Apolyton NFL Playoff Pick'em 2008

[SlowwHand]

My fault. Next year I'll know that who wins is secondary to what the score is. It's just not the norm.

[-Jrabbit]

Please note, gentlemen, the title of the thread. It's "Playoff Pick'em" -- 4 rounds, 11 games. Reset every round, so EVERY GAME WAS OF EQUAL IMPORTANCE. It was NOT a "bracket" contest.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

1. Picking the right team in the superbowl should place you above those who picked the SB wrong.

Woulda coulda shoulda... Letting a misguided sense of "fairness" run roughshod over the facts of the matter. Get a grip.

This contest was by Donegeal's rules, which were clearly stated. Any OTHER result would be unfair in the extreme.

If it means so much to you, Ben...
1. Make your thoughts clear at the onset.
2. Run your own "Kenobi Rules" contest next time. Just the way you like it.

Originally posted by SlowwHand
My fault. Next year I'll know that who wins is secondary to what the score is. It's just not the norm.

I totally call bull****. In the past 40 years, I have NEVER been in a pool where the first tiebreaker was "picking the last game correctly" (which, BTW, punishes those who picked most accurately for three rounds of playoffs).

[-Jrabbit]

I'd also like to thank Donegeal for taking the time to put this together for the group's amusement.

[EPW]

Congratualations Jaguar, I knew I should have stuck with the Giants

[SlowwHand]

True, Wascally One. Thanks, Donegeal.

[Ming]

What the Wascally rabbit said... both his discussion of the facts and the thanks to Donegeal for entertaining us

[Donegeal]

My pleasure guys. I will be doing this again next year, and I'm not planning on having anymore teeth pulled so not as many mess up. Hope you all participate again.

Thanks...

[Ben Kenobi]

Please note, gentlemen, the title of the thread. It's "Playoff Pick'em" -- 4 rounds, 11 games. Reset every round, so EVERY GAME WAS OF EQUAL IMPORTANCE. It was NOT a "bracket" contest.

Not every game was of equal importance. Can't you see that?

The only difference between 5th and 15th is the point total in the SB, which punishes players for making the correct picks throughout.

That is why tiebreakers are a lame way to do seeding.

Winning as 12 point underdogs >>> picking the points.

This contest was by Donegeal's rules, which were clearly stated. Any OTHER result would be unfair in the extreme.

We were discussing what the tiebreakers ought to be, and there were several proposals.

If it means so much to you, Ben...
1. Make your thoughts clear at the onset.
2. Run your own "Kenobi Rules" contest next time. Just the way you like it.

Sure, and unlike Doneagal I won't be participating in my own contest. I don't think that's very fair that Doneagal has more information then the other teams.

I also don't think the whole PM BS is helpful either.

I totally call bull****. In the past 40 years, I have NEVER been in a pool where the first tiebreaker was "picking the last game correctly" (which, BTW, punishes those who picked most accurately for three rounds of playoffs).

And the current tiebreaker doesn't? C'mon off it. The only thing separating 5th from 15th is the points. The person who accurately predicted the spread does worse then the folks who play it safe and predict big NE blowouts.

Yeah, I see how ''fair'' that system is.

[Ben Kenobi]

Here are my ideas to determine seeding.

At the end of the year, everyone who is tied is grouped together according to their picks.

Say Ming chose 12341234121 as his picks

If he picked 11 underdogs and still won he'd get a bonus 1.1 points.

If he picked no underdogs he'd get 0 points.

The points would only apply to seeding, ie, they could rank Ming ahead of DD, but they couldn't rank Slowwy ahead of Ming.

If it's still tied, then we look at the points in the SB.

If two people picked the same 11 teams then it would go to the points.

This way ALL of your picks have consequences for seeding, and not just the SB.

[-Jrabbit]

Ben, I expect this sort of myopic argumentativeness from you on topics of morality and politics, but this is just poor sportmanship in the extreme.

I'm not going to argue with you over what the rules "should" be, but I'm taking you to the woodshed for whining about the outcome of this little contest among friends, with clearly stated rules -- which had NOTHING to do with the spread BTW -- and an equally clear outcome. Donegeal took the time to put it together, and his rules apply -- period. If you didn't like it, you shouldn't have played. Once you participate, you have accepted and agreed to abide by the rules. No one else seems to have had a problem understanding that.

And implying the Donegeal was somehow at an advantage is totally insulting and borderline slanderous. Grow up and get a f*cking grip.

[Donegeal]

Actually, a more devious player could be at an advantage with all the info at hand, however, if anyone noticed, I actually picked exactly the same as Will in the last week (right down to the tiebreaker), so it's not like I looked at the info before making my pick. As far as the PM business, try it Ben. There is no way I know what someones picks are unless I open the PM... but then it can be seen using the PM tracking that I have opened it. Personally, I'd prefer that everyone PM me their picks (as I have said throughout), but I'm not/cannot force people to do so by discounting publicly made picks.

[SlowwHand]

Hell, I'll put mine out there first, as a warning. Go the opposite. I happened to get the Super Bowl right, but even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Donegeal
There is no way I know what someones picks are unless I open the PM... but then it can be seen using the PM tracking that I have opened it.

And needless to say, I have access to all those records

That's why I like the PM system. Especially when it comes down to the last pick and a tie breakers. It's easy to sit back and wait until the last minute and pick the highest or lowest number based on what has been posted. It doesn't really matter in the early rounds.

[SlowwHand]

Hold on. Burress was close on his prediction, wasn't he? I just realized.

[Jaguar]

May I be immortalized in the topped thread?