Post by Tim_GiantsGM on May 4, 2015 21:08:34 GMT -5
Thanks David, Anthony, Luc, Nigel, and Fin for prompting some thought on my part. Following are my two cents:
Inter-League Play - I like the concept of inter-league play. In an online league it provides the opportunity to play against GM's against whom we do not compete very often. However, the example David shared highlights my reservation with it. I prefer an inter-league schedule where each team in one league plays each team in the other league an equal number of games. That would mitigate the possibility of different strengths of schedule influencing division and wildcard races.
To this end we could adopt the following schedule structure:
All games would be meaningful. Teams competing for division titles would play the same number of games versus the same opponents. Teams competing for wildcard berths would play slightly different schedules, but the inter-league games would be the same.
That said, 48 games - slightly less than 30% of the games - would be played against teams in the other league. The opportunity to go head-to-head against teams in a division or wildcard race might be less than some GM's may prefer.
League Play Only - As Fin pointed out, the PBL structure allows us to adopt an intra-league schedule. No problem. If we do, we would not face GM's of teams in the other league, but the unbalanced competition issue would be reduced.
If we eliminate inter-league competition, we could adopt the following league structure:
This schedule would increase head-to-head games against teams within the same division, something Luc would like to see. It also would decrease inter-league games, something Anthony would like to see.
Personally, I also am in favor of switching it up and adopting league play only. But how do the rest of you feel? Where do we go from here?
Inter-League Play - I like the concept of inter-league play. In an online league it provides the opportunity to play against GM's against whom we do not compete very often. However, the example David shared highlights my reservation with it. I prefer an inter-league schedule where each team in one league plays each team in the other league an equal number of games. That would mitigate the possibility of different strengths of schedule influencing division and wildcard races.
To this end we could adopt the following schedule structure:
- Teams within a division (3 teams) - 14 games each * 3 = 42 games
- Non-division teams in the same league (12 teams) - 6 games each * 12 = 72 games
- Inter-league teams (16 teams) - 3 games each * 16 = 48 games
All games would be meaningful. Teams competing for division titles would play the same number of games versus the same opponents. Teams competing for wildcard berths would play slightly different schedules, but the inter-league games would be the same.
That said, 48 games - slightly less than 30% of the games - would be played against teams in the other league. The opportunity to go head-to-head against teams in a division or wildcard race might be less than some GM's may prefer.
League Play Only - As Fin pointed out, the PBL structure allows us to adopt an intra-league schedule. No problem. If we do, we would not face GM's of teams in the other league, but the unbalanced competition issue would be reduced.
If we eliminate inter-league competition, we could adopt the following league structure:
- Teams within a division (3 teams) - 18 games each * 3 = 54 games
- Non-division teams in the same league (12 teams) - 9 games each * 12 = 108 games
This schedule would increase head-to-head games against teams within the same division, something Luc would like to see. It also would decrease inter-league games, something Anthony would like to see.
Personally, I also am in favor of switching it up and adopting league play only. But how do the rest of you feel? Where do we go from here?