Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jack Jones
Yuck! Judges? No thanks!
I think the rankings are fine as they are. However, I think the top eight should stay that way. That is, no building powerhouse aliances by picking within the seeded teams. Scouting would be much more important than it is now.
I realize that it may encourage the seventh or eighth seed to sandbag their last match in order to finish ninth and thereby have a chance to get selected by a top seed, but they also run the risk of not getting picked at all.
Maybe this, and having a 1..8 then 8..1 selection order, would make for better elimination matches than the blowouts we get now.
|
I'm not so quick to block picking within the top 8. At Duel, 25's first pick was MOE, the #9 seed. I'm not saying MOE was sandbagging by any stretch--25 just made the best decision they could under the rules. I'd imagine that you'd see a lot of that under a restricted picking system. (And besides, the other teams in the top 8 can always decline.)
If you ask me, I think the best way to go about it would be to go by QPs, then the average QPs of your opponents over the qualifying rounds. If you're beating other highly-seeded teams, which are usually harder opponents, you'll do better than if you're beating teams that are 0-8. Furthermore, it encourages teams to do everything they can to help the very teams they'll be going against--you want your opponents to win every match (except the ones you're in, naturally).