Message Board Braggin' Rights League

[TREFF]

Question 2 should be 2 separate questions...

Question 2A- what to do with the open spot after the promoted team retires/quits(or from poll 1, decides to stay)?

Question 2B- what to do with an open spot of a retired/quit, of a current A leaguer...

I can put that in there I guess, but to me. .am open spot is an open spot and should be handled the same regardless. Thus the wording of the question. ."any and all"..no more gray area, no more questions or debates

 

[wilwhite]

That's the right question for number 1.

For number 2, I think the most important thing isn't to move teams down, but to move teams up. If there's extra space beyond the number of teams supposed to move up, A-leaguers who would have been relegated stay in the A league. That's how it's always been, and I don't see a reason to change that. Obviously if there are even more than that, spots would start going to B-leaguers.

I think the question is really only about an abandoned promotion spot - should it to go to:
a) the next B league team (for the sake of cross-league pollination), or
b) a would-have-been-relegated A-league team (since the next B-league team didn't really earn the promotion)?

 

[TREFF]

Still don't understand why an open spot isn't an open spot. .why the need to classify it and change the way we fill it? Either its open, and needs to be filled, or it isn't. Someone please explain why they feel the need for two different sets of conditions, when it'll only lead to more discussions later about why that spot is open.

One ruling, covering any and all openings eliminates any further questions

 

[TREFF]

And if the reasoning is we feel the need to have at least two teams moving up every year, why do have a provision specifically calling for only one, if that one meets all criteeia? We're contradicting ourselves if so

 

[wilwhite]

And if the reasoning is we feel the need to have at least two teams moving up every year, why do have a provision specifically calling for only one, if that one meets all criteeia? We're contradicting ourselves if so

That's a great point... we already have a "nobody else earned it" provision.

It would make sense to me that any A-Leaguer would have priority over any B-leaguer who failed to meet one of those criteria (which I think are Top Seed and top Points For, in addition to breakdown winner and SB champ).

 

[TREFF]

Loving how many opinions were getting here. ....

So. .if I worded the question to be,


how should we fill any potential opening caused by a former B league member who is set to move up, refusing promotion/retiring/disappearing? Bearing in mind that openings created by current A league members who have retired/disappeared will be filled by former A league members originally set for relegation.

A. Former A leaguers set for relegation first in line, followed by next B league member meeting the most of the standard criteria.
B. No relegated A leaguers eligible, only the next B league member in line who meets the most criteria.

Would this be sufficient?

 

[Trudem]

I would vote for option B. Current A league managers earned it previously but if they then "earned" relegation they should be relegated and earn their way back imo. Just my $0.02

We could also set a threshold on what the B league manager would need to meet to qualify as a provisional replacement otherwise they cant move up as a replacement.

I could just be spinning my tires though...im really tired

 

[wilwhite]

B-league champ and breakdown winner are already accounted for, so maybe:

A. A-leaguers set for relegation first in line, then B-league Top Seed/Power Rankings Leader/Points Leader

or

B. B-league Top Seed/Power Rankings Leader/Points Leader, then A-leaguers set for relegation

 

[TREFF]

I would vote for option B. Current A league managers earned it previously but if they then "earned" relegation they should be relegated and earn their way back imo. Just my $0.02

We could also set a threshold on what the B league manager would need to meet to qualify as a provisional replacement otherwise they cant move up as a replacement.

I could just be spinning my tires though...im really tired

I'll post an actual poll...much easier than searching through these pages to find everyone's votes

 

[TREFF]

B-league champ and breakdown winner are already accounted for, so maybe:

A. A-leaguers set for relegation first in line, then B-league Top Seed/Power Rankings Leader/Points Leader

or

B. B-league Top Seed/Power Rankings Leader/Points Leader, then A-leaguers set for relegation

Does the above enboldened mean either or, or all three, or maybe two of the three??

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I do think both questions are too connected to ask at the same time... These need to be separate polls, question 2 needs to be asked after question 1 is answered...

Also, depending on the answer of question one and two we might need to revisit question one...

What I mean is what if we decide that owners do have the right to reject promotion, and then decide that the next Best B-league owner is up for promotion, then does he too have the right to reject...

 

[Trudem]

I'll post an actual poll...much easier than searching through these pages to find everyone's votes

of course. Just offering options

 

[TREFF]

I do think both questions are too connected to ask at the same time... These need to be separate polls, question 2 needs to be asked after question 1 is answered...

Also, depending on the answer of question one and two we might need to revisit question one...

What I mean is what if we decide that owners do have the right to reject promotion, and then decide that the next Best B-league owner is up for promotion, then does he too have the right to reject...

I'm intending on two separate polls. The right to reject would apply from #1 to whomever. No need for revisiting. Also, since #2 applies not only to refusals, but also retirees and disappearing acts, the results of # 1 don't automatically mean much to #2..only eliminates/activates one possible option of there being a spot open in the first place. Meaning- regardless if the outcome of #1, #2 blankets all possibilities of any potential openings.

 

[TREFF]

I guess if your intent was that the outcome of #1 might affect your vote on #2..that I can understand.

At some point this evening I'll post poll #1, give it 48 hours, then do #2, also 48 hours, and then we'll be done with it

 

[wilwhite]

Does the above enboldened mean either or, or all three, or maybe two of the three??

I meant in that order. So first priority goes to the top seed - but if the top seed is one of the already-promoted teams, it would move on to power rankings leader, etc.

(In 2013 Micro and Bandit held all those spots. If Bandit had beaten Barilko in the SB, Micro would have got in and nobody else would have been eligible.)

 

[TREFF]

I meant in that order. So first priority goes to the top seed - but if the top seed is one of the already-promoted teams, it would move on to power rankings leader, etc.

(In 2013 Micro and Bandit held all those spots. If Bandit had beaten Barilko in the SB, Micro would have got in and nobody else would have been eligible.)

Well that's what I had assumed, and that's agreeable with me. .I'll get that poll up here within an hour or so

 

[leftypower]

Well that's what I had assumed, and that's agreeable with me. .I'll get that poll up here within an hour or so

I love polls. ....

 

[Chef99]

I love polls. ....

Me too! I'm gonna Gallup towards it!

 

[wilwhite]

Me too! I'm gonna Gallup towards it!

Oh, Chef....

 

[wilwhite]

Does that make you...