 |
 |
Flaws in the Week 14 schedule method? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
illuminati
Football Freak
3323 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 10/18/2003 12:44:08 PM |
 |
 |
Flaws in the Week 14 schedule method?
|
|
|
|
We may want to reconsider our original conception for the 2003 Aces High schedule.
First, a little background:
With 10 teams, a symmetrical schedule is 13 weeks long, and therefore consideration must be given as to how to fairly define the matchups for the extra week.
The main reason behind having a 14 week regular season is to provide for the championship game to be played in week 16. In addition to that, the "losers playoffs" of six teams would then have the appropriate three weeks to playout the season for final positions.
We were going to have a Week 14 schedule with the best team from each division play each other, the second place teams in each division play each other, etc. The thought was that it would be a balanced matchup and would also provide great drama, almost a "mini playoff" game.
Why it may need to be re-evaluated:
Does it "penalize" good teams, by forcing half of the good teams to suffer a loss?
And what about the fact that in most scenarios, one #2 team will be eliminated from the playoffs, and one #3 team will make the playoffs, solely based on that one game? The reason for this is that if there is a group of teams within a game of each other, and one #2 team is guaranteed to take a loss while at the same time one #3 team is guaranteed a win, we end up forcing a leapfrog effect that almost disrespects the point of a season-long campaign.
Solutions?
Randomly select a week from the first 13, and have that be Week 14? If so, we should do this as early as possible...
Other ideas, anyone? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/19/2003 12:00:57 AM |
|
|
other week 14 suggestions
|
|
|
|
i thought of this week 14 pre-postseason game as one that would allow the teams on the bubble (i.e. the 5th and 6th best teams) a final opportunity to knock off the team directly in front of them and get a spot in the playoffs. if that is indeed the spirit of the week 14 game, then here is a suggestion:
Division Champs get a bye week and automatic entry into the playoffs as 1st and 2nd seeds.
Teams 7-10 get a bye week to lick wounds before losers bracket.
#3 team (based on record, then points, etc. as per the league rules) plays the #6 team; #4 team plays the #5 team. the two highest seeds (again, based on record, then points, etc.) after week 14 make the playoffs.
if these four teams are indeed close to each other, there is an opportunity for any of the four to make the playoffs, thus creating a "mini-playoff" scenario. at the same time, the #3 team does not necessarily have to win to get in the playoffs, they just have to finish week 14 as a top 4 team, meaning that it's not a winner-take-all kind of setup that then deemphasizes what the #3 and #4 teams have accomplished through 13 weeks.
as for the losers bracket, i see two options. one, only the 7-10th place teams go through the losers bracket to determine next year's draft position, with spots 5 & 6 reserved for the "mini-playoff" losers. the other option is to put the mini-playoff losers into the losers bracket, but make it take 3 weeks to finish, thus having the losers championship on week 17.
questions, comments, concerns? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
jd
Tape Junkie
55 posts
 |
Fu: 0.00 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/19/2003 8:03:20 AM |
|
|
I like that . . .
|
|
|
|
| I think the Scandal has it figured out. I'd vote to throw 5 & 6 in the losers bracket. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/19/2003 8:13:01 AM |
|
|
I concur
|
|
|
|
| We can call our "mini-playoffs" Wild Card week. I also vote for 5 & 6 in the loser playoff finishing on week 17 as we initially talked about. |
|
|
|
|
|
