MD4L Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 I love making writeups and the other stuff to an extent. Winning makes it worth it to do the other stuff like reading people’s writeup, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 An 8-6 team was the 6th seed last year. One game above .500. The 8th seed was 7-7. Regardless of season length, the 8th seed is always going to hover around or exactly at .500 record for obvious reasons. If a team starts 0-4 or 0-5, they still have a chance to make the playoffs in a 6 team format. I went 8-0 to start the season. Louisiana went undefeated two years ago. If someone is 0-5 with a team they legitimately think can win it all, then giving up and losing their fun is on them. Once someone has lost half the games in the season, are we really worried about them missing the postseason? That happens to people now and they change plans and look forward to next season. The other scenario someone loses half their games is if they're in it until the end and just can't squeeze it out. Do we want to avoid that too? I will offer another alternative: Every team that finishes the season with over a .500 record makes the playoffs. 6-6 or 7-7 won't cut it. You're out. 7-5 or 8-6, you're in. The first round is a variable number of games that will allow us, with bye weeks to the top X seeds, to achieve a four team playoff for the following week. So if we had 7 winning records then #1 gets a bye and we have 2-7 play in 3 games. That way you can always choose to continue your hunt for the playoffs as long as you haven't lost at least half the games in the season. I've said my piece and I believe the evidence I've presented and the conclusions that I drew were valid. I basically didn't sleep last night putting together that post, and I hope everyone gives it a fair read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 13 hours ago, Whicker said: Hawaii started 0-3 this year and said he would have tanked had there have been a 6 team playoff. My comment was regarding a 4 team playoff, not 6 but i'll continue to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 6 hours ago, bcb1213 said: Here's the the thing guys. While we get feelings about this and that. We do this for fun. I think having more teams make the playoffs is fun. We do not need to mimic the NFL. This is the BDL I am adamently against only a quarter of the teams making the playoffs. That would make this tougher than any league Irl People think it's too long of a season is not fun. I'm willing to look at that. Try mixing up the scheduele start earlier with a bye and see if that solves an issue, if not shorten it next season I'm with bcb here. We're all doing this for fun, why take the chance of playoffs away from people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 Main Proposal: Reduce playoffs from 8 teams to 6. Pros: - Harder to get in so people will try harder? - More like the NFL - Top seeds will be rewarded with a bye - More perceived playoff drama Cons: - Less fun when you know you're eliminated, people will be eliminated earlier - No effect on schedule length - Less playoff write-ups Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 Try harder: As documented by Whicker's post people's game plans suffered due to real life circumstances. I don't think there's a huge difference going into the offseason if you barely missed a 6 team playoff or if you barely missed an 8 team playoff. While the match-ups might be better because the more talented teams are in the playoffs the talent in our league is so tight that a 7 seed can take down a 2 seed and win the whole thing. More like the NFL: I don't see the need to be "More like the NFL" in this scenario. In all of my fantasy football leagues 6 teams make the playoffs (all 10 and 12 man leagues) so that's either 50 or 60%, this is much closer to a fantasy league than the NFL. Top seed gets a bye: While discussing schedule length more than one person indicated that they liked doing writeups....is this even a benefit? More perceived playoff drama: We had plenty of drama this year with 8 seeds and multiple teams being able to make it or miss out in the last couple of weeks evidenced by the post you quoted. That same post probably gets made with 6 teams but is also probably a little shorter. I think at the end of the day there isn't a single real "benefit" to reducing in my eyes as it doesn't help the schedule in any way and results in less playoff writeups and a potentially less fun by those people not in the playoff chase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 There was no playoff drama last year. There five teams fighting for four spots, and the fifth team was Gotham who submitted 3 straight inadequate gameplans. All five teams would have still been fighting for the same spots in a six team playoff. The 6th seed was 8-6. This is indisputable. All five teams in the hunt in the playoff scenario could have finished with an 8-6 record. I don't see how that's not empirical evidence that there will be fewer teams for a playoff push when... that's what it is. I'm not trying to be a ****** here, but me showing an example of it happening is the truth of what happened. I didn't construct a false scenario. Every single team considered a playoff contender last year would have been a playoff contender under a 6 team playoff. My argument is all laid out in that post and IMO, it addresses all the concerns that have been addressed after it about losing the fun in BDL or losing playoff teams. If you disagree then we disagree, but I personally do not see where the argument lies for there being less fun or fewer playoff teams, and you cannot convince me otherwise without concrete examples as I have provided to you. At this point, we are likely to go in circles. I wanted the chance to lay my argument on the table with the links and quotes that I provided. I got that, and it clearly got through to some. I'm not checking out of this discussion, but I'm going to limit my responses to those with something new or those that address me personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just one question @Whicker. What do you think is the single biggest benefit of reducing playoff teams to 6 from 8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 Just now, Hockey5djh said: Just one question @Whicker. What do you think is the single biggest benefit of reducing playoff teams to 6 from 8? Better competition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted March 17, 2019 Author Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Hockey5djh said: Main Proposal: Reduce playoffs from 8 teams to 6. Pros: - Harder to get in so people will try harder? - More like the NFL - Top seeds will be rewarded with a bye - More perceived playoff drama Cons: - Less fun when you know you're eliminated, people will be eliminated earlier - No effect on schedule length - Less playoff write-ups I"m 100% with Whicker on this. I remember years where playoff teams were decided week 11 or 12. I think regular season would be more fun and more competitive with 6 playoff teams. The first two seed getting a bye is also a nice thing. Just on your cons. To be honest, we already have half the field rebuilding before the trade deadline, so I don't expect overall fun to decrease. The schedule length thing is not a con, I'm not sure why you'd bring that up if you proposal is to stay at 8 teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 For the record a six seed lower has won the bizz bowl two years in a row But those are obviousky insignificant teams that shouldn't be in the playoffs. Smh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 5 hours ago, Whicker said: Better competition I mean you say this but how will it give us better competition? Less playoff teams mean more people quit earlier and less effort overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 12 minutes ago, SwoleXmad said: I mean you say this but how will it give us better competition? Less playoff teams mean more people quit earlier and less effort overall. Come on, dude. Does this frustrate anyone else as much as it does me? I said I was going to stay out of this thread as much as possible and of course I couldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 5 hours ago, TedLavie said: Just on your cons. To be honest, we already have half the field rebuilding before the trade deadline, so I don't expect overall fun to decrease. The schedule length thing is not a con, I'm not sure why you'd bring that up if you proposal is to stay at 8 teams. If reducing the teams in the playoffs alleviated any the schedule issue then it would be a pro. If we go from 8 teams to 6 teams we still have the same exact amount of playoff weeks. Maybe its a "non factor" rather than a con. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 3 hours ago, bcb1213 said: For the record a six seed lower has won the bizz bowl two years in a row But those are obviousky insignificant teams that shouldn't be in the playoffs. Smh I think that this can't be understated. Two teams that "aren't good enough to make the playoffs" in Whicker's mind and I guess Teds as well have won the Bizz Bowl. I really don't see the benefit of reduction or the "better competition" if we have that level of competitiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.