Warrior General Games

As anyone following the mess that was D'Haran - Denver playoff seeding knows, this is something GLB2 needs improved.

My suggestion for seedings and tie breakers.
- Always start by picking the three division winners.

Division winner criteria (in order):
League Record
Head to Head win-loss
Division record
Head to Head composite score (add the two scores together and see who wins)
Total League Points Allowed
Total League Points Scored
Total League Yards Allowed
Total League Yards Gained
Ladder ranking
Coin flip (in the extremely unlikely event you haven't gotten a winner by that point

After the division winners are picked, move on to wildcard using these criteria:
League Record
Head to Head win-loss
Head to Head composite score if 2 games
Total League Points Allowed
Total League Points Scored
Total League Yards Allowed
Total League Yards Gained
Coin flip

Those criteria are very straightforward, and it would avoid the mess that is trying to deal with the mess that came up with the rookie leagues.

Originally posted by Xavori
My suggestion for seedings and tie breakers.
- Always start by picking the three division winners.

This is the most important part tbqh.

If you are going to add the composite score i would still move that below division record. still gave a thumbs up

Originally posted by HayRow
If you are going to add the composite score i would still move that below division record. still gave a thumbs up

Adding composite score helps identify which was the better team at the end of the season without completely discounting the game at the start of the season.

As for which is more important, division record or composite score; I can make really good arguments for either. I went with composite score because I wanted to focus more on which of just those two teams is better, but I can see where you'd want to go with who did better against the entire division.

Originally posted by Xavori
Adding composite score helps identify which was the better team at the end of the season without completely discounting the game at the start of the season.

As for which is more important, division record or composite score; I can make really good arguments for either. I went with composite score because I wanted to focus more on which of just those two teams is better, but I can see where you'd want to go with who did better against the entire division.

My argument for division would be that if the 2 teams are clearly the cream of the crop they would likely both be 5-1 and then could go to the composite score.

going to the score first could be misleading because it could of been a simple bad play call or mistake in game planning for a single game/play that caused a blowout score in one game.

I don't see an argument really for going score first. I would be really upset to have a 5-1 division record and lose the division title to a team with a 3-3 division record just because my DC missed an assignment.

The issue I see is the possibility of a clear division winner and then a 3-way divisional tie for the remaining teams. While not the probable outcome, especially in more advanced leagues, it is certainly possible to have a division that winds up like this in rookie league:

Team A - 14-0 (6-0 Div)
Team B - 10-4 (2-4 Div)
Team C - 10-4 (2-4 Div)
Team D - 10-4 (2-4 Div)

In this case, Teams B through D can't use head to head comparisons because it is a three way tie. Division record could be a discriminating factor but in this example, that too would be not enough to decide. So on Xav's list, this would be determined based on Pts allowed. Rather than using Pts allowed, I would rather see League Scoring differential used. I think a team's season long scoring differential is more telling as a factor than on pts allowed and has a much smaller chance of also being a tie and forcing you down to an even less overall indicator of a team's relative performance.

Originally posted by pabloex
The issue I see is the possibility of a clear division winner and then a 3-way divisional tie for the remaining teams. While not the probable outcome, especially in more advanced leagues, it is certainly possible to have a division that winds up like this in rookie league:

Team A - 14-0 (6-0 Div)
Team B - 10-4 (2-4 Div)
Team C - 10-4 (2-4 Div)
Team D - 10-4 (2-4 Div)

In this case, Teams B through D can't use head to head comparisons because it is a three way tie. Division record could be a discriminating factor but in this example, that too would be not enough to decide. So on Xav's list, this would be determined based on Pts allowed. Rather than using Pts allowed, I would rather see League Scoring differential used. I think a team's season long scoring differential is more telling as a factor than on pts allowed and has a much smaller chance of also being a tie and forcing you down to an even less overall indicator of a team's relative performance.

I like scoring differential too, never really thought about it...even at that, it is getting down to the crazy low possiblities. What is proposed would help tremendously in what is currently happening

division record should definitely come before composite score in same league tiebreakers for division title.

Originally posted by HayRow
If you are going to add the composite score i would still move that below division record. still gave a thumbs up

this

Originally posted by HayRow
If you are going to add the composite score i would still move that below division record. still gave a thumbs up

Originally posted by HayRow
My argument for division would be that if the 2 teams are clearly the cream of the crop they would likely both be 5-1 and then could go to the composite score.

going to the score first could be misleading because it could of been a simple bad play call or mistake in game planning for a single game/play that caused a blowout score in one game.

I don't see an argument really for going score first. I would be really upset to have a 5-1 division record and lose the division title to a team with a 3-3 division record just because my DC missed an assignment.

Originally posted by Jampy2.0
division record should definitely come before composite score in same league tiebreakers for division title.

Y'all are prolly right. My initial thinking was that composite score gives a better chance of seeing who the better team is at the end of the season without losing that first game.

However, after reading everyone else, I do think that divisional record should be more important for deciding who the divisional winner is.

Originally posted by Xavori
I do think that divisional record should be more important for deciding who the divisional winner is.


I agree.

Maybe edit that in the OP...

Everyone who likes that idea, should give a thumbs up.

Would be nice to get some more thumbs up...

Lookin' for people to give me advice on owning a team. I need help in GLB2 and I started not too long ago. If anyone has advice, send the advice to Redmond's Imposter via GLB2 mail.


-_-
Redmond
-_-