General Tournament discussion

I thought I'd open up a thread on this year's tournament, the incorporation of the 2000s, etc. Normally, about this time, I might be figuring out my chances of making the final 12 or be looking at likely opponents. This year is quite different with the addition of the 2000s and expansion to 24 teams. One thing that really feels different is the pace of the tournament. It's been a whirlwind and, in the past, that is capped off with the finals. This year, the 4-league extravaganza leads to a 24 team 2000s league (two 12-team leagues actually) that will have to be played all the way through before we get to the finals. I don't like this change to a much more drawn out, longer tournament. In future years, should the tournament keep the 2000s semi-finals, or should the 2000s be added as just another league so we'd have 5 leagues playing nearly simultaneously leading to the finals?

As the 70s are reaching the finals, the tournament standings are taking a less fluid order. One new player currently in the top 10, "gritch" has a .550 winning% in the mystery format and could well be a new player in the finals. On the other hand, I can't help but mention that Moodywoody completely slacked off in the 60s and 70s and is now at #63 and will probably fall further once the 70s playoffs are completed. So, he'll have to make up 20+ points in the 80s and 90s just to make the 2000s and then would need to kill it in the 2000s to reach the finals before he can win yet another crown.

Another thought on the 2000s. I have not yet played a team in the 2000s, but I'm trying to start a 24 team keeper league (currently taking sign-ups on the 60s, 70s.. message board). My theory is that the 2000s has too many good hitters, and that a 24 team league will be more realistic and fun than a 12 team league where every lineup is full of all-stars. If this league comes together, we'll have some idea whether a 24 team league in the 2000s is a good idea for the tournament.

I'm certainly in favor of adding the 2000s to the qualifying seasons. We previously added the 60s and 90s as soon as they were available. Making it 5 leagues should only add 2 or 3 weeks to the tourney.

I'm still up in the air on 24 teams qualifying and having the semi-final round. I understand that with close to 200 owners it opens up more opportunities to advance and to stay interested until the end.

I haven't played any 2000s leagues yet, but I assume most everyone is in the same boat. There are a few guys I have my eye on. There sure are a lot of high dollar, high injury, bad defense hitters.

I am not against the idea of next year having 5 rounds of qualifying, all rounds spaced 2 weeks apart, and then sending just the top 12 to the finals. The downside include we'd be moving to a minimum 5 team committment for everyone, and we'd be going back to only 12 out of nearly 200 teams making any kind of playoff round. Even though the other tournaments have semi-finals, maybe the thing that makes this tournament unique (other than this year) is we have an exclusive playoff group. Does that discourage enrollment? Maybe.

Another idea might be reverting back to the 4 round and one 12 team playoff round we had before this year, and rotate which of the 5 sets gets excluded from the first 4 rounds each year. That set could be used in the finals.

Keep sharing ideas here!

You could model it after the Player Championship, with 5 rounds, by including the 2000's set....where only the 4 top scores count. This is how it is described in the PC rules -

The score for the qualifying events will be the sum of the best four scores out of the five events. This provides several benefits for the members of the tournament:

-If someone misses Event I, but they still want to join up for Event II, they can do that, and still have a chance of making the playoffs assuming they do not miss any additional events.

-If someone joins for Event I, but misses only one of Events II-V, they are still eligible for the playoffs (assuming they make the cutoff score).

-If someone enters all five events, they benefit from being able to drop their lowest score.

Good suggestion Delbird, it's worth considering, but I think there are a few things I don't like about the Players tournament. One is that they don't assign people to leagues. I much prefer a random assignment than allowing people to join any league on their own, and potentially having people cherry-picking a league. Also, that lack of structure allows for leagues to fill at any time which makes the standings of very little value because you don't know at first glance how many leagues each player has joined, and what point in the season those leagues are. Finally, the playoff format is such that I think 36 teams make the playoffs after 4/5 rounds, but the team at #1 is basically at no more of an edvantage than #36.

You also have the Barnstormers ATG model. 6 qualifying teams/leagues, with you dropping your lowest score. After those 6 leagues, some teams automatically qualify for the finals (they do 9, but nothing magic about that number) and then another group plays in the semis for the rest of the spots in the finals. They have also negotiated bonus(es)/credit(s) for everyone who makes the semis and for the playoff teams in the finals.

The one thing I have learned with absolute certainty from playing the Mystery Tournament, never count out Moodywoody. I'm certain he'll be making a furious charge towards the top 24 and picking up all the free agents in the 2000's semi round.

Agreed, don't count Moodywoody out. The average pts. for the last 5 years to make the top 24 is 365. To reach 365 Moody will need 93 more points. If his last two teams continue to win at their current pace he'll get 81 points. Both should make the playoffs for another 10, which means he'll need to make the finals with one team. The manager he knocks out of the top 24 will likely be me if I'm still in the top 24.

For this tournament one thing that should never change is the common start for all teams even though it's got to be a big pain for the commish.

So I’m new, this is my first tournament but I’d say add the 5th round of the 2000s. It seems that restricting entries isn’t a problem as you are already over 150.
I do like the randomly assigned leagues. It seems fairer than “shopping”. Particularly to newer guys like me.

It seems that 1-12 will have such a big cushion of wins that most of round 5 will be a mere exercise and be rendered pointless...