05-22-2018, 10:43 AM
Shake put a lot of work into this, but it is meaningless.
In order to come up with an accurate "weighted" system like this one there has to be some logical basis for the weights. This one is just totally random. We could all sit down and give different weights and come up with different rankings.
For example. I don't see how a 9-7 team that wins a weak division (13 points) should be considered almost three time better than an 11-5 wildcard team (5 pts). I disagree with giving any bonus for winning a division (unless it earns a bye) but no way a 9-7 champion of a weak division should be considered three times as good as an 11-5 wildcard team.
And under this formula a team that earns a first round bye actually gets penalized because they lose the chance to earn an extra 10 point bonus.
In order to come up with an accurate "weighted" system like this one there has to be some logical basis for the weights. This one is just totally random. We could all sit down and give different weights and come up with different rankings.
For example. I don't see how a 9-7 team that wins a weak division (13 points) should be considered almost three time better than an 11-5 wildcard team (5 pts). I disagree with giving any bonus for winning a division (unless it earns a bye) but no way a 9-7 champion of a weak division should be considered three times as good as an 11-5 wildcard team.
And under this formula a team that earns a first round bye actually gets penalized because they lose the chance to earn an extra 10 point bonus.
