 1060.5
Overall Pt Rank 30 DAWG & HOGG 1058.15
Overall Pt Rank 32 footballinjuries.com 1056.05
[ November 03, 2004, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]
Playoff Teams make sense?
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 7222
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Is my "weekend warrior" prep better than your prep?
-
Route Collectors
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Originally posted by nnoy:
NCAA note to Route:
Back in the late 90’s Minnesota was ranked 25th in the final regular season poll and was not invited to the Dance. I believe they won the NIT that year, so yes it does happen. You are right NNOY. I forgot about the Gophers. I stand corrected on my NCAA b-ball trivia, but the rarity of it does prove my point.
NCAA note to Route:
Back in the late 90’s Minnesota was ranked 25th in the final regular season poll and was not invited to the Dance. I believe they won the NIT that year, so yes it does happen. You are right NNOY. I forgot about the Gophers. I stand corrected on my NCAA b-ball trivia, but the rarity of it does prove my point.
-
Route Collectors
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Good post Skipman. Assuring the top 10/15/20 scoring teams a playoff spot is a fair way of rewarding the best teams, not to mention it's value in further marketing this event.
[ November 03, 2004, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: Route C ]
[ November 03, 2004, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: Route C ]
-
Route Collectors
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
[qb] ummm, it is 64 because it was much more revenue than the 32 it originally was, it is about TV, not competitioan. If it was up to the NCAA, they would have all the teams enter into the tourney for more revenue..... Exactly! Competition IS the product TV is marketing. The BEST competition. If you don't see that, try filling those other 33 "revenue" spots with the 2nd place teams from the weakest conferences. Wouldn't that be great revenue generating TV. How many people do you suppose watch a 1 vs 16 game from start to finish? What about an 8 vs 9?
I don't understand why you're so bitter about this thread subject. Would it be any different for you if someone else had started it? You seem to have a personal war going on with GG. IMO
[qb] ummm, it is 64 because it was much more revenue than the 32 it originally was, it is about TV, not competitioan. If it was up to the NCAA, they would have all the teams enter into the tourney for more revenue..... Exactly! Competition IS the product TV is marketing. The BEST competition. If you don't see that, try filling those other 33 "revenue" spots with the 2nd place teams from the weakest conferences. Wouldn't that be great revenue generating TV. How many people do you suppose watch a 1 vs 16 game from start to finish? What about an 8 vs 9?
I don't understand why you're so bitter about this thread subject. Would it be any different for you if someone else had started it? You seem to have a personal war going on with GG. IMO
-
dgamblnman
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Route, sarcasm, look it up
And yes, it was expanded strictly because of TV revenue, it's the same case as in all the other sports, baseball, football, basketball, hockey. They expanded their playoff system to get more money. But people are trying to apply that system to fantasy sports. I am trying to point out there are differences.
As far as the NCAA, it is not always the best teams that are in the tourney. After the automatic qualifiers, the rest is filled with the best marketable teams, not neccassarily the best teams. About 25% of all colleges make it to the big dance, yes they capture most of the good teams, but if there is a choice to make, it comes down to drawing power, not talent on the court, that get invited.
As far as my stance, there is no bitterness, just read the posts. There are statements that the current system is flawed, which it is not. I am just showing the hypocrasy of some things being said. Yes, I would have the same stance if someone started it.
And yes, it was expanded strictly because of TV revenue, it's the same case as in all the other sports, baseball, football, basketball, hockey. They expanded their playoff system to get more money. But people are trying to apply that system to fantasy sports. I am trying to point out there are differences.
As far as the NCAA, it is not always the best teams that are in the tourney. After the automatic qualifiers, the rest is filled with the best marketable teams, not neccassarily the best teams. About 25% of all colleges make it to the big dance, yes they capture most of the good teams, but if there is a choice to make, it comes down to drawing power, not talent on the court, that get invited.
As far as my stance, there is no bitterness, just read the posts. There are statements that the current system is flawed, which it is not. I am just showing the hypocrasy of some things being said. Yes, I would have the same stance if someone started it.
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 7222
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
The current system of playoffs is good, it compares teams within the same league. Adding additional teams means comparing leagues across the board, that is not a good thing. Vegas,
Please answer this question with a direct reply (none of your usual BS). Thanks.
Is the playoff system “good” (your word) if a team with second highest regular season point total misses the playoffs.
The current system of playoffs is good, it compares teams within the same league. Adding additional teams means comparing leagues across the board, that is not a good thing. Vegas,
Please answer this question with a direct reply (none of your usual BS). Thanks.
Is the playoff system “good” (your word) if a team with second highest regular season point total misses the playoffs.
Is my "weekend warrior" prep better than your prep?
-
Route Collectors
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
[qb] The current system of playoffs is good, it compares teams within the same league.
Which is why we have league prizes, right?
Adding additional teams means comparing leagues across the board, that is not a good thing. Isn't this what we currently do when we lump 32 teams together for a 3 week shoot-out?
Vega$- All major sports have some form of wild card team, but the object is ALWAYS to field the BEST teams.
If you want to stand on this comparison then at least do it objectively.
The NFL, NBA and MLB only field 30+ teams to start with.
The NFFC currently has 224.
What is being suggested is that we ammend (not totally change) the system to include the best teams in the main championship playoff round.
Currently the system would allow some of the best teams to miss the chance to compete for the big prize.(Not absolute - but definately possible.)
This is about making sure the BEST teams have a CHANCE to compete.
Best league records already get the best payoff and a spot in the finals.
Don't you think it's only fair that the top overall scoring teams have a CHANCE to compete as well?
Before you answer that remember, the overall winner WILL be determined by TOTAL POINTS.
[ November 04, 2004, 10:37 AM: Message edited by: Route C ]
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
[qb] The current system of playoffs is good, it compares teams within the same league.
Which is why we have league prizes, right?
Adding additional teams means comparing leagues across the board, that is not a good thing. Isn't this what we currently do when we lump 32 teams together for a 3 week shoot-out?
Vega$- All major sports have some form of wild card team, but the object is ALWAYS to field the BEST teams.
If you want to stand on this comparison then at least do it objectively.
The NFL, NBA and MLB only field 30+ teams to start with.
The NFFC currently has 224.
What is being suggested is that we ammend (not totally change) the system to include the best teams in the main championship playoff round.
Currently the system would allow some of the best teams to miss the chance to compete for the big prize.(Not absolute - but definately possible.)
This is about making sure the BEST teams have a CHANCE to compete.
Best league records already get the best payoff and a spot in the finals.
Don't you think it's only fair that the top overall scoring teams have a CHANCE to compete as well?
Before you answer that remember, the overall winner WILL be determined by TOTAL POINTS.
[ November 04, 2004, 10:37 AM: Message edited by: Route C ]
-
dgamblnman
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
The current system of playoffs is good, it compares teams within the same league. Adding additional teams means comparing leagues across the board, that is not a good thing. Vegas,
Please answer this question with a direct reply (none of your usual BS). Thanks.
Is the playoff system “good” (your word) if a team with second highest regular season point total misses the playoffs. [/QUOTE]The only way to answer this is by another question...
Does the best team always play in the finals of any championship???? Answer this....please
What is being asked is to dimish the regular season (like basketball or hockey where sub .500 teams are in the playoffs). How about the wild card teams being based on W-L record then using points for tie breakers?
quote:Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
The current system of playoffs is good, it compares teams within the same league. Adding additional teams means comparing leagues across the board, that is not a good thing. Vegas,
Please answer this question with a direct reply (none of your usual BS). Thanks.
Is the playoff system “good” (your word) if a team with second highest regular season point total misses the playoffs. [/QUOTE]The only way to answer this is by another question...
Does the best team always play in the finals of any championship???? Answer this....please
What is being asked is to dimish the regular season (like basketball or hockey where sub .500 teams are in the playoffs). How about the wild card teams being based on W-L record then using points for tie breakers?
-
Route Collectors
- Posts: 3525
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
[/qb]The only way to answer this is by another question...
Does the best team always play in the finals of any championship???? Answer this....please
What is being asked is to dimish the regular season (like basketball or hockey where sub .500 teams are in the playoffs). How about the wild card teams being based on W-L record then using points for tie breakers? [/QB][/quote]
I know this question wasn't directed at me - sorry GG - but I have to jump in since it's obvious by your lack of response that you have no credible answer to my question.
A valid arguement can be made that the best team doesn't always play for THE championship. (See how easy it is to recognize a good point)
THE best teams however, are usually in the tournament (or playoffs) that determine THE eventual champion. I doubt there will be many (if any at all) teams in the NFFC in the top 20 in overall pts. with sub .500 records.
The first NFFC team with a sub.500 record is currently 39th overall. 2 others have 4-4 records that are 9th & 19th overall, both ahead of you and your 7-1 record I might add. Maybe if they had your strength of schedule and you had theirs the records would be reversed. You just don't get it do you? :rolleyes:
[/qb]The only way to answer this is by another question...
Does the best team always play in the finals of any championship???? Answer this....please
What is being asked is to dimish the regular season (like basketball or hockey where sub .500 teams are in the playoffs). How about the wild card teams being based on W-L record then using points for tie breakers? [/QB][/quote]
I know this question wasn't directed at me - sorry GG - but I have to jump in since it's obvious by your lack of response that you have no credible answer to my question.
A valid arguement can be made that the best team doesn't always play for THE championship. (See how easy it is to recognize a good point)
THE best teams however, are usually in the tournament (or playoffs) that determine THE eventual champion. I doubt there will be many (if any at all) teams in the NFFC in the top 20 in overall pts. with sub .500 records.
The first NFFC team with a sub.500 record is currently 39th overall. 2 others have 4-4 records that are 9th & 19th overall, both ahead of you and your 7-1 record I might add. Maybe if they had your strength of schedule and you had theirs the records would be reversed. You just don't get it do you? :rolleyes:
-
dgamblnman
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:00 pm
Playoff Teams make sense?
Route, my comparison is with using actual pro leagues playoff system. Better teams and better records can be left out of the playoffs. That is a fact of pro sports. So if anyone wants to emulate a pro playoff system for fantasy sports, you have to take the good with the bad, that is all I am trying to say.
What many are failing to realize and the points I am trying to make:
If you want to follow a pro formula, yes ,there will be better teams left out of the playoffs.
If you want to modify out FF system to make sure all the better teams are in the playoffs, then do not compare our system to pro sports
Do you see where I am getting with this?
Positions are being made where "the pros do it this way", yet try to do something different if the "pro sports" formula doesn't work for them. (IE- a better team may be left out of the playoffs).
As far as strength of schedule, I'm 3rd in points against in my league, I wouldn't call that a cake walk.... I am 24 out of 226, I think I'm doing ok, yet I may not make the playoffs.
What many are failing to realize and the points I am trying to make:
If you want to follow a pro formula, yes ,there will be better teams left out of the playoffs.
If you want to modify out FF system to make sure all the better teams are in the playoffs, then do not compare our system to pro sports
Do you see where I am getting with this?
Positions are being made where "the pros do it this way", yet try to do something different if the "pro sports" formula doesn't work for them. (IE- a better team may be left out of the playoffs).
As far as strength of schedule, I'm 3rd in points against in my league, I wouldn't call that a cake walk.... I am 24 out of 226, I think I'm doing ok, yet I may not make the playoffs.