|Willy (Montevideo) - Saturday 04-26-08 10:54|
|I like them being played right at the end of the season. Thanks Al for this!|
Now a thought/conclusion for the future: although I agree with the decision of pulling an abandoned team from the playoffs there is an unwanted side effect: teams with a bye in the first matches have an advantage! (Unless I missed it and teams with a bye get an EL boost...)
For example: BFC/MT are playing ZAR/MLB after playing 2 matches while ZAR/MLB only have played 1, the EL difference is BIG...
Graham: just like the famous last words: "gwe wuss ruubbed!!!"
|Tim (Zaragoza) - Tuesday 04-29-08 15:15|
Except that the team that has the bye first gets no EL advantage, while the team that has a bye in the middle gets an EL boost in the middle of the matches. So you will have more energy than me when we get to our final match. (I presume.) Methinketh worketh botheth wayth. You could also try a touch less aggression.
|Willy (Montevideo) - Tuesday 04-29-08 16:32|
|But there is no EL boost for the team with no match!!! (as far as I know...)(Anyone got one?) Now given the previous, I know you are the more experienced manager but with all due respect I have to strongly disagree with "...the team that has the bye first gets no EL advantage..."! Also, by the last match there is no advantage, we will be both playing our 4th match... If there is an EL boost then I agree that the team with the first bye is at a dissadvantage... :)|
|Graham (Barcelona) - Tuesday 04-29-08 17:10|
I'll take it under advisement.
As a tactic it might just take off.
|Willy (Montevideo) - Tuesday 04-29-08 17:14|
|We can call it the tip-toe tactic... ;)|
|Tim (Zaragoza) - Wednesday 04-30-08 12:16|
I'd be surprised if there is no EL added for the bye, Willy, as that would require an edit and I'm not sure Al has paid any attention to the playoffs since telling us they were on. ;-) Anyway, checking after this match should answer that one way or the other.
|Phil (Missouri) - Wednesday 04-30-08 12:21|
|There is no EL added for the bye.|
|Willy (Montevideo) - Wednesday 04-30-08 16:06|
|I rest my case! Graham: "we wus robbed!"|
|Phil (Missouri) - Thursday 05-01-08 8:54|
|Hoooold on just a minute, Willy. The proper spelling should be "wuz" rather than "wus" or "wuss." Those latter words are not adjectives you want associated with your team in any fashion. Just like walking the dinosaur, it's "Wuz Not Wus." :-) Please tell me someone will get the '80's music reference...|
|Willy (Montevideo) - Thursday 05-01-08 9:45|
|Is there a smiley for a hand that "whoozes" over the head? |
Phil, just like I tell my kids when they make fun of me trying to make accents, "I already got an accent...!" ;)
|Allan (Memphis) - Thursday 05-01-08 19:05|
|Bottom line on this for me is..."no good deed goes unpunished". Next time I'll let a newbie manage the 6th team and reduce the odds of each team from 60% to 50% for each team to promote. That way it won't be unfair to anyone and we can allow a "previously unheard of manager" the opportunity to promote over a manager who has been in the league for a while.|
This new plan sounds much more fair.
|Willy (Montevideo) - Thursday 05-01-08 19:36|
|No Al! Don't change anything! It's ok this way, i can totally blame this issue on my team relegation... ;)|
No, seriously now: maybe the best solution is to allow the next (managed) team down in Div 2 to join the playoffs?
|Steve (Asteria) - Friday 05-02-08 13:08|
|"Walk the Dinosaur" reached No.10 in the UK, Phil. Don Was (Weiss) was guest on one of the local (to me) radio stations a couple of weeks ago.|
As for the REA situation - maybe letting them play as an NMR team would have worked. If they stayed up even then, then it's obvious they are too good to go down.
I'm not sure ZAR gets much of an advantage getting the first bye. Yes they have all EL 10 for the 2nd match - but every team would have a fully fit side then anyway (barring injuries) so the team that got a bye in the 2nd game have the same "advantage". BFC were probably the worst off.
|Tim (Zaragoza) - Friday 05-02-08 16:03|
Yeah, Al, what's with Willy making complaints about your fine league?! The guy is never satisfied. He needs a stern talking to. I'd never do anything like that!
|Phil (Missouri) - Saturday 05-03-08 1:43|
|I think that the current set up worked fine. Of the six teams in the mix for division one, one team was managerless. I would definitely prefer a policy that allowed existing managers to battle in the playoffs minus one managerless team rather than have a (no offense) new manager step into division one while existing managers went to division two. I've always felt that newer managers should "earn" their way to division one versus being given a team already there (whether they are a new manager or an existing manager trading up). Not a very popular opinion, I am sure, and it is not an opinion directed at any one manager in particular at all. Just my thoughts.|