Toggle sidebar

OT: 2024 Washington Commanders thread: change we can believe in!

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fantasy football theoretical question, need your opinions.

Last regular season games wrap up tonight. There will be two teams, myself being one of them, at 7-7, tied for the last wildcard spot, but one other team at 6-6-2 could/should also be considered tied with the 7-7 teams. The tiebreaker is different for two teams tied vs three teams tied.

Question: Absent any other guidance, such as "most wins" , is 6-6-2 the same, standing wise, as 7-7? Both are obviously .500 records.



Footnote: we already voted to ditch ties next year, but we're stuck with them this year. We had three ties this year.


Footnote 2: in a three team tiebreaker, I win. In a two team tiebreaker, it depends on who I'm up against, so I prefer the three team tiebreaker of course.


Footnote 3: fantasy football is still dumb.
 
kicksavedave said:
Fantasy football theoretical question, need your opinions.

Last regular season games wrap up tonight. There will be two teams, myself being one of them, at 7-7, tied for the last wildcard spot, but one other team at 6-6-2 could/should also be considered tied with the 7-7 teams. The tiebreaker is different for two teams tied vs three teams tied.

Question: Absent any other guidance, such as "most wins" , is 6-6-2 the same, standing wise, as 7-7? Both are obviously .500 records.



Footnote: we already voted to ditch ties next year, but we're stuck with them this year. We had three ties this year.


Footnote 2: in a three team tiebreaker, I win. In a two team tiebreaker, it depends on who I'm up against, so I prefer the three team tiebreaker of course.


Footnote 3: fantasy football is still dumb.
Click to expand...
I vote for 7 - 7 > 6 - 6 - 2 because wins should be the first tiebreaker. Good luck figuring that out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTFN, AlexModvechkin8, ynotcaps and 1 other person
You need another level of tiebreaker, like h2h or common opponents or points scored because those 2 records are the same.

If you don't spell it out before the season you could be in for bad blood. You might just say "most wins" is the next tiebreaker after win% as has been suggested but doing so now is a potential problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ynotcaps, kicksavedave and Ridley Simon
kicksavedave said:
Fantasy football theoretical question, need your opinions.

Last regular season games wrap up tonight. There will be two teams, myself being one of them, at 7-7, tied for the last wildcard spot, but one other team at 6-6-2 could/should also be considered tied with the 7-7 teams. The tiebreaker is different for two teams tied vs three teams tied.

Question: Absent any other guidance, such as "most wins" , is 6-6-2 the same, standing wise, as 7-7? Both are obviously .500 records.



Footnote: we already voted to ditch ties next year, but we're stuck with them this year. We had three ties this year.


Footnote 2: in a three team tiebreaker, I win. In a two team tiebreaker, it depends on who I'm up against, so I prefer the three team tiebreaker of course.


Footnote 3: fantasy football is still dumb.
Click to expand...
All of my leagues use total points as the tiebreaker. Whomever has scored the most, during the season, wins the TB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ovechkins Wodka, ynotcaps and kicksavedave
We have multiple tiebreakers if teams finish tied in the standings. Total points is the first one in a three way tie. Head to head is the first one in a two way tie and total points is second. If things are still tied after that we go to highest single week score, then 2nd highest, etc, until we have a winner.

I would win a 3 way tiebreaker easily, I have the most posts by a good bit. But in a head to head, I would beat one guy and lose to the other, so I'm figuring that the 6-6-2 guy joins the tiebreaker, meaning I will win it. The commish just chimed in and agreed, so, like Ron Rivera or the Seattle Seahawks, I'm going to the playoffs with a .500 record :D

Again we're doing away with ties next year but this year we have a solution. Thanks for the feedback, you're all champions in my book! :thumbu:
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ridley Simon
ynotcaps said:
You could just call your record "fake news" and claim that you're 14-0....
Click to expand...

Well true fact, for about the 3rd year in the last 6, I've given up the most points against which is nothing but pure bad luck. Couple times I've overcome it to make the playoffs.

FFL is still dumb! That's real news.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ridley Simon
@kicksavedave - go to decimal points! 3 ties is crazy and annoying. Tie breaker should be wins and then total points scored.

I am in 3 season longs. Home league I am a paper tiger of sorts at 12-2 but with the least points against / 4th in total points for. Other 2 leagues 9-5 and 9-4.
 
RandyHolt said:
@kicksavedave - go to decimal points! 3 ties is crazy and annoying. Tie breaker should be wins and then total points scored.

I am in 3 season longs. Home league I am a paper tiger of sorts at 12-2 but with the least points against / 4th in total points for. Other 2 leagues 9-5 and 9-4.
Click to expand...

We talked about using decimals but I think we're just going to go with highest starting scorer as the W/L tiebreaker. Even using decimals we could still have a tie and need a tiebreaker, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandyHolt
Ridley Simon said:
I liked him a lot his draft year. Instead we took Forbes, and then Martin (who I like), and then Stromberg 7 slots later.

Sweet?
Click to expand...
I’m choosing to go with sweet because it got us Jayden and got rid of Ron. If Ron was even a little competent this team wouldn’t have been in position to draft a QB high in the first round.

But, alas, he wasn’t. He was perhaps the worst talent evaluator/GM we’ve ever had, and that’s saying something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ridley Simon and ynotcaps
AlexModvechkin8 said:
I’m choosing to go with sweet because it got us Jayden and got rid of Ron. If Ron was even a little competent this team wouldn’t have been in position to draft a QB high in the first round.

But, alas, he wasn’t. He was perhaps the worst talent evaluator/GM we’ve ever had, and that’s saying something.
Click to expand...
Given that group includes Vinny Sir Asshole, that's saying a lot.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: AlexModvechkin8, RandyHolt and kicksavedave
AlexModvechkin8 said:
I’m choosing to go with sweet because it got us Jayden and got rid of Ron. If Ron was even a little competent this team wouldn’t have been in position to draft a QB high in the first round.

But, alas, he wasn’t. He was perhaps the worst talent evaluator/GM we’ve ever had, and that’s saying something.
Click to expand...

He wasn't really that great on game day either. :thumbd:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ynotcaps
kicksavedave said:
We talked about using decimals but I think we're just going to go with highest starting scorer as the W/L tiebreaker. Even using decimals we could still have a tie and need a tiebreaker, right?
Click to expand...

Hundredths of a decimal... dare I say no, and that I would even bet large sums of money that a tie won't happen to a team of yours in the rest of your illustrious fantastical career. With that said... Dear Mr Fantasy, lets end the ties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kicksavedave
ynotcaps said:
Given that group includes Vinny Sir Asshole, that's saying a lot.
Click to expand...
Vinny Sir Asshole was indeed a piece of shit but he did lead the player personnel department when they drafted LaVar, Chris Samuel, Champ Bailey, Jon Jansen, Fred Smoot, Ladell Betts, Rick Cartwright, Derrick Dockery, Sean Taylor, Chris Cooley, Brian Orakpo, etc. He looks like Bobby Beathard compared to Ron.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Ridley Simon, g00n and Kazer
Its no coincidence our bad run of GMs mirrors the pathetic state of the franchise over the past 2+ decades.

Its still mind boggling to me how much we paid to move up to take RG3. Only rivaled by the Saints giving up EVERY pick in 1999 + to move up to take Ricky "Pass the J and just suspend me" Williams. Of all those picks only Lavar was a name you'd recall.

1733934778223.png


Many NFL GMs are dumb. Giants paying Danny Jones, largely thanks to him only beating us. The Dolphins inked Mostert age 32 before the season started. How's that going.
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: Ridley Simon
RandyHolt said:
Its no coincidence our bad run of GMs mirrors the pathetic state of the franchise over the past 2+ decades.

Its still mind boggling to me how much we paid to move up to take RG3. Only rivaled by the Saints giving up EVERY pick in 1999 + to move up to take Ricky "Pass the J and just suspend me" Williams. Of all those picks only Lavar was a name you'd recall.

View attachment 943589

Many NFL GMs are dumb. Giants paying Danny Jones, largely thanks to him only beating us. The Dolphins inked Mostert age 32 before the season started. How's that going.
Click to expand...

Holy Jebus…that’s one giant steaming pile of excrement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandyHolt
With WR Noah Brown likely out for the season, the Commanders claimed WR K.J. Osborn off waivers from the New England Patriots, per his agents Drew Rosenhaus and Robert Bailey.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Neil Racki
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom