Semifinals groupings

success over 810 games is a better reflection of performance than success over a maximum of 50-70 post season games.

Yes
Dougess’s proposal puts the ultimate premium on regular season tour placement by applying it to berth placement in the semis. Carrying over tour points as a weighting of sorts is a brilliant and direct way to make tour points matter in the semis.

Carrying over regular season points into the semifinals seems unnecessarily messy and complicated. I prefer the simplicity of win a semifinal, get a spot in the final.

I agree with the idea that points accumulated during the 6 events should matter, and I also agree that bonuses for winning titles skew those points. I am going to continue to advocate that you should not be grouping all the top teams into 1 league, even if it is a 12 team league. What you are saying is "Congrats on doing well, but only one of you top finishers gets to move on and we are going to guarantee that 2 teams that finished below you get a spot in the finals". I don't see how this approach rewards accumulating points during the initial events.

I understand that the lottery aspect of the 24 team semifinal seems unfair also. Personally, I would like to see it go back to the top 9 make it in and there are then 3 semifinal leagues with 12 teams each. I think this rewards doing well in the events but also makes the semis more about skill than luck. However, I also understand that allowing more people to stay in the running for a semifinal spot keeps them engaged and lessens manager dropout in the later events.

If the desire is to have a reward for the top points accumulated, but not have the 24 team crapshoot semis, then I would suggest the top 6 make it in directly based on points, and then 6 more make it in by winning a 12-team semifinal league. That gives you 78 total players in the semis (not significantly different than the 81 currently) while also removing all 24 team leagues.

Well Moose, thanks for doing this, no matter how you decide to manage it.
Peace

I feel the goal of every team is to make the postseason, then you have a chance. I would lose my mind winning a semifinal league but not advancing because of point totals from the regular season. By that logic, the Dodgers would be this years champs, not the Braves (who just so happened to have the lowest win total entering the post season tournament). Some owners may not be adept at extreme caps, but thrive in the post season leagues of 80 or 100. The goal is to be good enough to make the tourney, then see what you can do. We all love seeing Cinderella at least have a chance against the big boys (unless she's playing your team), even though in the end she rarely wins the whole thing.

Seems like a few spoiled brats who want to change rules to benefit the few of "them" while screwing the rest of us

happened in the mystery tournament this year, so why would I not be surprised "they" fuck this up to

im done with this strat brat bullshit, the few of you keep driving away the rest of us. what happened in the mystery tournament this year, where the rules were absolutely bent/changed DURING final voting so Frankie can get his way absolutely pissed me off.

im out, who cares

Moose my condolences on your loss. Thanks for all you do for this tournament.

My only question is how long has the format been this way and why hasn't this come up in the past? Seems like if it was such a concern, it would have been raised before the whole tour started.

My feeling is, if you have rules in place, you don't change them during the tour. If there are concerns about the playoff system, then do a poll of all of the participants and change the rules for the NEXT tour.

my feelings are this:

play the tournament with the rules we started with, we knew them going in...change for next tournament.

Never change in midstream.

WHatever you decide Moose, I will follow willingly.

Condolences, and also thank you for all you do.

Coach

im out, who cares

Bye.

Pretty sure that changing this year's rules is not even on the table, the paranoid rantings of the author of the above quote notwithstanding. Even my initial suggestion on this thread presupposed that this year's rules were set in stone - as they should be.

There is zero chance Moose changes the rules at this point so I would not worry about it.

The funny thing is that this is always the time people want to discuss the rules when they see how it is going to affect them. NOW. But of course it is patently unfair to change them at this point regardless if you think the rules are unfair.

Prior to the tour--when rules changes could be discussed--it's crickets and whatever will be discussed now will be forgotten...

Good times.