I don't get it...

I watched the game last night against the Esks. The TSN announcers kept saying that if Edmonton got that last second field goal they would win the "series" against B.C. But here is what I don't get:

B.C. and Edmonton played each other 4 times. After last night's game they each won 2 games. Okay, so to break the tie you look at total points scored for each team against the other. Going into last night's game Edmonton had outscored B.C. by 12 points. In other words before last night's game Edmonton had scored 96 points to B.C.'s 84 points. If Edmonton had scored the field goal the final score would have been 43- 31 for B.C. That would have given B.C. a total of 127 points. It would have also given Edmonton a total of 127 points against B.C. So, why would Edmonton have won the series by scoring the field goal since both teams beat each other twice and scored 127 points against each other? What am I missing?

Hi beaglehound -

I was interested in the same thing, so I looked info up. According to CFL rules, the next tie-break if BC and Edm were tied in points scored would be total net points scored in all games. On this criteria, BC is way ahead so the announcers (and Edm coaches) were wrong -- Edmonton needed a TD.

Thanks for clarifying that guys. I was wondering the same thing and scratching my head for a bit!!

Okay, this is what the total points thingy as all about when breaking series ties.

According to my "sources" (hehehe) the B.C. Lions would "officially" have taken the series if they beat the Esks by just 13 points. Of course they won by 15 points so it is moot. But had the Esks scored the final last second field goal B.C. and Edmonton would have each beaten each other twice and scored a total of 127 points against each other so " technically" neither B.C. nor Edmonton would have won the series until the season was over. Why? Well, as PK pointed out, when 2 teams are deadlocked in a series tie (and have the same number of points in the standings) then the league looks at the total number of points each team scored for the entire season. That's what would have happened if Edmonton scored their field goal. But since they did not then B.C. has already won the series against the Esks. Now to end up ahead of Edmonton, B.C. just has to win one of its remaining 2 games. But had Edmonton scored that crucial field goal, had Edmonton and B.C. ended up with the same number of points in the standings at the end of the season then B.C. would have had to have scored more total points during the whole season to break the tie.

I Still don't get it. If in fact the Lions could secure the tiebreaker by winning by 13 points why didn't they go for 2 when they scored the touchdown? This would have given them a 16 point lead and the field goal wouldn't have mattered.


Because if they went for the 2 point convert and missed they would have had 42 points. Had the Esks scored the field goal they would have ended up with 31 points. That's a difference of only 11 points. B.C. was 12 points going into the game so the Esks would have won the series by a single point. What the announcers should have said is that if B.C. won by 13 points they automatically win the series but if they only win by 12 points then there was still a chance for the Esks to win the series depending on the year end standings and who scored the most points overall.