Likely regular season outcome? (and tiebreaking rules!)

[Tecno]

The thing I find interesting, is if SSK had the season series on CGY (by points; 2 games), and we all (3) end up tied, the CGY@WPG WPG win would not only have us beat CGY, but also SSK.

In other words, a game that has nothing to do with SSK could determine SSK's fate even if SSK had the series on us!

That's why I think it would have been better to use everyone's season series outcome to determine things first, and only if there's a cycle in the graph (probably rare-ish) would they switch to some other method.  In this case there is no cycle (because we won the series on both teams) and thus a series-based tiebreaker would be very straightforward, with the outcome:

WPG
CGY
SSK

Ya, that's the same anyhow, but it didn't have to be.  The dichotomy arises from "season series" taking into account points (possibly), but "winning percentage among the group" does not.  It's a weird quirk of how they've set up the tiebreaking rules.

[tlf]

I'm not sure whether you guys are right about the win percent being vs their loss count, or is it like the vs total games played by the group like I calculated.

I'll recheck the wording of the rules.

Maybe the end result is the same though.

In either case Wpg comes out on top in a 3 way. The only question is who ends up on the bottom.

From the CFL.CA website:
https://cfl.prod.s.cfl.ca/standings-tiebreaker-rules

STANDINGS TIEBREAKER RULES
When two or more member Clubs are tied in the final Division standings in points (PTS) at the conclusion of the regular season schedule, preferential ranking for playoff purposes shall be determined on the basis of the following descending-order priorities and shall be awarded to the Club that:

has won the greater number of games played against all member Clubs of the League, then,

has the higher winning percentage in all games played against all of the other tied Club(s), then,

has scored the higher net aggregate of points (i.e. points scored for less points scored against) in all games played against all of the other tied Club(s), then,

has scored the higher net quotient of points (i.e. points scored for divided by points scored against) in all games played against all of the other tied Club(s), then,

has the higher winning percentage in all games played against all member Clubs of the Division, then,

has scored the higher net aggregate of points in games played against all member Clubs of the Division, then,

has scored the higher quotient of points in games played against all member Clubs of the Division, then,

has scored the higher net aggregate of points in games played against all member Clubs of the League, then,

has scored the higher net quotient of points in games played against all member Clubs of the League, then,

has won a coin toss against the other tied Club.

Note: If two Clubs remain tied after other Club(s) are eliminated during any step, tie breaker reverts to step a).

[Tecno]

STANDINGS TIEBREAKER RULES
has the higher winning percentage in all games played against all of the other tied Club(s), then,

Ya, that makes me think my math in OP is right, not bomb squad's .600, .500, .400 numbers.  However, the maths might math out to the same order every time regardless of method?

To me the above spells out that you take team-1's wins divided by count of all games played by all 3 in aggregate.

[tlf]

Ya, that makes me think my math in OP is right, not bomb squad's .600, .500, .400 numbers.  However, the maths might math out to the same order every time regardless of method?

To me the above spells out that you take team-1's wins divided by count of all games played by all 3 in aggregate.

I've done too much thinking about it and have confused myself into who who I am cheering for today.  I think it's SSK since we already have the season series on them and we want them ahead of someone (?)... but it seems wrong in my head. Also EW! LOL

[Blue In BC]

We want the Riders to lose.

[tlf]

We want the Riders to lose.

Ok thanks.  I read the other way elsewhere. I always want the Riders to lose.

[Mick]

Okay, working this "Most likely" outcome which looks primarily at Win/Loss records, and ignoring that teams might sit certain players, and adding the Win/Loss records:

Week 19 (remaining game)
Mtl beats Sask tomorrow, Sask falls to 8-8

- Wpg 3rd (8-8)
- Sask 4th (8-8)
- Cgy 5th (8-9)

Because Wpg has 3 wins (two against Cgy and one against Sask) and 2 losses (one each against Cgy and Sask), Sask has 2 wins and 2 losses (one each against each team), and Cgy has 2 wins and 3 losses, I think that's what drives the ranking above.

Week 20
Edm beats Wpg (Edm takes first place, 13-4; Wpg falls to 8-9)
BC beats Cgy (BC takes 2nd place, 11-6; Cgy falls to 8-10)
Mtl beats Sask (Sask falls to 8-9)

- Wpg 3rd (8-9)
- Sask 4th (8-9)
- Cgy 5th (8-10)

Week 21
BC beats Wpg (BC improves to 12-6, remains in second; Wpg falls to 8-10)
Edm beats Sask (Edm improves to 14-4, Sask falls to 8-10)

- Wpg 3rd (8-10)
- Sask 4th (8-10)
- Cgy 5th (8-10)

Is that right?

I believe its calculated on win/loss in your division against all teams, not just the teams involved in the tie.

So right now it is :

Sask 4:5
Wpg 3:5
Cgy 3:6

Since our last 2 games are with division opponents they are huge games for us to win in the event of a 3 way tie. Unless of course calgary just loses to bc next week then we clinch a playoff spot.

[Horseman]

We are listed as 4th in the west, pretty sure we should be in 3rd as we beats Sask and control the tie breaker based on points scored against Sask.

[Mick]

We are listed as 4th in the west, pretty sure we should be in 3rd as we beats Sask and control the tie breaker based on points scored against Sask.

Not in a 3 way tie. Sask has a better div record than us.

[Jesse]

Not in a 3 way tie. Sask has a better div record than us.

It's just the record between the ties teams. Someone quoted the rule book above.

[Mick]

Oh, my mistake. So I guess sask holds that on us? Or why are  we listed as 4th then?