Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
Bring on the 16 team, end of season tournament then if we aren't gonna play all the top teams in our tier. I, and most others, care more about who is the best team in our tier than elo rankings.

Beating more higher ranked teams doesn't make you a better team?

They have an entire season or two more SP than we do. Its like putting a Rookie team versus a Seasoned team. It doesn't make sense.

Not if you can't prove it on the field by beating other teams within your tier.

Team A beats team B.
Team C beats team D.
Team A is better than team C....what???

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
Not if you can't prove it on the field by beating other teams within your tier.

Team A beats team B.
Team C beats team D.
Team A is better than team C....what???

I agree, if only one game was played every season, relative ratings would not make any sense at all.

If one JV team beats 7 varsity teams, and another JV team only beats 3 varsity teams, which team is likely better?

On the flip side, is the winner of head to head always the best of the two? Does the fact that Team A (with a strong run defense) beats Team B (that relies on running) mean that Team A is the better team?

What's really the better measure, the aggregate of wins against increasingly challenging competition, or the winner of a head to head match?

This is worse than college football 20 years ago trying to crown a champ.

Ladder isn't trying to crown a champ, though. That's the point.

Originally posted by Corndog
Ladder isn't trying to crown a champ, though. That's the point.

It's not and you're right but I think I speak for a decent amount of agents when I say that inter-tier rivalries at least mean something to us in terms of keeping us interested in the game. League games don't do us too much good since some leagues aren't terribly competitive and get can boring. For some teams ladder is the only real sense of excitement and it can be a bit demoralizing to not play a couple games against top teams from your tier that you were used to playing in rookie and sophomore.

It just serves as a stomping ground so lower levels feel inadequate while gigher levels see it as no challenge as they have a season or more on us.

Originally posted by ValiantArcher
It just serves as a stomping ground so lower levels feel inadequate while gigher levels see it as no challenge as they have a season or more on us.

Well, as fun as that hyperbole is, it's also clearly not true. Many teams are winning tier-up games. And if they aren't, they'll stop playing up a tier thanks to the dynamic nature of ELO.

Originally posted by jfbueno
It's not and you're right but I think I speak for a decent amount of agents when I say that inter-tier rivalries at least mean something to us in terms of keeping us interested in the game. League games don't do us too much good since some leagues aren't terribly competitive and get can boring. For some teams ladder is the only real sense of excitement and it can be a bit demoralizing to not play a couple games against top teams from your tier that you were used to playing in rookie and sophomore.

I can see where you're coming from as far as the tier rivalries go.

Originally posted by Corndog
I can see where you're coming from as far as the tier rivalries go.

Yeah it kind of goes in line with a post that Rob. made in the season 13 changes thread about how some top pro and journey teams haven't played certain other top teams in the tier for 2-3 seasons. It's an inherent issue with the ladder system that doesn't promote much inter-tier games past sophomore. Granted teams shouldn't be coddled all the way through vet and that's the reason it's noholdsbar once you hit seasoned but I don't think it's implausible to reach some sort of middle ground without compromising the ladder system.

Originally posted by Corndog
Well, as fun as that hyperbole is, it's also clearly not true. Many teams are winning tier-up games. And if they aren't, they'll stop playing up a tier thanks to the dynamic nature of ELO.

Originally posted by Jagat0r
https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/team/1421
JMan Saskatchewan Mountain Lions 14-8 7 Losses Playing Up a Tier or more!! Havent played a single top 10 JMan team outside their league!!

When do they stop playing up a tier when they run out of opponents. 0-7 vs pro paints a clear enough picture does it not? Wait they havent played Bronx yet maybe thats the sweet spot.

Originally posted by Jagat0r
When do they stop playing up a tier when they run out of opponents. 0-7 vs pro paints a clear enough picture does it not? Wait they havent played Bronx yet maybe thats the sweet spot.

Looks like they won their latest ladder game?

Originally posted by Corndog
Ladder isn't trying to crown a champ, though. That's the point.

Perhaps it should. Not a tournament champ, but a Meta champ. Maybe a user base Poll is warranted? You do give out Trophies.

We understand the logic behind ELO match ups. The problem is in missing too many in-tier games and thus not having rivalries. So if League play is the guaranteed in-tier matchup, then reset leagues every year by Ladder ranking or Playoff teams or something.

In the NFL, you play divisional opponents and then across divisions based on where you ended the previous season. In essence a Ladder matchup system. The top team in a division plays other divisional winners; the bottom teams play other bottom teams.

This change was made after Marino and Elway went almost their whole career not facing each other. Now Brady and Manning face each other practically every year even though they've never been in the same division.

GLB2 needs more of this. Harrisonburg-Salty 8 times a year wasn't the solution. Harrisonburg-Salty zero times a year isn't ideal either.