BringinDaPain Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, SwoleXmad said: How about we just do no changes and table this for the summer meeting. Xmad, if we are going to do it why put it off? Why not get over with now? It's going to come around sooner or later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 2 hours ago, PR said: One game can keep anyone from being in the playoffs period. Tis the nature of the beast. Okay. Yes. But it's about the idea of actually missing the playoffs. Not bad teams that were close. If you finish 9th, aka the bottom half of the league, with likely a .500 or below record, you didn't miss the playoffs. Take the 2010 Seattle Seahawks. They were a 7-9 team that was universally considered an undeserving playoff team. They still beat a legitimate contender, despite not being a "playoff team" themselves. Regardless, their sub-.500 record proved that they were not a deserving playoff team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 3 hours ago, WFLukic said: In principle, I agree with 6 teams but it just opens us to non-competitive performances a bit more. Hmm. This is why I keep quoting myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 2 hours ago, Ragnarok said: Also, I would have much rather resolved the issue of regular season length before we voted to change playoff rules. 2 hours ago, BringinDaPain said: Honestly, why are we keep pushing the regular season vote to the side? Can we not solve this issue now? Why not knock it out while voting on the playoffs rules? The season length is determinate on the number of playoff teams. Voting on season length now completely ignores the fact that a 4 team playoff is a legitimate option that is being discussed, AND carries the downside of influencing the vote for other playoff restructure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 19 minutes ago, SwoleXmad said: How about we just do no changes and table this for the summer meeting. Do you actually have a good reason for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 The other thought train that I attempted didn't work, so let's start with this one: If we were to reseed the playoff teams based upon the 2018 season, would Hawaii be #1? Or #7? Or neither? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnarok Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, Whicker said: This is why I keep quoting myself Ok no, that is not why you keep quoting yourself. You saying that, when some of us have raised valid opinions on concerns over cutting the number of playoff teams, is a slap in the face. Don't get upset because you believe people aren't discussing your point enough, then turn around and try to invalidate our concerns. 2 minutes ago, Whicker said: The season length is determinate on the number of playoff teams. Voting on season length now completely ignores the fact that a 4 team playoff is a legitimate option that is being discussed, AND carries the downside of influencing the vote for other playoff restructure 4 teams is not a legitimate option as everyone who has commented on it has said no. 6 teams keeps the season the same length so resolves nothing in terms of season length. Also, voting on playoffs first carries the downside of influencing the vote on season restructure. The length and grind of the season is more important than having 6 or 8 teams, at least for this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, Ragnarok said: Ok no, that is not why you keep quoting yourself. You saying that, when some of us have raised valid opinions on concerns over cutting the number of playoff teams, is a slap in the face. Don't get upset because you believe people aren't discussing your point enough, then turn around and try to invalidate our concerns. 4 teams is not a legitimate option as everyone who has commented on it has said no. 6 teams keeps the season the same length so resolves nothing in terms of season length. Also, voting on playoffs first carries the downside of influencing the vote on season restructure. The length and grind of the season is more important than having 6 or 8 teams, at least for this year. Huh? What are you saying with my first point? I've told multiple people or at least said multiple times, that I have a rebuttal for the competition in season that I will lay out when I have time on Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, Ragnarok said: Also, voting on playoffs first carries the downside of influencing the vote on season restructure. The length and grind of the season is more important than having 6 or 8 teams, at least for this year. I have never suggested that the playoff vote is first. In fact, I've suggested that they happen at the same time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 I need this clearly laid out for me, please. I have been quoting myself because, at the very least, people have raised concerns over the consolidation of my thoughts. Lukic brings up a point that others have brought up, in which has already been responded to. So I keep quoting myself to ensure that everyone is on the same page as what has been discussed and what has been not How is that a slap in the face? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PR Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 42 minutes ago, SwoleXmad said: How about we just do no changes and table this for the summer meeting. Stop Ping and let us Js handle the plans lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PR Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 25 minutes ago, Whicker said: Okay. Yes. But it's about the idea of actually missing the playoffs. Not bad teams that were close. If you finish 9th, aka the bottom half of the league, with likely a .500 or below record, you didn't miss the playoffs. Take the 2010 Seattle Seahawks. They were a 7-9 team that was universally considered an undeserving playoff team. They still beat a legitimate contender, despite not being a "playoff team" themselves. Regardless, their sub-.500 record proved that they were not a deserving playoff team. I was agreeing with you. Hockey was bewildered why him not turning in his write up should effect him the rest of the season. It is because one game separates most bubble teams period. If you lose because if forefit you have to try even harder to make up for thatbloss later and if it is missing playoffs by one game so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PR Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 25 minutes ago, Whicker said: Do you actually have a good reason for this? He is a P. He isn't all about planning and organizing things. He likes to go with the flow and doing other things than debating this which he is not entertained by seem better if it is tabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PR Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 Alright let me see if I can help translate for Whicker. Alright silo the main question is which should come first. Season Length or Playoff Team quotient. Whicker believes that if a set season length is Set prior to voting the number of teams in the playoffs it will elimate options as (in his opinion) a longer season or shorter season will determine which playoff configurations are plausible. To discuss both as interconnected allows for valid discussion of both. Perhaps a 6 team playoff goes better with a 14 game season as it will help spread out the standings more, while a 4 team playoff is more apt for a shorter season as a couple of teams may break out to long leads well before seasons end. He wants to discuss both, not put one priority before the other which could limit the other option following. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 59 minutes ago, BringinDaPain said: Xmad, if we are going to do it why put it off? Why not get over with now? It's going to come around sooner or later. The more time we have to go over and come up with options the better, it's not like delaying it until the summer will stop us from addressing it entirely. 42 minutes ago, Whicker said: Do you actually have a good reason for this? We're getting nowhere with the general consensus on what we should do with the regular season the conversation has shifted entirely to the playoffs when that's a separate issue entirely. 11a is pretty simple to solve, 14 games, start the season earlier (Preseason week 3-4) have a bye or two and see how that works, if it doesn't work we'll address that in 2020. 11b. Make everyone eligible for playoff periods, as long as they played a game in weeks 15-16/whenever the final game of the BDL regular season is they are eligible. Injuries are a part of the game but they've screwed over teams too much in the playoffs (see several teams not being able to field an o-line in recent years/week 17 situations) so it's better to just let teams play at 100%. 12. No reduction of the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.