Using Points Allowed instead of Points Differential - Page 2 - Forum - RedZoneAction.org - Free online American Football Manager Game

We are sorry, but this page requires JavaScript! Please check out www.activatejavascript.org for detailed instruction on how to enable JavaScript in your browser.

Check how to improve security while using RedZoneAction.org

no content

Community - American Football Management Simulator

AdBlocker active? It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org. The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site. Thank you very much!

Main / Discussions / Using Points Allowed instead of Points Differential Search Forum

Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 16 17 18 > >|

Poll: Should we change the tiebreakers for the League and Supercup Divisions and Friendly Cups?, Poll closed, votes: 356

121	Yes, use Points allowed instead Points Differential
160	No, keep it as it is now
75	I don't care!

Poster

Message

MTS1972

posted: 2013-03-19 10:21:08 (ID: 87309) Report Abuse

Agree with sh8888

Quote Reply Edit

sh8888

posted: 2013-03-19 10:49:48 (ID: 87311) Report Abuse

badkarma wrote:
So putting all your effort into an overpowered offense to win is a legitimate tactic, but putting all your effort into a shutdown defence is not? When was this decided as part of the game? Did I miss that in the manual?
I read this as.. play the game my way or you're a whiner.

That's your (mis)interpretation of my post, but it's not what I actually said .... trying to put words into my mouth could be interpreted as disingenuous ....but I'll be charitable here and assume that you innocently misunderstood what I said.

However ... keeping this thing On-topic ...... lets go back to the original suggestion .......

Firstly, just to make things perfectly clear .... I've nothing against Meitheisman who makes some very good posts (being an Eagles fan isn't against the law either .... not yet anyway

)

"Of course a 3-0 victory would therefore be more valuable than a 42-28 victory but I think it's a small price to pay to add realism and reduce the influence of teams going Bot in the middle of a season."

Ok ... so I read it as - - -> the intention of this Suggestion is to take scores against bots out of the equation.
Unfortunately, it doesn't do that .... it takes points scored by a human team against bots out of the equation..... but it introduces points scored by a bot team into the equation. I actually think that would be an insipidly retrograde step......and I'm keen for RZA not to go back to the dark old days of yore.

I don't actually see a perfect solution for "Tiebreakers" ..... as long as there are Bots (and there probably always will be) then there will be random factors and 'injustice' (overly strong word .... but you know what I mean) in the scoring systems/tiebreakers.

One possible solution would be to limit SuperCup qualifying to the 112 SC Group Winners. But this introduces other problems of it's own (Byes etc), and it also doesn't remove the "tiebreaker" problem .... i.e. there still needs to be tiebreakers to decide group winners in the event of identical win/loss records.

Quote Reply Edit

badkarma

posted: 2013-03-19 11:06:52 (ID: 87313) Report Abuse

That's a fair point.
I won't take exception at being accused of being disingenuous seeing as you referred to people who's opinions differ to yours as "one or two whiners"

I guess the real answer is to "fix" bots? The problem then is that you might have bot teams promoting over human teams.
Maybe if they played like a below average team in their division (if you can't beat them you're not ready anyway, kind of thing), rather than like a team of 10yr old children vs the Super Bowl champs as it currently is.

Quote Reply Edit

nobody

posted: 2013-03-19 12:22:10 (ID: 87316) Report Abuse

neutral !
voted !
Dont know enough.
Im on the outside looking in so i cant help in this !!

Quote Reply Edit

Grzymisław

posted: 2013-03-19 13:09:38 (ID: 87320) Report Abuse

Do I understand right? Points allowed first after win/loss record? So then 450-280 will be better match point record than 600-300!?!?
Absolutely against.
I don't think it useful anyway. With normal point difference(as it's now) both offense and defence counts, but with this rule suggested it would be defence much more important(offence only to score one more FG than opponent to win the game).

Quote Reply Edit

bagss

posted: 2013-03-19 13:35:24 (ID: 87323) Report Abuse

no improvement to the game

should be in suggestion forum

Last edited on 2013-03-19 13:35:38 by bagss

Quote Reply Edit

sh8888

posted: 2013-03-19 13:45:21 (ID: 87324) Report Abuse

If anyone wants to see the difficulty of finding a 'fair' Tiebreaker, then they should have a look at SuperCup Qualifying Division 5 - - -> here

Basically, there is a 3 team Tie, all with 14-1 between Mad Rabbitohs, Indija Polar Bears and Nebraska Cornhuskers.

So .... head-to-head first :-

Bears 35 Rabbitohs 10
Bears 0 Cornhuskers 33
Rabbitohs 28 Cornhuskers 14

what does that prove ? .... it just seems to show that Bears beat Rabbitohs who beat Cornhuskers who beat Bears. Hmmm, I don't think we're any further forwards

Points difference :-

Rabbitohs - 1394
Bears - 1334
Cornhuskers - 894

(in this case, Points For, TD For, and TD Diff would give the same result as Points Diff)

Points against :-

Cornhuskers - 49
Rabbitohs - 80
Bears - 97

So .... a question for everyone ..... in your opinion, who should qualify in the above situation, and why ???

btw .... before anybody mentions "strength-of-schedule" as a possible Tiebreaker .... just thinking aloud, can S-of-S ever be used ? .... If Team A plays Team B when Team B is a human team and then Team C plays Team B after Team B has gone Bot, doesn't that immediately wreck S-of-S across the entire SC group or the entire League ?

Quote Reply Edit

Grzymisław

posted: 2013-03-19 13:51:13 (ID: 87325) Report Abuse

Best tiebreaker is point difference - all games count really to the final ranking.
Then head to head - some games are much more important(against equal strength teams) and other could be given up a bit.
Points allowed - very bad, but at least depends on a team.
Strength of schedule - already it's a problem how to calculate this strength. And a team cannot choose a schedule. Maybe it can be added, but not before first 2.

Quote Reply Edit

Meitheisman

posted: 2013-03-19 14:18:20 (ID: 87326) Report Abuse

sh8888 wrote:
It's a bad idea.
1) It will encourage extremely negative tactics, even against Bots.
Currently, even some of the very best RZA teams don't have "shutdown Defenses" .... Reason ? ... because the whole point of the game is to win ... and whether you win 38-35 or 14-0 shouldn't matter much, it's the fact that you've won that should matter.

2) If this suggestion was implemented (god forbid

) .... I can see a situation next season where Team A is eliminated because they allowed 1 or 2 field goals against Bots whereas Team B didn't. Does that mean Team B is a better team ? ....... No, because the 'tactics' of bots are totally random.

3) It would be a real shame if changes like this were made just to satisfy one or two whiners whose teams narrowly missed SC qualification, changes made hastily as a result of a knee-jerk reaction are rarely well-thought changes. The rules are the same for everyone, use your initiative and plan your tactics to make best use of the rules instead.

4) In real-life, I'm struggling to think of any sport/competition that uses 'Points Allowed' as the initial Tiebreaker.

5) Edit :- Looks like this change would also give some teams who are no longer in the qualification hunt the opportunity to sabotage other teams by using MOTY. Currently, this probably isn't a factor ... i.e. if a team that can't/won't qualify uses MOTY , if that Team loses then there is little difference ........ but with a "points allowed" tiebreaker, a team that is out of the qualification hunt could use MOTY in order to score points against another team and thereby hurt his 'points allowed' tally.
Lol ... yet another (and there are many) good reason to make MOTY obsolete.

I've numbered your paragraphs in order to address all of your points.

1) "Negative tactics" - What do you mean exactly? Teams running up the clock? Players taking a knee at the 1 yard line instead of scoring a TD late in the game? These things happen in the NFL so I actually see this as adding realism, don't you? At least it's more realistic than being up by 10 TDs and still throwing the ball trying to win by the biggest possible margin as it currently is, isn't it?

2) A few FG allowed against Bots might make a difference if my suggestion was implemented, however, they can also make a difference today AND the points Humans score against Bots make an even bigger difference. Today if Team A beats a Bot 60-0 because it runs a lot (using the clock more) and Team B beats a Bot 120-0 because it passes a lot... Is team B really better than Team B? Not in my book, team B just ran up the score more.

3) I don't like being accused of being a whiner and tbh the points differential might be what qualifies me for the PO in my league... After 14 weeks I'm 2 games behind Bahamas Blue Bulls... his PD is +73, mine is -14 so I need to win both of my games and him to lose both of his to tie plus I need to outscore him by 87pts in two games... That should almost be impossible... however, one of the two remaining teams on my schedule went Bot during the season so I have a good chance of covering the 87 point difference which I don't think is fair... Bahamas has a better team than mine as he even beat me this season, however, because I have a Bot remaining on my schedule and he doesn't I have a chance of clinching a WC spot ahead of him... So I'm certainly not whining about the current situation since it's actually giving my team an advantage this season!

4) True, there are no real life American Football competition where the first tie breaker is Points Allowed but there isn't a competition where Points Differential is the #1 tie breaker either.

5) How is that any different to today? A team using MOTY against you today will drastically affect your overall Points Difference.

To conclude, I feel like you're trying to find the imperfections in my suggestion (and there are some, for sure) instead of trying to compare the current imperfections with the imperfections we'd end up with if my suggestion was implemented... If we want perfection then H2H is the way to go but it's not doable in RZA so it's about picking the "next least imperfect system" and you haven't pointed out a single advantage of having Points Difference instead of Points Allowed in the above post.

Quote Reply Edit

Meitheisman

posted: 2013-03-19 14:23:23 (ID: 87327) Report Abuse

sh8888 wrote:
If anyone wants to see the difficulty of finding a 'fair' Tiebreaker, then they should have a look at SuperCup Qualifying Division 5 - - -> here

Basically, there is a 3 team Tie, all with 14-1 between Mad Rabbitohs, Indija Polar Bears and Nebraska Cornhuskers.

So .... head-to-head first :-

Bears 35 Rabbitohs 10
Bears 0 Cornhuskers 33
Rabbitohs 28 Cornhuskers 14

what does that prove ? .... it just seems to show that Bears beat Rabbitohs who beat Cornhuskers who beat Bears. Hmmm, I don't think we're any further forwards

IMO Cornhusker making it would be perfectly fine because if you look at Points Difference in H2H matches between the 3 teams Cornhusker has the highest one meaning that it performed better against the other top teams in the group.

I don't really see why the other two teams should be rewarded by beating Bots by 100pts when Cornhusker was "only" beating Bots by 70pts.

Basically I don't like games against Bots being the deciding factor and it is way too often with the current system... Maybe count all victories against Bots as 42-0 or something like that so that these games aren't the difference makers anymore?

Quote Reply Edit

reply Mark this thread unread

Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 16 17 18 > >|

Main / Discussions / Using Points Allowed instead of Points Differential

Booo, you are using old style IPv4...

Username	Password (Lost password?)