All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Knight > Mega-Ultra-Super-Duper-Uber Challenge
8/29/2013 10:42 PM
Before anyone drops out, we should see how this season goes.  For next season, I like the idea of tweaking it so that conferences have a commissioner that gets the participating members of the conference ranked among themselves, however they like, then gives the rankings to dacj by a certain date (e.g. before the non-conference schedule starts).  If someone screws up and schedules a game in the first 5, then the conference commissioner can line up a substitute.  

Looking at my own schedule for next season: holy crap!  What was I thinking?  So that leads me to agree with llamanunts & mmt - that the seeding should not have #1 seeds only playing other #1s.   To make it easy on dacj, the seedings should just be automatic based on each conference's prior season performance.  So, the conferences would be ranked 1-6 based on prior season win totals (relegation entrants, if any, automatically #6).  Then the assignments have the top 2 conferences play top to bottom, down to the top conference and the bottom playing inverted schedules, and in the middle mixed.  I can't think this all the way through right now, but either there is an easy and elegant way to assign it or someone could create an inscrutable excel spreadsheet that would assign it without dacj having to do a ton of work each season.
8/30/2013 4:25 AM
It seems to me that 1 issue is generating 2 primary (and concurrent) solutions. The seeding as currently done is not terribly good at actually seeding. It is a measure of relative strength, and overall it probably averages out fine, but for individual teams can be very mixed.  As a result people are suggesting that we mix up the schedule, but to me that negates the purpose of seeds at all (other than determining which 6 interested coaches get to participate). 

If the conferences are seeded in a way that is more in line with how powerful the teams actually are at the time of the challenge then I don't see how it works out to have different seeds play.  I'm looking purely from the POV of the MUSDUC, not teams overall NC schedules. In order for the MUSDUC to have any credibility for bragging rights all the seeds must play each other to as closely as possible give each conference the same toughness in scheduling. I know that the conferences are not exactly even and that some 4 seed might be as good as most 2s or whatever, but if the seeding is more accurate than most of the time you'd expect a 4 to lose to a 2, a 5 to a 3, etc. If the seeds don't play each other it is too easy for the schedule to get unbalanced and some conference have an advantage in the tourney. I guess I understand if coaches decide that we can't get the seedings figured out to their satisfaction and want to drop out, and hopefully few enough do so that we can still field 6 conferences if that's the case. I am 100% in favor of a more equitable seeding process, but I can't see the point of not having all the like seeds play one another... I guess if a majority vote that way we'll implement it and see what happens, but I'll have to watch it in action to see if it can disprove my doubts in that case.
8/30/2013 9:10 AM
I understand the point re having 1s play only other 1s. To achieve a schedule that is "equal" across conferences without just having 1s play 1s would be very hard.

I think we should see how this year goes and then talk about any potential tweaks Just keep in mind, if you need some soft games bc of the musduc you have 5 non conference games to schedule sim ai squads, etc.
8/30/2013 7:23 PM
If we go with real-time seeding, I'm still in.  The ConfCommish idea is fine.  I like my previous idea, too - let anybody rank any conference - though I can see how that might complicate things.
8/31/2013 2:10 PM
Posted by dacj501 on 8/30/2013 4:25:00 AM (view original):
It seems to me that 1 issue is generating 2 primary (and concurrent) solutions. The seeding as currently done is not terribly good at actually seeding. It is a measure of relative strength, and overall it probably averages out fine, but for individual teams can be very mixed.  As a result people are suggesting that we mix up the schedule, but to me that negates the purpose of seeds at all (other than determining which 6 interested coaches get to participate). 

If the conferences are seeded in a way that is more in line with how powerful the teams actually are at the time of the challenge then I don't see how it works out to have different seeds play.  I'm looking purely from the POV of the MUSDUC, not teams overall NC schedules. In order for the MUSDUC to have any credibility for bragging rights all the seeds must play each other to as closely as possible give each conference the same toughness in scheduling. I know that the conferences are not exactly even and that some 4 seed might be as good as most 2s or whatever, but if the seeding is more accurate than most of the time you'd expect a 4 to lose to a 2, a 5 to a 3, etc. If the seeds don't play each other it is too easy for the schedule to get unbalanced and some conference have an advantage in the tourney. I guess I understand if coaches decide that we can't get the seedings figured out to their satisfaction and want to drop out, and hopefully few enough do so that we can still field 6 conferences if that's the case. I am 100% in favor of a more equitable seeding process, but I can't see the point of not having all the like seeds play one another... I guess if a majority vote that way we'll implement it and see what happens, but I'll have to watch it in action to see if it can disprove my doubts in that case.
I'm going to take it a step further (or rather, a step deeper, you could say): you're saying the seeding method is causing 2 problems...well, the real root cause is the fact that there is seeding. The seeding itself is causing the seeding issues.

I see your point on the seeding, where a 6 seed might be sent to lose 5 games if they face higher seeds. it's a similar issue that's facing the 1 seeds.

I would propose this as an alternative: 5 teams per each of the 6 conferences. No seeds, instead set up a round robin where each team plays a random opponent in each of the competing conferences.

How we determine the 5 teams would be akin to how we decide to determine seeds, except it's just a top 5 determination, no seeding within. otherwise, ending up as any seed can be seen as a huge disadvantage vs. not appearing in the MUSDUC.
9/3/2013 11:33 PM
I haven't read much, but I will get in.  Anything combining gambling an WIS is alright in my book.  I'm Bloomburg in Heartland.
9/10/2013 9:34 AM (edited)
Redacted due to whininess.
9/11/2013 11:27 AM
Posted by llamanunts on 9/10/2013 9:34:00 AM (view original):
Redacted due to whininess.
Good thing too.  Losing those 2 games on the road will not hurt your chances.  

I would still argue that the seeding methodology needs to be improved (i.e. in the hands of the participating conferences).  St. Augustine's wins the NC and is not involved?!  Maybe the right way to do it is that dacj can give the conferences the seedings as it currently exists and give a day or two for the conference commissioners to make adjustments.  After those two days, the original seedings stand.  

Then again, if the seedings were really reflective of current year power, then it would be necessary to scramble to scheduling a little or the #1's & #2's will be burned out.

9/11/2013 12:34 PM
Yeah, yeah.  I got lucky more than once in the home games.  My other whine is that, in order to have any hope of making the NT, I had to play the lineup I did.  Given the state of my team, I would have scheduled differently and started Howard to get him developing and gaining WE, for one thing.

St. Augustine's is the perfect example of how superclassed teams are going to get bitten in the current format.  They'll be a #1 the season after next with a team of nothing but freshmen and sophomores.
9/11/2013 5:13 PM (edited)
Congratulations to the California CAA who win the Inaugural MUSDUC with a record of 21-9. The Lone Star Conference came in 6th at 9-21 and will be relegated out of next season's challenge. 



CCAA: 21-9

Central: 19-11

Heartland: 15-15

GLIAC: 14-16

NAAA: 13-17

Lone Star: 9-21
9/11/2013 4:04 PM
Dac, check the GLIAC's record again.  Unless I'm missing something, we won a lot more than 13....
9/11/2013 4:06 PM
I have the GLIAC at 19-11
9/11/2013 4:35 PM
Indeed. Our top 3 teams alone scored 15 wins. Although the rest did not fare so well....
9/11/2013 7:23 PM
My bad dac.  I thought Hillsdale was in it instead of one of the others.
9/13/2013 11:15 AM
What is up with the seeding for next season? That will determine if I continue.
of 15
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Knight > Mega-Ultra-Super-Duper-Uber Challenge

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.