I had brought this up as a possibility for the baseball tourny and a few people liked it- How about two people are assigned to comment in a game thread? -one person must present Team A's case -one person must present Team B's case For example, maybe Murrell would get assigned to be pro-Donnie and ganooch would get assigned to be pro-1028 for the Donnie vs 1028 Week 5 game. It sounds good. Then you consider, "Well, what if Murrell really thinks 1028 would win?" So, the whole thing might be faulty. In lieu of that, we should plead with the voters to please expain their votes. Because we are receiving such low turnouts, explanations will help get bring in more voters. Everytime someone posts an explanation the game thread will move up to the top of the NFL forum (and the top of the recent posts on the tgg home page on the lower left side). Also, explanations (even bad ones; well, especially bad ones) will lead to debates. In turn, game threads will have many more posts in them and each post will push a thread to the top of the forum. Let's bring on the explanations.
I have had 53 voters find for my team (four votes were mine; so 49 voters besides me). Only four of them explained why they voted for me. Donnie and Jetfanmack in Week 1 and BIG COUNTRY and winstonbiggs in Week 2. The two most detailed explanations in my game threads came from kinghenry89 (aside from those posted by myself and my competition) and they were both anti-Cakes ones. Hopefully, here in Week 5 I'll have somebody besides myself openly support my team, providing I receive any votes, that is. I am one of the least backed teams explanation-wise in this tournament. Even though my team is 4-0 I haven't received much open support. In the majority of games not involving my team (there have been 16 of those), I have explained my votes in detail, which means I have openly supported my competitors when I have found for their team. So, along with explanations from voters who do not have teams, I would also really like to see more explanations from my competition, whether you vote for my team or against it. Again, this will all lead to game threads being pushed to the top of this forum. Therefore, they will be noticed more often.
I will present my case as to why the ten of us should explain our votes in each and every game from here on out. I will also make a case that voting should not begin until the ten of us explain how we will vote. Look at the NFC standings. Cakes 4-0 Donnie 3-1 Murrell 3-1 JetGreen 2-2 Wolfe Tone 1-3 For a high school kid, Donnie comes across as fairly mature. He also seems to be a standup guy. I think Murrell is a good guy. But they're like most people who are involved in any sort of competition. They want to win. Voting against my team this week is very, very inviting. Especially since we are dealing with a closed vote here. Currently, I am trailing MSUJet85 5-1 (was 4-0 a little while ago; I have not voted yet, since I haven't properly analyzed the game) and Donnie, 1028, and Murrell have been active in these threads tonight. I'm not saying they did anything wrong, but I can have the thought. I'm not wrong to have the thought. It just may be they really think MSUJet85 is better. Now, it also may be that none of them cast a vote yet. But, c'mon, I may have been born on a Saturday, but it wasn't last Saturday. (Come to think of it, what day was I born? Ahh, I'll ask my mom.) I believe they casted some of the first four votes. Weeks ago, I mentioned this sort of thing could and maybe would happen. That team ahead of you in the standings is in your way of a final playoff spot? No problem. Vote against them. It's a closed vote. Nobody will know how you voted. Nobody wants to get done like that. Weeks ago I wrote that voting like we're voting will be problematic the deeper we go in this tournament. I'll paint a Week 9 scenario: Cakes 6-2 Murrell 6-2 Donnie 6-2 MSUJet85 vs Murrell2878 ganooch vs Donnie Cakes vs 1028 With closed voting, human nature would suggest: Cakes will vote against Murrell and Donnie only to help secure a playoff spot for himself, even if he thinks Murrell and Donnie have better teams than their respective opponents. Murrell would vote against Cakes and Donnie. Donnie would vote against Murrell and Cakes. Then they'd all hope for the best. And that's just wrong. Here is a solution- Between Sunday and Wednesday the ten people with teams must explain their future votes. Polls open on Wednesdays, or earlier, or later, depending on when the ten of us post the explanations for our future votes. In the above Week 9 scenario, it would be hard for me to make a case for ganooch if he's still got 1 win and Donnie's sitting there at 6-2, unless I really spin the matchup well. I have been explaining my votes throughout so as to show I am being as fair as possible about the whole thing. I will continue to do so. Hopefully, those who cast votes against me tonight can explain their votes. This will ultimately lead to debate and tons of activity all week long in my game thread, in particular. MSUJet85- last week, 7 days, 5 votes, against a previously .500 team MSUJet85- this week, less than one day, 5 votes against a 4-0 team That can be looked at with raised eyebrows. Tell me I'm not wrong for thinking something is up. Like I wrote earlier in the post, maybe the 5 voters legitimately do feel MSUJet85 has the better team. Fine. Explain why.
There was a moronic mistake in one of my above posts, aside from the moronic typo. Anyway, it is reasonable for me to think some combo of 1028, MSU, Donnie, and Murrell casted some of the first 5 votes for MSU. I'll assume kinghenry89 casted one, although last week I made cases for teams, but didn't vote right away, so who knows. You can rip me for taking this too seriously if you want. The evidence is strange, though. A fair person would have to admit that. It's not just 'cause it's my team. Hell, I'm throwing some support the way of one of my chief competitors. Murrell is right behind me in the standings. He's losing 3-2 to Wolfe Tone. pro-Wolfe Tone votes last week- 2 (against a team with a .333 winning pct) this week- 3 (against a team with a .750 winning pct) Heck, I like Murrell losing. Helps me. But it is fishy. I'd rather he win legitimately than lose in fishy fashion, even though the latter scenario helps me out. Maybe those 3 pro-Wolfe Tone votes are legit. Maybe. But at first glance, I don't know.
Please, if you read any stuff on this page and your blood begins to boil, you can join the club of which I am a member. I implore you to read the posts more than once and put yourself in my shoes and look at the evidence. If you still think I'm way out of line, we'll discuss.
I have a great idea, obviously by now everyone has to have come to terms that Cakes has the superior team, no questions about it, he should just be the champ and have everyone else play for second place Also Cakes maybe people might be voting against you because they feel there is no stability in the locker room, and your players have began to revolt
Oh boy!!! This is going to be fun. Knock the arrogance. Fine. From your comments, I can see you may be doing my team wrong. Vote against or vote for teams. Do not vote against or vote for TGG members. Knock my team, Wolfe Tone. Do not knock me. Did I or did I not PM you with a kind message two weeks ago? Did I or did I not try to help you out last week in your game thread?
This is not a game thread, it is a discussion thread, I think your team is good, but I also feel that you are being out of line.
How, exactly? I thought I was being very fair. I admitted that people who voted against me may have done their due diligence and looked at the teams properly and found for MSUJet85. That's fine. What I said is things were a bit fishy. MSUJet85 got 6 votes in Week 3 against a 1-1 team. MSUJet85 got 5 votes in Week 4 against a 1-1-1 team. MSUJet85 got 5 votes tonight in a matter of 10 or 11 hours against a 4-0 team. Obviously, you have a major problem with me. Can you please put that aside for a moment and re-read what I wrote? I'm not trying to kill the guys who voted against me. I wrote I will be tempted to vote against people in Weeks 7-9 if it would help my team. I wrote it is human nature. Many weeks ago, I wrote this stuff could happen. I probably first brought up this issue back in May.
He started it. Seriously now, I have been very consistent. I have had a problem with the voting process for a long time. Do I have a reason to suspect something is fishy? I believe a reasonable person would say I do. Let the record show that in post 131 we see our first actual personal attack courtesy of one Wolfe Tone.
Four hours later and I'm not any less upset. All I'm seeing is people belittling me. Nobody in the tournament has cared to address the odd votes cast today (surely you can admit they are at least certainly odd at face-value and that they raise suspicion). Nobody is giving me any credit as of yet. The same guy who has been sticking his neck out for you fellows in your game threads week after week. Helping to make the argument for your team. Hell, last week I helped make a strong case for Wolfe Tone. He didn't even make a case for himself. Then the guy repays me for dumping all over me tonight.
To beat a dead horse, prior to post 127, the game thread vote totals were as follows: MSU vs Cakes- 6 votes 1028 vs Donnie- 5 votes JetGreen vs kevin- 2 votes ganooch vs J_V- 3 votes Wolfe Tone vs Murrell- 5 votes By the end of the night: 7 votes were cast against my team in a matter of 10 or 11 hours. If my math is correct, we were roughly on pace to see 118 votes cast for MSUJet85. Tell me this is not, at least to some level, odd. I don't think anybody here received 7-pro votes in any span of time under 12 hours, as MSUJet85 received last night.
This is a great idea. I won't force people to explain their votes if they choose not to. I recommend the 9 of us (10 if Kevin can get on) explain their votes.
