Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 40 of 40
  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    20,174
    Tiebreaker for playoff seeding should be head-to-head first...THEN points.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Purgatory
    Posts
    16,503
    Quote Originally Posted by rjohmit View Post
    Tiebreaker for playoff seeding should be head-to-head first...THEN points.
    I agree. Is there a way to set it up to automatically do that on MFL?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    20,174
    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBones View Post
    I agree. Is there a way to set it up to automatically do that on MFL?
    Don't know...would have to explore it.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    30,828
    Quote Originally Posted by rjohmit View Post
    Tiebreaker for playoff seeding should be head-to-head first...THEN points.
    I agree and disagree. It depends on league setup and what tie is being broken. H2H is a lot more fluky in fantasy football than real football because of player byes and lack of impact on your opponent.
    Last edited by Xulu Bak; 11-26-2014 at 01:19 AM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    19,889
    Quote Originally Posted by rjohmit View Post
    Tiebreaker for playoff seeding should be head-to-head first...THEN points.
    Completely disagree. If teams A and B are both 9-4, team A scored 1400 points, team B scored 1200 points, but team B beat team A in week 7 because team A had key guys on bye or just had a bad week, no way that should count for more than being the better, higher-scoring team all year. Total points scored is by FAR the best indicator of team quality in fantasy football, and the best teams should make the playoffs. It's bad enough as it is with teams making it in large part due to fortune, we definitely shouldn't give those teams another chance to make it due to a fortunate matchup in a given week.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Purgatory
    Posts
    16,503
    I'd like to get rid of defenses. The scoring we implimented is better than what we had in the past but this position is more directly affected by the matchup than any other position. I'd rather win/lose with the skill position players than by a defense lucky enough to be matched up with an inept offense.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    19,889
    Ditto 1 billion per cent. These flukey week to week defense scores are ruining otherwise good matchups.

    Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    30,828
    I'm good with getting rid of defenses. We tried a change that would make scoring reflect performance and make them relevant, but unfortunately, in today's NFL, quality of opposing QB matters more than actual defense 95% of the time.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    20,174
    Quote Originally Posted by Xulu Bak View Post
    unfortunately, in today's NFL, quality of opposing QB matters more than actual defense 95% of the time.
    And the officiating crew...

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Down Under
    Posts
    7,364
    Need to discuss this roster freeze for playoffs teams once the playoffs start, it's ridiculous and makes no sense at all
    "It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man" - Jack Handy

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.