Please discuss the options for how our divisions are to be setup. I propose two divisions producing 13 weeks on our schedule playing each team in your division twice and each team in the other division once. The division winners are decided by win-loss record then power rank and two wild-card teams decided from power rank.
Next week, I will add an option to vote on this issue. It will link to a poll on the MDFL web site on Sportsline.
Vote for the division setup here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I agree - I think this is a nice compromise. Since I am a reasonable man, I would be willing to have the two wildcards be based on breakdown, not power ranking, since won-loss is a component of power ranking.
I think battle lines are drawn on this....Last year was a real cluster fuck of a situation..how so: Well, instead of saying top 4 get in or top 6 get in by power rank, we did what the gov't does when they craft a bill.....throw in a bunch of shit in there and what comes out is a bill. We gave Division winners an auto bids to playoffs,and then used power rank to seed them...but wait theres more..... then had 5th and 6th seeds which could be a division winner which tells you what we think of division winners...but wait there is more....division winners get the highest pay out which tells you what we think of division winners...but wait there is more, even despite having 6 teams make the playoffs, in theory the 5th and 6th powerranked teams would not make the playoffs if the division winners (by record of course) are the 7th and 8th poweranked teams...., but wait there is more......we then give out $10 a week to any team that wins that week even though they might have been the 2nd lowest scoring team that week and we are already awarding wins by having in count at 1/3 of the powerrank and handing out division titles based on record..... but wait there is more.....because we have 2 divisions we have unbalanced schedules and really you are at the mercy of what division you are in so last year 1 division had all 5 teams that all scored over 800pts (2 in the 1,000's, 2 in the 900's, and 1 in the 800's)....while the other division had 2 in the 1000's and 3 in the 700's so you have these division like records where Tim went 4-4 in his weak division but 0-5 against the tougher one, Ted went 2-3 against the week division but 2-6 against the tough division.....basically Ted was penalized for being in the tougher division and it showed by having the most pts against him. Because of the divisions Ted played 10 of his 13 games against the 6 highest scoring teams where Snoop Dawgs played 6 games against the highest scoring teams in the league. All in all something needs to be done here, my guess is pride and stick to guns mentality will prevent this cluster fuck from being fixed but I want to thank Joe for providing this forum for all members to have their say.
Thanks to Red and Ted for getting the ball rolling.
Remember all that we would not have had this issue/confusion IF WE DISCUSSED IT SOBER WELL BEFORE THE DRAFT.
We now have this forum to get our ideas heard ahead of time.
Carry on....
No matter what the schedule is going to be unbalanced... just like every major sports league in real life.
So, once you get past that, it only makes sense to have one division with the top 4 teams making it based on Power Ranking. This is clearly the easiest and most logical format.
All divisions do is muddy everything up.
If anyone can tell me why we need divisions I am listening.
I agree, Joe. 2 divisions...the schedule even lends itself to that setup as we'll be playing 4 teams twice. Divisions take that scheduling break down and create little rivalries with it. For instance: Let's say Joe, Ted, John, and Jim were in my division. We are each playing eachother twice...instead of me playing each team twice and John playing me and 3 different teams twice. That is how the division setup creates rivalries...and if divisions are kept the same each year it only adds fuel to the rivalries.
If somebody can explain the harm in 2 divisions I'm all ears....although I won't be reading your response.
John-
Please propose a schedule template with no divisions. Use numbers 1-10 to represent each team.
RE: Schedule Template
We would use the same template as last year... you play each team once and you would play 4 teams twice. The 4 teams would be random based on the draw.
John-
"the 4 teams would be random based on the draw."
exactly....so:
What is the template for that setup. Who plays who week-to-week?
I am in favor of what Joe proposed.
However, I feel we should stick with the exact same format as last year, that being the 2 division winners are decided by win loss record then power rank, and 4 wild card teams decided from power rank.To me, last year was the most exciting year in the MDFL with the expansion of a 6 team playoff. It worked very well.Why should we change back to 4? Last years setup was the finest weve ever had.I feel we should go with exact same format as last year.Keep it the same.
Griffins
All I will say is that if we go to Power Ranking as the only standings tool then there is absolutely no doubt we should go to one division. The only way that two divisions make any sense at all is if we have the division winners by W-L record.
So for those of you that vote for two divsions, please keep that in mind when we vote on standings criteria.
If you plan to vote for Power Ranking as the standings criteria than please vote for one division.
Thanks,
John
John, I disagree. Two divisions level the playing field somewhat.
With two divisions, each team within the division plays the other four team twice and the other division once. Therefore, every team within your division has the same schedule difficulty (or close to the same).
With one division, each team will have to play some teams twice and others just once. I believe it is strictly luck of the draw as to which teams you play twice and others just once. Therefore, by luck of the draw, a lucky team can draw playing the dogshit teams twice and the better teams just once. And vice versa. Completely different schedule difficulties decided by luck of the draw.
I agree that it is unfair that one division may be loaded and the other weak; but at least you have four other teams in the same boat.
I think two divisions can work while still using power rankings as the deciding standings criteria.
Post a Comment