gdl playoff restructuring vote

[kgman]

i think we should change playoffs to football style top 2 divsion winners get a bye into 2nd round 6 teams from each conf make it to playoffs

[jrodimus]

As much as it would suck if I finished 7/8, this sounds like a good idea. It would make the reg. season competitive from beginning to end. The only down side is the possibility of having more teams out of contention early on and possibly less motivated to get their games in.

[RedWingDevil]

I have a better option. Hear this out.

We should use the 60-game cap with a special twist:

As you guys probably know, rounding involves a number that's at the 5 figure or above it, it automatically rises to the next number (25 [figure of 5] = 30). Passing through this small Math class, guys that manage to get to 55 games or more won't suffer penalties and may have the option to finish the remaining ones to strenghen their seeding positions.

As for the lower ranked teams, this gives them a new incentive to catch up and try to get the last seeds by completing all 60 games. With tihs clause, this will increase competiveness in the last throes of the regular season and give some fire to the players that feel that they have a chance to make the playoffs. Sounds like a good idea.

[metzgerism]

I have a better option. Hear this out.

We should use the 60-game cap with a special twist:

As you guys probably know, rounding involves a number that's at the 5 figure or above it, it automatically rises to the next number (25 [figure of 5] = 30). Passing through this small Math class, guys that manage to get to 55 games or more won't suffer penalties and may have the option to finish the remaining ones to strenghen their seeding positions.

As for the lower ranked teams, this gives them a new incentive to catch up and try to get the last seeds by completing all 60 games. With tihs clause, this will increase competiveness in the last throes of the regular season and give some fire to the players that feel that they have a chance to make the playoffs. Sounds like a good idea.

What does rounding have to do with it?

[RedWingDevil]

Just the procedure in which 55 or 56 becomes 60. It's called rendondeo in Spanish, but I have to look up the English definition. Basically it's a shout out on how Swos decided to go for 56 instead of 60 games for the league.

Edited November 25, 2009 by RedWingDevil

[smozoma]

Just the procedure in which 55 or 56 becomes 60. It's called rendondeo in Spanish, but I have to look up the English definition. Basically it's a shout out on how Swos decided to go for 56 instead of 60 games for the league.

It's always been 56, since season 1

[smozoma]

I have a better option. Hear this out.

We should use the 60-game cap with a special twist:

As you guys probably know, rounding involves a number that's at the 5 figure or above it, it automatically rises to the next number (25 [figure of 5] = 30). Passing through this small Math class, guys that manage to get to 55 games or more won't suffer penalties and may have the option to finish the remaining ones to strenghen their seeding positions.

As for the lower ranked teams, this gives them a new incentive to catch up and try to get the last seeds by completing all 60 games. With tihs clause, this will increase competiveness in the last throes of the regular season and give some fire to the players that feel that they have a chance to make the playoffs. Sounds like a good idea.

If I may translate... and acknowledge that the season is 56 games, not 60:

"Don't give DNPs under 52 games."

Edited November 25, 2009 by smozoma

[smozoma]

i'm not in this league anymore, but screw football rules. this is hockey. everyone has the win the same number of games.

Edited November 25, 2009 by smozoma

[shaftman]

i'm not in this league anymore, but screw football rules. this is hockey. everyone has the win the same number of games.

Thumbs up to this

[Freydey]

Just the procedure in which 55 or 56 becomes 60. It's called rendondeo in Spanish, but I have to look up the English definition. Basically it's a shout out on how Swos decided to go for 56 instead of 60 games for the league.

I dont get it but if your saying we should add more games, this is retarded. Less games would be better, less slackass

[RedWingDevil]

I dont get it but if your saying we should add more games, this is retarded. Less games would be better, less slackass

No, it is not and I take offense to this. I guess no one likes to use their imagination to come up with some exciting stuff for the leagues and that's kinda sad. I believe this idea could work given time, but you're all too complacient and flat to want to go all the way, and being too complacient makes you lax. What if someone proposes a league and it's say, 70-games long? You're all gonna say 'Eff that' just because of that? Guess we're not adventureous enough.

And I don't take kindly that people say that I'm dumb just because I came up with a different idea. It's a bit outlandish, sure, but how can you're sure it's gonna suck if you don't even want to try that? Maybe not in this league, but what about somewhere else?

[smozoma]

No, it is not and I take offense to this. I guess no one likes to use their imagination to come up with some exciting stuff for the leagues and that's kinda sad. I believe this idea could work given time, but you're all too complacient and flat to want to go all the way, and being too complacient makes you lax. What if someone proposes a league and it's say, 70-games long? You're all gonna say 'Eff that' just because of that? Guess we're not adventureous enough.

And I don't take kindly that people say that I'm dumb just because I came up with a different idea. It's a bit outlandish, sure, but how can you're sure it's gonna suck if you don't even want to try that? Maybe not in this league, but what about somewhere else?

But how does eliminating DNPs for the last few games make things better? That's the issue. How does eliminating the DNPs make people play more games to increase their seeding?

DNPs were actually introduced so that people wouldn't sit on their points and leave some games unplayed because they didn't need more points.

[shaftman]

I think what ice guy is getting at is we have a 60 game schedule but only play 55 games to complete the season. And those 5 extra games are like bonus possible points we can get if we CHOOSE to play them.

And having it like this gives incentive to the slackers...because once they reach 55 they have the chance to 'unlock' those 5 extra games and play them..and make the playoffs.

and in the end all 60 games get played basically, because everyones gunning for points in the end of the season.

Is this your idea iceguy?

[RedWingDevil]

That's pretty much clear, Shaftman. I'm glad that at least it was understood better than what I had said. Maybe I don't explain myself too well.

But yeah, this is probably the idea I wanted to show.

[CamKneely]

There will be some voting referendums at the end of the season. Trust me, I don't want there to be any slackers and I'm trying to eliminate them by any means necessary.

[smozoma]

I think what ice guy is getting at is we have a 60 game schedule but only play 55 games to complete the season. And those 5 extra games are like bonus possible points we can get if we CHOOSE to play them.

And having it like this gives incentive to the slackers...because once they reach 55 they have the chance to 'unlock' those 5 extra games and play them..and make the playoffs.

That's pretty much clear, Shaftman. I'm glad that at least it was understood better than what I had said. Maybe I don't explain myself too well.

But yeah, this is probably the idea I wanted to show.

but who do those extra games end up being against..? What if those opponents don't show up to play one person, but do against another?

Interesting idea, but not practical.. It goes against the "release many games early so there is time to play them" lesson. It doesn't really fix anything DNPs don't already do, as far as I can see.

Anyway, this thread was supposed to be about the idea of using the top 6 seeds instead of 8.. which is fine if you're good, but makes it not worth playing if you're not. I never* made the playoffs when there were 16 teams, but I at least felt I had a shot each time. And, actually, it changes absolutely nothing for the top 6 players and just ruins the fun for the 7th and 8th seeds. The playoffs will have the same result, regardless, since there is very little chance of a 7th or 8th conference seed beating a 1st or 2nd, but at least they got the chance to play.

* I made it once due to someone else's DNPs

[RedWingDevil]

So you dislike or perhaps aren't agreeable with upsets, smoz? That sounds bad, coming from you. =P Tihngs in life are improbable but not impossible, it's better that you don't forget that.

I don't believe we should change the format with the playoffs, since the traditional system still works. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And I don't think we should try to adpot a system similar to MLB. Hockey is hockey, pure and simple. Whether you make the playoffs or not is up to you, your skill and perhaps luck. I got short at making the postseason, but I don't regret trying; if you say that the lower seeds 7th and 8th should be weeded out or something to that effect, smoz, I exercise my freedom of speech in saying you're mistaken. If at first you don't succeed... It can suck for a while, but you can get better eventually, so shutting the door to the other players can affect things more negatively rather than make it better just because it needs to be changed for the greater good.

[smozoma]

So you dislike or perhaps aren't agreeable with upsets, smoz? That sounds bad, coming from you. =P Tihngs in life are improbable but not impossible, it's better that you don't forget that.

I don't believe we should change the format with the playoffs, since the traditional system still works. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And I don't think we should try to adpot a system similar to MLB. Hockey is hockey, pure and simple. Whether you make the playoffs or not is up to you, your skill and perhaps luck. I got short at making the postseason, but I don't regret trying; if you say that the lower seeds 7th and 8th should be weeded out or something to that effect, smoz, I exercise my freedom of speech in saying you're mistaken. If at first you don't succeed... It can suck for a while, but you can get better eventually, so shutting the door to the other players can affect things more negatively rather than make it better just because it needs to be changed for the greater good.

Actually, I was trying to say to give the guys a chance at an upset (though they're extremely rare). I am in favour of keeping the 7th and 8th seeds.

[HABS]

but who do those extra games end up being against..? What if those opponents don't show up to play one person, but do against another?

Interesting idea, but not practical.. It goes against the "release many games early so there is time to play them" lesson. It doesn't really fix anything DNPs don't already do, as far as I can see.

Anyway, this thread was supposed to be about the idea of using the top 6 seeds instead of 8.. which is fine if you're good, but makes it not worth playing if you're not. I never* made the playoffs when there were 16 teams, but I at least felt I had a shot each time. And, actually, it changes absolutely nothing for the top 6 players and just ruins the fun for the 7th and 8th seeds. The playoffs will have the same result, regardless, since there is very little chance of a 7th or 8th conference seed beating a 1st or 2nd, but at least they got the chance to play.

* I made it once due to someone else's DNPs

agree with this

no point in taking out first round for top seeds, most guys want to play more playoff games anyway. and like smoz said its not like the real nhl, theres been very, very few if any upsets by 7 and 8 seeds.

[Zalex]

i think we should change playoffs to football style top 2 divsion winners get a bye into 2nd round 6 teams from each conf make it to playoffs

this isnt football

THIS IS HOOCCCCCCCKEEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYYY

GA

GA

GA

GA

G

AA