 |
 |
actually, what is important is that the BEST teams make the playoffs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
sPliTin sKulZ
Football Freak
3325 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 11/12/2002 2:22:36 PM |
 |
 |
actually, what is important is that the BEST teams make the playoffs
|
|
|
|
That is our mission statement when it comes to determining who we want in the playoffs.
And we all know that W-L can be finicky and frankly unjust at times (look at Points Against vs. W-L in the main Ragnarok league right now). The TRUEST barometer for a team's power is how many points they've put up over the course of the season. However, we do overall W-L just for the sake of making a season-long campaign have meaning; otherwise, in most seasons only one or two teams would be in the running late in the season and by Week 10 most teams would be outside looking in (if we used ytd points first).
With overall W-L being the first determinant, everyone remains involved.
Now for the role that divisional games play throughout the season, and why divisional games are not the second determinant:
Ragnarok used to emphasize divisional games, and we all agreed that a change was needed. It simply wasn't fair to have 6 of 14 games be the practical end-all, be-all. Divisional games already make an incredible impact on the playoff makeup. Just think about it - if you sweep your division, you're giving Losses to your main competitors' overall record, and thus **every divisional game already has double the value when it comes to determining who makes the playoffs**. Why make it three times the value, and thus diminish the role of the rest of your games, by having it be the second determinant in playoff eligibility?
If you make divisional games the second determinant, ahead of ytd points, you would be giving such an emphasis on those 6 games that the other 8 games have tertiary meaning at best. You could have a team with a 7-7 record, 6-0 in division and 750 ytd points, beat out a team with a 7-7 record, 4-2 in division and 1100 ytd points. Who do you want in the playoffs, a team with 750 points or a team with 1100 points? Who is the "stronger" team? Simple - the team with 1100 points over the course of an entire season is stronger. Does anyone really think that the 2 individual games that separate a 6-0 vs. a 4-2 record should be used ahead of a total examination of the 14 games that actually measures a team's power?
What about the role of bye weeks, and how they can just happen to match up during divisional games? That's not fair, either. We can't let 1 or 2 specific games be more important than a season-long measurement of a team's potency.
Alot of these game design issues have been discussed and/or evolved over the years, and I hope that everyone can take a moment or two to reflect on the things that I've talked about. Sometimes it is easy to look at an issue and come to quick conclusions, but taking a step back and reflecting on the subtleties can result in some different perspectives. We lived through the times where we had divisional records be very important, and we all reached a consensus where we felt that such a system was unjust.
One last point to mull over is how fantasy sports differ from real sports. When our teams "face" each other, they aren't on any real field, and your Bucs DF/ST isn't matching up with my QB Drew Brees, for example. It isn't about which team is better head to head, like it is in real life. W-L records serve as a design tool (see the first paragraph above), nothing more. Total points is the more accurate way to measure which teams are "best." So when you "beat" your divisional opponents, be glad that you handed them losses while you took a win, but don't delude yourself to think that your team is necessarily the best team in the division. We've seen it where some teams have gone 6-0 in the division, 1-7 outside of it, and scored in the bottom third in total points - clearly, they are not the "best" team in their division if their overall record is .500 and they've only scored 680 points in 14 games. "Know what I mean, Vern?"
Forgive my lengthy ramblings on this topic. I just want everyone to understand some of the other considerations involved, and why we use ytd points second. I love talking about game design, and can talk/write yer ears/eyes off on these things. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
HellsFire
General Manager
339 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/12/2002 3:21:14 PM |
|
|
I agree 100%
|
|
|
|
if a team goes 6-0 in its division, yet has a .500 record or worse certainly does not make it the best team in its divsion.
This is "FANTASY" and its about head to head matchups throughout the league and overall record and total points is the truest meter of how strong your team and coaching is.
Divisional records are for bragging rights and rivalry, it says nothing about a team as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
WarPig
Head Coach
214 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/12/2002 3:47:29 PM |
|
|
Makes Sense to Me
|
|
|
|
| But it seems that if we wanted the four best teams to go to the playoffs we would abolish the divisions and just send the top four teams. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
sPliTin sKulZ
Football Freak
3325 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/12/2002 4:24:23 PM |
|
|
we try to design a balance of W-L interest and pure power ranking
|
|
|
|
from a game design perspective, the divisional structure contributes in ways that we are all experiencing and advocating (setting up pivotal games, creating tradition and rivalries, etc.). we just have to balance that with our other desires, one of which is to try to be fair when determining who makes the postseason. if we just went with total points and eliminated W-L, for an extreme example, the league would go "flat" and much of the drama would be lost. so instead, we have W-L records and then only in the case of a tie do we use points as a way to differentiate the better teams.
while it is true that total points is the "best" measurement for a team's average power ranking, it fails from a practical perspective (most owners get disinterested halfway through the season, as you can witness happening in other leagues that just go on total points alone).
having a role for W-L allows for everyone to have a fighting chance, as well as for developing the aforementioned "big games" and traditional rivalries that make this socially fun. it also grants more weight to divisional games; and remember, it was an advocacy of divisional games that spurred this entire discussion thread.
so, we can't just say that 1 thing and 1 thing only should be the determinant (as ties on singular determinants will always take place). a heirarchy of determinants has to be defined, and having W-L exist makes the leagues fun, and total points only separates teams when W-L ties occur and thus helps to ensure that the better teams make the playoffs.
thanks for the great discussions, folks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
