|
Post by Rodney L. Voumard on May 5, 2007 16:11:54 GMT -8
I'd like to see the fight.......
de la Hoya by decision
|
|
|
Post by Greenie on May 5, 2007 16:14:25 GMT -8
Pretty Boy destroys him.
|
|
|
Post by Rodney L. Voumard on May 5, 2007 16:16:28 GMT -8
It won't be easy, but I think Oscar has more experience with tougher opponents
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 5, 2007 16:59:28 GMT -8
i want to see mayweather got his ass kicked because he has a big f'in mouth
|
|
|
Post by Greenie on May 5, 2007 17:37:56 GMT -8
like me ;D
|
|
|
Post by crash23 on May 5, 2007 20:17:11 GMT -8
The division winner is just that - the division winner. That entitles them to an entry into the tourney, nothing more. Then teams are seeded accordingly and the fairest method is the one Chris posted... There will never be a perfectly fai play-off system (othen than the one MLB had pre-divisionals). But the splitting hairs is almost pointless. If the Angels have to be one of the top 4 then they'd be ranked last (of the top 4) and play the 5th seed.... But the reason the seeding format Chris posted is better is that it's based on merit, not becasue a team is in a weak divsion. With our inter-league schedule everyone has played everone so the winning percentage is the fairest way to go. And besides, who says the pros have got it right? This method is better than the NFL format!
|
|
|
Post by Randy Edwards on May 6, 2007 8:00:51 GMT -8
Greenie, Does it really matter where your team gets seeded ? if your ultamite (sp) goal is to win the Championship you or any other team will have to go through the big dogs to get there and visa versa... We beleive the win % is the only fair way to do it. We tried and talked about other formats but this always came out the best.
|
|
|
Post by tmurphy on May 6, 2007 18:54:20 GMT -8
Come on guys every sport in American history your divisions winners are seeded first then everyone else falls in place. I do not understand why you guys make something so simple so hard. It does not matter to me because I am not involved but if I was I can not see it being any other way. Most of the guys that want it done differently are working on the advantage for their team. It is a simple fix division winners 1 - 4 and then the next 4 by winning percentage.
The only people that will disagree are the ones that will have the hardest 1st game . Why make a big deal about it when you will have to beat a couple of the top teams to win it any way. Do not be mad at me guys but we all know how these LL politics work when it comes down to things like this. Everyone works the drill to there advantage no matter what, because everyone wants to win. Why would you not award the teams that win their division with a higher seed and the next 4 fall in place. Maybe becuase someone knows their team will not win their division and still want the higher seed. That way they can save their ace to a later round and not have to use him out of the gate to keep from falling into loser bracket. Chris and Crash I am really suprised you guys would not want to award the division winner a higher seed because that is the way it is done in any other sport including baseball.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 6, 2007 19:14:02 GMT -8
Tony ~
We were trying to account for the inequalities in the leagues, number of scheduled games and general fairness. We started this process by saying that two teams from each league would enter the tourney. That was all that was determined. We ultimately decided the only straightup method of seeding was to go by winning percentage. How can you possibly call that unfair or shady?
Perhaps your projecting your own issues upon us but our intentions and ultimately our recommendations were totally void of politics. That may be hard for you to believe but its true.
|
|
|
Post by Greenie on May 6, 2007 19:29:48 GMT -8
How can you possibly call that unfair or shady? I believe it's both. Are you saying there is not any inequalities in the leagues in any other sport? I think there is and yet you NEVER see a team that placed 2 seeded ahead of a division winner. You guys are trying to make up a seedings system that has never existed before.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 6, 2007 19:32:25 GMT -8
Based on your take on things here are the seedings.
1. Padres .929 2. NS Yanks* .800 (head-to-head) 3. N Dodgers .800 4. Orioles .643 5. Cubs .733 6. Giants .714 7. Red Sox .600 8. NS Angels .333
Now look at the advantage the cubs and Giants gain under your method. The Cubs no longer play the Giants in round 1 our game ended 3-2.
Under your method the Cubs now play the Orioles whom they beat 11-1. The Giants now play the Dodgers whom we beat 11-0 (a fluke I know but . . ). If we were looking at match ups we certainly wouldn't choose to go with our method.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 6, 2007 19:42:27 GMT -8
Wait a minute Jim! I just reread your post. Are you saying we did this to be shady? FU!
|
|
|
Post by Greenie on May 6, 2007 20:14:07 GMT -8
I love you too. You said it first. When you do things that are out of the ordinary what do you call it? I really can't figure out any reason how you could justify your seedings.
|
|
|
Post by Greenie on May 6, 2007 20:20:22 GMT -8
I just reread your post. What in the hell do the scores have to do with anything? The seedings you have are the correct way to do them as long as the Orioles win the division. Scores during the season have nothing to do with it. BTW~ our score was not a fluke. We are not playing very well right now.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 6, 2007 20:30:41 GMT -8
LOL - FU ANYWAY!
|
|