BuzzerBeater Forums

The idea of the current system is to have at least 1 team per division relegate unconditionally -- no second chances.

Whose idea? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but you're making that up.

I think the suggestion is a great idea, actually. And not just because I'm a curling fan. This suggestion — not coincidentally, from a Canadian — is simply the Page playoff system (without a final) used in curling tournaments.

Last edited by Mod-oeuftete at 7/23/2009 1:47:28 PM

OK, thanks, that's the explanation I needed to hear, at least.

OK then, what about this?

8's get RELEGATED.

Two pools are made (below)
Big 8 #5, 7 & Great 8 #6
Great 8 #5, 7 & Big 8 #6

Then, teams compete in a round-robin format.
1st Tuesday - #5 (at home) vs. #6
1st Saturday - #6 (at home) vs. #7
2nd Tuesday - #7 (at home) vs. #5

The team with the most wins (or largest point margin as TB) is SAFE.

2nd Saturday - 2nd place team (at home, according to above) vs. 3rd place team.

Winner is SAFE, loser gets RELEGATED.

whats the advantage of finishing 5?

You get to play at home against the #6 team, any you only have to play away against the #7 team.

the question is that an advance or an disadvantage ;)

My round-robin format is designed so that every team is able to get funds from a home game in the playoffs. Isn't that more important than having the #5 team play at home in all of their games, making it almost impossible for them to get relegated?

Last edited by Somebody Important at 7/23/2009 3:52:10 PM

actually you could win your away game, and you should have a advance of finishing 5th then 7(ok currently this place is a punishment to, but when we change it don't replace is with an Hobsons choiche).

Maybe the fund problems, could be fixed in dividing the money 50:50 - that won't be bad for the PO team too.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/23/2009 3:57:18 PM

Maybe the fund problems, could be fixed in dividing the money 50:50 - that won't be bad for the PO team too.

I could go with that, but there's no reason that every team that doesn't make the playoffs shouldn't have to fight for their safety. When the playoffs start, everything is back at square 1 - season records don't matter except for homecourt advantage, which doesn't need to be there anyway because of the placement of teams in the playoffs.

I think the biggest issue is the problem with incomes not really adding up with league standings.

We can probably all agree that #1 and #2 have it covered. #3 and #4 are a little off balance (#4 prolly earns more than #3 as the income is based on the home team arena. #1 usually has a bigger income than #2), but it adds up with #3 having a better chance to win the game. Usually playoffs end for them in one away game income.

#5 has the biggest problem with no income. Perhaps this should be avoided with both #5's playing eachother with income split and multiplied perhaps with 0.5 (why? because we want their income to be below #4 teams income) or any number that balances it out a little.

I think the the relegation matches should be decided with one game. With #6 playing at home and income divided just like with playoff teams. This income needs to be multiplied with a number, making #6 earn a little less than #5. The second option would include some attendancy penalty for the relegation matches.

#8 should relegate without extra income, with the bonus of getting a high draft pick.

I hope this was understandable.