More Deletions on the CIFL Board

[Crimefighter]

The lopsided scores might had been lessened if the scheduled were set up where everyone played each team in their division at least once.

[ChampionOfSteel]

Originally Posted by Crimefighter

The lopsided scores might had been lessened if the scheduled were set up where everyone played each team in their division at least once.

That's an interesting twist. Can you explain what you mean?

We should throwout games involving replacement players/teams and those games where the players were a heartbeat from walking away due to the owner's inability to pay them earlier in the week -- attention span was somewhere else instead of playing the game.

[Crimefighter]

Well some teams were never scheduled to play certain teams in their own division...and lets forget about the substitute teams...for instance, two teams where going winless in one division, but the schedule was not set up where they had a game against each other, and some weak teams played the division leaders repeatedly but didn't get to play weaker teams.

[ChampionOfSteel]

Originally Posted by Crimefighter

Well some teams were never scheduled to play certain teams in their own division...and lets forget about the substitute teams...for instance, two teams where going winless in one division, but the schedule was not set up where they had a game against each other, and some weak teams played the division leaders repeatedly but didn't get to play weaker teams.

That would fool some people but it doesn't repair anything because I believe that still doesn't address the three distinct talent tiers of teams. Teams playing outside of their tier get hammered.

Even in the NFL, the worst team playing the best team doesn't get hammered like you see/saw in the CIFL. The score is still respectable.

[preeths]

Originally Posted by ChampionOfSteel

Even in the NFL, the worst team playing the best team doesn't get hammered like you see/saw in the CIFL. The score is still respectable.

The NFL will always have a better shot at achieving parity than a minor league. The money and talent is dispersed so evenly, through the draft and TV revenue sharing, that it is difficult to be completely superior or inferior to the rest of the competition. That's not really a good example.

[ChampionOfSteel]

Originally Posted by preeths

The NFL will always have a better shot at achieving parity than a minor league. The money and talent is dispersed so evenly, through the draft and TV revenue sharing, that it is difficult to be completely superior or inferior to the rest of the competition. That's not really a good example.

I agree. The NFL was not a good example since the NFL has a player draft.

Substitute leagues without a draft like the NIFL, IFL, UIF, AF2 or WIFL and you won't see (according to exit322's research) lopsided scores like you saw in the CIFL...this year and last year.

I don't see three tiers in comparable indoor leagues like we had in the CIFL.

On top of that, when you also might have a questionable game system that allows for a slight advantage in talent to steamroll over their lesser opponent, I don't believe scheduling teams primarily in their own talent tier solves anything. Better to not even have a league then to go through this crap again keeping everything "as is". Yes, I could be wrong about the game system having a significant role, but then again I could be right. Test these assumptions in the offseason.

[preeths]

Originally Posted by ChampionOfSteel

Substitute leagues without a draft like the NIFL, IFL, UIF, AF2 or WIFL and you won't see (according to exit322's research) lopsided scores like you saw in the CIFL...this year and last year.

Sure you will, especially in the NIFL. You also will see some in the other leagues, though maybe not as many.

[Crimefighter]

Still, if a top tier team played only the bottom tier team the whole season and acculumated a 12-0 record, and another top tier team played other top tier and second tier teams ending up with a 6-6 record...that hardly makes the 12-0 team deserving of a league championship.

[Tatonka]

I suppose you guys knew what "talent tier" everyone belonged in back in October when we were working on the schedule? Before any of the new-for-'07 teams even had any players?

The issue concerning our schedule has been rehashed so many times on our board, that it's really not worth even bringing up again. Suffice it to say, it was impossible to make a "balanced" schedule with the dates we were given from some teams' arenas. Many of our teams play in hockey arenas and couldn't get good March dates as an example.

Going forward, we've already asked teams to begin securing as many weekend dates as possible for '08 so we have more to work with when it comes time to make the schedule for next season.

[ChampionOfSteel]

It's unfortunate Jeff Sagarin doesn't do indoor/arena ball:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt06.htm

My point is I think the CIFL may have the following type of Sagarin power rating for its league (difference between teams is the projected winning margin with 3.02 points added to the home team):

1. Port Huron 90.11
2. Kalamazoo 45.24
.
.
.
7. Marion 25.55
.
.
.
14. Springfield -10.47


Unlike other Indoor leagues with the same similar number of teams we get a better competitive spread where everyone is within 30 or less projected points of each other:

1. Sioux Falls 80.26
2. Billings 72.23
3. River City 70.79
.
.
.
11. Ohio Valley 51.32



That's about as good as I can explain it. The CIFL has a talent parity issue (and possibly a game system issue that adds gasoline to this already lit fire) that gives the statistical breakdown of having three distinct tiers of competitiveness.

This isn't something desirable for the fans.

The burden of defining the problem correctly and doing a repair job rests with the managers of this league.