KRFL - a football simulation league
Forums
KRFL :: Forums :: KRFL Forums :: 2015 League Business
Proprosed Rule Change: Change Method of Determining Draft Order << Previous thread | Next thread >>
Moderators: noodles, MarkB
Author Post
MarkB
Fri Mar 27 2015, 08:57a.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
CURRENT RULE: 5.1
All non-playoff teams will be ranked on the following tie-breaking factors:
a. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs)
b. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division
c. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games
d. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference
e. Strength of victory
f. Strength of schedule
g. Best net points in common games
h. Coin toss

PROPOSED RULE: Follow the NFL Rules:
Draft Order:

Determination of Draft order for KRFL teams is based on the record and playoff finish by each team in that year. The selection order is based on each team's win-loss record in the previous season and whether the team reached the playoffs. Teams that did not reach the playoffs the previous season are ranked in reverse order of their records (so the team with the fewest wins is awarded the first selection). Ties between teams with identical records are determined by the following tiebreakers (in order):
1. Strength of schedule, which is the combined win-loss record for all 16 of the team's opponents in the previous season (ties count as a half win and half loss). The team with the lower strength of schedule (as calculated by the Action PC game) is granted the earlier pick in round one.
2. Division tiebreakers (if the teams are in the same division).
3. Conference tiebreakers (if the teams are in the same conference).
4. Coin flip(s), administered by the Commissioner.

Teams that reached the playoffs the previous season are then slotted in the order in which they were eliminated (1st round of playoffs, 2nd round of playoffs, Conference Championship, Superbowl). Within each tier, the slotting is determined as above (i.e. worst record picks first and the same tiebreakers apply).

EXPLANATION:
The current system is difficult to understand and not written well. Plus, lets do it like the NFL does as the ACTION PC game calculates Strength of Schedule.





Back to top
Hawks
Sun Mar 29 2015, 07:50p.m.
Guest

I would support this proposal as written.
Back to top
PapaBear53
Sat Apr 04 2015, 12:33a.m.
Guest

I would not support this, simply because giving the tiebreak to the team with the worst SOS helps to promote losing, while giving the tiebreak to the team with the best SOS rewards teams for trying to win, even with a bad team (a 5-11 team with a .550 SOS arguably played better during the year than a 5-11 team with a .400 SOS).
Back to top
MarkB
Sat Apr 04 2015, 08:57a.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
Mark - Dan - Everyone else:
Would you support this if "lower" SOS was changed to "higher" SOS as follows:

1. Strength of schedule, which is the combined win-loss record for all 16 of the team's opponents in the previous season (ties count as a half win and half loss). The team with the higher strength of schedule (as calculated by the Action PC game) is granted the earlier pick.
2. Division tiebreakers (if the teams are in the same division).
3. Conference tiebreakers (if the teams are in the same conference).
4. Coin flip(s), administered by the Commissioner.
Back to top
KRFL-BayCity
Sat Apr 04 2015, 11:42a.m.
Registered Member #12
Joined: Mon Sep 01 2008, 07:40p.m.

Posts: 798
I can see no logic to Dan's post about it promotes losing; quite the opposite.... if you lose, your opponent's record improves thus your SOS improves; improving your SOS would grant you a better pick in Dan's scenario; so his theory actually makes it better to tank than the proper one(the NFL way)
Back to top
MarkB
Sat Apr 04 2015, 12:07p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
I just noticed that the game also calculates Strength of Victory in addition to Strength of Schedule. The NFL uses strength of schedule. If strength of schedule is used, Jerry is correct. If strength of victory is used, Jerry’s example is irrelevant to the losing team's strength of victory percentage.

I therefore revise my proposal to:
1. Higher Strength of Victory percentage as calculated in the Action PC game, which is the combined winning percentage of the opponents a team has beaten, is granted the earlier pick.
2. Division tiebreakers (if the teams are in the same division).
3. Conference tiebreakers (if the teams are in the same conference).
4. Coin flip(s), administered by the Commissioner.

In #1 I am proposed "higher" not "lower" incentivize team to do everything they can to win games against better teams. Again, not that I think we have a problem, but I think it is a good league philosophy.

[ Edited Sat Apr 04 2015, 12:23p.m. ]
Back to top
MarkB
Mon Apr 06 2015, 07:49p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
I really would like two Co-sponsors and some support for this. I think we have too many tiebreaker rules now and this would may it so much simpler to determine the draft order. Not to mention be closer to the method used by the NFL. Please consider supporting this change.
Back to top
Jimbo0121712000
Mon Apr 06 2015, 08:08p.m.
Registered Member #21
Joined: Fri Sep 05 2008, 01:10a.m.

Posts: 412
I support as long as we continue to do lottery for the first four spots
Back to top
MarkB
Mon Apr 06 2015, 08:24p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
Jimbo0121712000 wrote ...

I support as long as we continue to do lottery for the first four spots



The lottery for the first four picks would remain as is.
Back to top
 

Jump:     Back to top

Syndicate this thread: rss 0.92 Syndicate this thread: rss 2.0 Syndicate this thread: RDF
Powered by e107 Forum System