This is as far as I can tell. It includes the common opponent tiebreaker. Bold means the position is locked.

Currently-
1 - Demented Avengers 10-5
2 - Team Canada 10-5
3 - Looshle's Losers 10-5
4 - Zimmer 9-5
5 - Kings in the Hole 10-5
-- Yangsters 8-7
-- Oh You Call I Call 8-7

A Zimmer loss makes Demented number 1 and Canada number 2.
Zimmer can move up to number 3 seed with a win.
Oh You Call I call and Yangsters will have a playoff for the 6 seed.

Uhh...why would Demented get the number 1 seed if Team Canada loses? We have the same record, the same conference record and we've never played head to head. I'm pretty sure Sleuth mentioned a tie-breaker in that situation whether we both won or both lost.

Don't matter...a Team Canada win solves all the headaches!

I think the best thing for me would be if I win and Canada loses. Looshle would be the 4 seed because of a worse conference record. I'm not sure what would happen between me, Demented, and Canada.

It would probably come up to Record vs. Common opponents, where Canada and I are 2-0, and Demented Avengers is 3-1. I guess that means we have the best record against common opponents, then Canada gets the 1 seed over me due to head to head record. So I'm still in the running for the 2 seed, I have to win and Canada has to lose. If Canada wins, best I can do is the 3 seed, and if I lose, I get the 4.

I would certainly prefer for us to be playing the 6 seed instead of kings in the hole.

Zim, I wish the very best for you because you share my passion for the Simpsons.

However, Team Canada ain't planning to lose today...fukk you very much

I haven't done the math myself, but Bizzle seemed pretty certain that we have the edge in common opponents vs you guys.

edit: yup, we're 5-1 vs your 4-2 Zim.
edit2: also 5-1 vs TC's 4-2

That's the weird thing. You have us beat individually. You have us beat in the common opponents we share, and Canada beat in the common opponents you two share. However, there are 2 teams that all 3 of us have played, Canada and I are 2-0 in those games, You guys are 3-1.

The part that seems clear:

So if TC wins, and you win, TC gets the number one seed outright with the best record. Then there's a tie between the two us for the number two seed (since we have KitH and LL beat via the first tiebreakers), and then we'd get the number two see and you number 3 since we hold the common opponents over you.

The part that is unclear:

If TC loses and TZ wins, there's a three way tie between us, and as you said, you guys hold over us in the common opponents between all 3 of us and we hold over you in common opponents individually. Hell if I know how that is meant to be resolved, but I (obviously I'm biased) would be really ticked if we were to lose this tiebreaker even though we hold it over both teams individually.

Ur hurting my brain.

If you win, everything is clear!

Not so clear...brain hurting more.

I think my way I outlined it is gonna happen.

I win:

1. Canada
2. Zimmer
3. Demented Avengers
4. Looshle
5. Kings
6. Someone

I lose:

1. Demented
2. Canada
3. Looshle
4. Zimmer
5. Kings
6. Someone

I disagree. I didn't realise that you and Canada played each other heads up. With that it should just be between Canada and us. Even if that's not the case, we still beat both of you guys in common opponents.

No, there's no way that because one team beat another HU they are eliminated. I guess it's up to Sleuthis to make the call, but by my understanding of the rules, that's how it will shake out.

Why not? From a common sense argument:
TC > Zimmer based on Headsup
DA > Zimmer based on common opponents

According to your interpretation, the team that holds the tiebreaker over the team that beat you should come in third. I guess we'll have to wait until Sleuthis lets us know what's going on (and if you win tomorrow's game), but your standings really make no sense to me.

Okay, so i'm clear on this.

If Drawin Dead loses then

Yangsters and Oh you call will both the same records, division, conference and overall. We never played each other. So there would be a playoff match to see who gets in, right?

Then if Drawin Dead wins, we will all have the same overall, division and conference records.

Oh you call beat Drawin Dead twice

Drawin Dead beat us once.

Yangsters never played Oh you call.

So it would be a 3 way round robin for the wildcard, right? Does common opponents enter in? Since they are in the same division does that effect anything?

How would a 3 way round robin work?

:Head spinning in circles face:

I edited the first post based on current records. To (hopefully) provide correct rulings to the thread-

Oh You Call I Call and Yangsters will have a playoff. They have the same record, same conference record, same record among common opponents. Drawin Dead cannot make the playoffs, because they do not hold over Oh You Call I Call in any tiebreaker, and the 3rd place team in a division cannot make the playoffs when the second place team in a division does.

I didn't flip through tiebreakers for a 3 way tie, because I thought it would be unlikely. Assuming Zimmers math is correct, at 3-1 DA would finish third, while Team Canada (as far as I can tell) holds over Zimmer, if Zim wins.

Bizzle, i want to believe you but I looked through all the rules and don't see that a 3rd place team can't make a wildcard anywhere. Is this something I missed? You are saying Drawing Dead can't win but I wish sluethis would update us on what is going on.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Team A were to beat Team B headsup and Team A beat Team C heads up, the would have a sweep of the headsup tiebreaker, yes? It wouldn't matter if team B and Team C played each other.

So how is it that completely different rules would apply to the next tiebreaker, where DA beat TC in common opponents, and DA beat TZ in common opponents?

There seems to be no logical continuity between the two tiebreakers.

What I will laugh the most at is if Zimmer wins and sleuthis goes by Zimmer's interpretation, because then despite holding the tiebreakers over TZ, TC, AND 5150s, we will be ineligible for the best record prize money since conference seeding will take priority.

Same as NFL tiebreakers-resolve the tied teams down to 1 per division, then resolve the teams down to the top one.

I disagree teammate...and Im captain. It makes no sense that a team that holds tiebreakers over each opponent individually can finish behind them in a 3 way tie.

This is supposed to mimic NFL rules. In the NFL tiebreaker, a three way tie is broken by eliminating one team with a tiebreaker and going back to step one.In this case the first relevant tiebraker is a head to head TC over Zimmer. Zimmer is 3rd, then you go back to tiebreaker 1, work your way through and we have it over TC.

Note that the NFL rule for division tie breakers does NOT require a sweep of both teams they are tied with to be effective. That is a specific requirement of the wildcard tiebreaker, and would have been worded the same way for division if it were meant to be that way.

Your a logical continuity mistake. :-p

No, in all honesty, you are somewhat correct. But that isn't the way the tiebreaker works. The key to the heads up scenario you proposed is a heads up SWEEP, where one team wins outright over the other two.

In terms of the common opponents, with 3 teams, you figure out their common opponents and their record. In this care, with the common 2 teams, we clearly fall behind the other two teams (since we have lost, and they have not). Thus, we will be the 3 seed.


Ummm....this isn't a divisional tiebreaker? It's a in-conference tiebreaker? Thus, a sweep is necessary.

Except the NFL head to head tiebreaker does not require a sweep at the division (equivalent to our conference level) as I pointed out above. It specifically does only for the wildcard...by logical (and legal, if it were a contract or law) construction it would have stated that a sweep is necessary in both places if it were meant to be so.

No, I don't think it's fair that because Canada has a win over me that I'm eliminated from the 3-way tiebreaker. There has to be a HU sweep by 1 team over the other 2 in order for that rule to be in effect. If one team didn't sweep the other two, then it goes to the next tiebreaker.

COPERNICUS DOESN'T WANT ME POSTING THIS ANYMORE

Listen people, you can either listen to me or not. I'm right, and anyone who disagrees is wrong.

If zimmer wins, TC is the 1 seed, TZ is the 2 seed, and DA is the 3 seed.

If zimmer loses, DA is the 1 seed, TC is the 2 seed, and Zimmer is the 4 seed.

It's fair, it's correct, and it's logical.

End. Of. Frickin. Story.

because you are wrong...end of story.

Let me explain to you why this is inherently illogical. I'll start off with your interpretation, and then show you why even with your interpretation, your conclusion is still wrong. (all of this is assuming Zim wins tmw)

Deciding the number 1 seed

Conf record, blah blah, we have a 3-way tie between DA, TC, and TZ.

Heads up Tiebreaker - Fine, say you need a sweep, this doesn't get us anywhere.

Common Opponents - Depending how you interpret this, either DA wins outright, or DA is eliminated from the number one seed. IMO, since DA holds the lead over both teams individually, DA sweeps this tiebreaker. IF you take the approach of Bizz/Zim, then we look at the subset group of teams that all 3 of us have played. There, DA is eliminated from contention for the number one seed.

So then, you return back to the start of the tiebreak process, and TC becomes the number one seed.

HOWEVER, THAT DOES NOT MAKE TZ THE NUMBER 2 SEED.

After you determine the number one seed, you do not take the runner up and make them the number two seed. You then go through the whole process again to get the number 2 seed.

Look at record, conference record, you get a tie between TZ and DA.

Headsup tiebreaker -> no match played

Common Opponents tiebreaker -> DA > TC

=> DA gets the number two seed.

Now I'm not saying I agree with that second interpretation of the 'common opponents tiebreaker', but even if that is the interpretation you go with, you still get

1. TC
2. DA
3. TZ

as opposed to

1. TC
2. TZ
3. DA

Well, therrinn, by my understanding of your interpretation, you're saying that DA isn't automatically the 2 seed after that. By your logic, they should be put into a H to H tiebreaker with TC, which they would win.

I think DA being eliminated by common opponents makes them the 3 seed. I am then the 2 seed, making TC the 1 seed.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree then. Its a moot point until a) Sleuthis has some free time to clarify this and/or your match tomorrow.

I didnt even focus on 2 vs 3...you are clearly right on this. While there is no "conference tiebreaker" in the NFL, and therefore no real analogy, I still maintain a conference tiebreaker for us is closer to division tiebreakers where head to head does not require a sweep.

But getting beyond that, once the tie is broken for first in any nfl tiebreaker, you start again with tiebreaker 1 for seeding the remaining teams.

this is pretty much the NFL way. If more than one team is tied for a spot, they use a tiebreaker for more than 2 teams. Head-to head would only qualify if all three(or 4 or 5...however many teams are involved) played each other. Not applicable here. Then you work your way down until you get one winner.

The runner up in this scenario does not get the next seed. Now however many teams are left go through the tiebreak procedure again.

Yup. Like I said, Sleuthis will be the one that has to make the decision about how to interpret the 'common opponent' tiebreaker, but I am absolutely certain that the runner up here does not get the number two seed automatically.

I'm SO confused

I don't know why it annoys me to see Team Canada shortened to TC. Probably because of the loss. If we won you could call me Sally and I'd probably be cool with it.

haha sally

Since i'll be in Calgary for 10 days starting next week, I will show more respect, Team Canada. And I would never have dreamt of calling any of you Sally...you could kick my a$$ all over the ice.

Did I win!?!

Do what High School Football does, FLIP A COIN!

Reading through the NFL rules, this looks correct. Good work therrinn, glad to be proved wrong.

Coper's claim that there is no "conference tiebreaker" in the NFL is ridiculous. If New England and Indianapolis tie during the regular season, and they didn't play heads up, how is the tiebreaker done? By the same process as the wild-card tiebreakers are done.

I guess it just doesn't make sense to me to use the common opponents to eliminate one from the 3 man tiebreaker, then go back to Head to head to break the tie between the top two, then use a tiebreaker for the other two teams. It's just a weird process, and I guess I'll go with whatever Sleuthis decides.

Hows your headache, Sleuth?

Either way, I do hope we get official word on the standings tonight.

I'm way too anxious right now and listening to Bizzle ensures that I will never run an NFL pool or anything like it.

And the headaches from this entire thread were pointless.

Yup, an 8 outer took care of that quite nicely.

10 outer actually..sorry bout that.

I'm so confused. lol.

what a sick finish. good lord...who'd have thunk it?

looks like bizzle was right

Hm.