I would love to see it [head-to-head score] implemented, since after listening to all arguments, I am really not convinced that points differencial reflects better the strengh of the teams/managers.
I am not convinced head-to-head score is that much better either. It probably is if we expect each team to play every game as well as they can, but as a two-time Cup champion I find that an unfair assumption. Unless you have really deep pockets and therefore even more depth in your roster, you need to take risks in the league to advance in the Cup. I know that's how it is for my team anyway. This season I finished third in my conference, although I beat the team that finished first for the Cup title in an away game. One reason for the weaker league record is taking it easy in certain league games that I could've won if I were willing to risk my Cup run. While I'm not the favourite, I think I have a decent shot at the league title as well.
How does this play into the league and head-to-head scores? Well, you would need to plan ahead which head-to-head scores you need to win to maintain an edge come playoff seeding time without knowing the Cup schedule. While this might obviously show unparalleled managerial prowess as suggested, it would more likely be a sign of pure clairvoyance. The points differential takes this consideration out of the equation. You may still need to make sacrifices to do well in other competitions, but you're freer to make those sacrifices when needed. As many have pointed earlier, the head-to-head score is considered in the points differential, so those two games are the most important two games anyway -- however, they're not the only ones that count.
The head-to-head score is not completely fair in lower leagues either (where bots turn active, active teams turn bot, and the whole Cup run argument is perhaps out of the picture). Let's come up with a silly, but feasible
example:
As the season begins Team A is active, Team B is bot. The first week Team A easily beats Team B (or even gets a 25 - 0 WO, if that's possible in any scenario). Week or two later, Team B gets a new owner. In their second game, Team B beats Team A by a few points. They finish with the same W/L record battling for the playoff spot, Team B has a better points differential (having played a strong season under the new owner). Why would Team A deserve to go to the playoffs in this case? They won the head-to-head sure, but are they really the overall stronger team? Of course, this is a pretty silly example, but there's still a good chance that points differential is in fact the better parameter in such cases. It certainly appears much more fair in this example.
Shortly, I am not convinced head-to-head score is really a better parameter than points differential. In my opinion, it is a very important factor, but I feel it is already pretty well reflected in the points differential.
Last edited by GM-WallyOop at 2/8/2009 4:13:18 AM