Kansas City Chaos is in.
Forum > Pee Wee Leagues > Who's The Best: Silver League Tourney
Gongadan
offline
offline
If we're letting the leagues set their own seeds each round, why not just let them pick their four representatives each round as well? Would save the tournament from a team going inactive or CPU in the middle if we had a built-in control to keep a competitive group of four teams from each league in there.
Also, if we used 5 teams from each league instead of 4, we wouldn't have to worry about tiebreakers.
Also, if we used 5 teams from each league instead of 4, we wouldn't have to worry about tiebreakers.
EatDaBeaver
offline
offline
Originally posted by Gongadan
If we're letting the leagues set their own seeds each round, why not just let them pick their four representatives each round as well? Would save the tournament from a team going inactive or CPU in the middle if we had a built-in control to keep a competitive group of four teams from each league in there.
Also, if we used 5 teams from each league instead of 4, we wouldn't have to worry about tiebreakers.
I said the same thing as far as the leagues choosing whichever people each week (and it being their duty to get their lineup in on time or they FF, and also... that the teams they choose accept their scrimmage in a certain time blah blah... u know...)
I would say that the tiebreaker I proposed of having the outcome of the #1 seed game is likely better than having 5 teams... because otherwise if we pick our own seeds... you will see #1 seed calibur teams playing at the #3-#4 seed spots to ensure wins.... so unless you want to just do random matchups each round (could be fun, but less accurate as to whos the best) its better to have some kind of way to prevent teams from dodging the system....
because who are we to say who their best team is... they may have a very different idea... so I see this being an issue.
If we're letting the leagues set their own seeds each round, why not just let them pick their four representatives each round as well? Would save the tournament from a team going inactive or CPU in the middle if we had a built-in control to keep a competitive group of four teams from each league in there.
Also, if we used 5 teams from each league instead of 4, we wouldn't have to worry about tiebreakers.
I said the same thing as far as the leagues choosing whichever people each week (and it being their duty to get their lineup in on time or they FF, and also... that the teams they choose accept their scrimmage in a certain time blah blah... u know...)
I would say that the tiebreaker I proposed of having the outcome of the #1 seed game is likely better than having 5 teams... because otherwise if we pick our own seeds... you will see #1 seed calibur teams playing at the #3-#4 seed spots to ensure wins.... so unless you want to just do random matchups each round (could be fun, but less accurate as to whos the best) its better to have some kind of way to prevent teams from dodging the system....
because who are we to say who their best team is... they may have a very different idea... so I see this being an issue.
Stixx
offline
offline
Originally posted by Gongadan
If we're letting the leagues set their own seeds each round, why not just let them pick their four representatives each round as well? Would save the tournament from a team going inactive or CPU in the middle if we had a built-in control to keep a competitive group of four teams from each league in there.
Also, if we used 5 teams from each league instead of 4, we wouldn't have to worry about tiebreakers.
I like both ideas, but the problem is we can't even fill the tourney now... Teams have declined and we are having to go to 2nd and (in one case) 3rd alternatives. I think it will be pretty tough to keep all the leagues active in the tourney expecially if they are having to choose their 4-5 teams each round. I think it will just be easier to just keep with the teams that have already said they will play (the 4 from each league) and let them choose each week which teams they want as which seed 1-4.
If we're letting the leagues set their own seeds each round, why not just let them pick their four representatives each round as well? Would save the tournament from a team going inactive or CPU in the middle if we had a built-in control to keep a competitive group of four teams from each league in there.
Also, if we used 5 teams from each league instead of 4, we wouldn't have to worry about tiebreakers.
I like both ideas, but the problem is we can't even fill the tourney now... Teams have declined and we are having to go to 2nd and (in one case) 3rd alternatives. I think it will be pretty tough to keep all the leagues active in the tourney expecially if they are having to choose their 4-5 teams each round. I think it will just be easier to just keep with the teams that have already said they will play (the 4 from each league) and let them choose each week which teams they want as which seed 1-4.
Gongadan
offline
offline
I agree that some of the leagues need to get some representatives in here for this thing. But on the other hand, it's only a 3 round tournament, so we're not exactly pressed for time. 

You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.





























