Wanna talk about the standings again?

We had a pretty interesting discussion going a couple of weeks ago, and with the current 3-way tie in the West, the question raises its head again: Who is actually in first place?

Of course, none of this matters, since the standings don't really mean much until the end of the year. But just for fun...

The tied teams are Calgary, Saskatchewan, and Edmonton. According to the CFL's tie-breaking procedure, ties go to the team that:

(a) has won the greater number of games played against all member Clubs of the League
All teams have won three games. Next.
(b) has won the greater number of games played against the other tied Club(s)
In games between Calgary, Saskatchewan, and Edmonton, Edmonton has 1 win (over Saskatchewan), Saskatchewan has 1 win (over Calgary), and Calgary has none.

Tie is broken: Calgary is in third.

Now there is a new tie between Edmonton and Saskatchewan. Start tie-breaking procedure over. First place will go to the team that:

(a) has won the greater number of games played against all member Clubs of the League
Both teams have won 3 games.
(b) has won the greater number of games played against the other tied Club(s)
Edmonton leads the series 1 game to none.

Therefore, the standings should be:

  1. Edmonton
  2. Saskatchewan
  3. Calgary
  4. B.C.

Though this isn't how it shows up on the web site.

Anyone disagree? :cowboy:

nobody follows the rules..

in the local paper here in Edmonton, the Sun..

yesterday they had Edmonton in first, then today Calgary was first.

i'm sure that local papers all have it different.

Currently on this website it goes
Edm
Cal
Ssk

I think Big Dave is right

Ticats vying for first in the East, that's all I really care about. :thup:

But!!!!!!!

Do we start over? Or do we continue on to

C) has scored the higher net aggregate of points (i.e. points scored for less points scored against) in games played against the other tied Club(s)
In this particular case, it is still Edmonton that comes out on top. But what if it wasent?

Return to A?
Continue on to C?

It only matters once the 18 games have been played... Not too sure why people with teams tied at 3-2 need to know who would get the tie breaker with 12 games left to play... At this point the only thing that matters is the win/loss column.

for some of those people who are enthusiasts about stats and standings..

it is pretty important.

HfxTC is prob right!
Lets talk about expansion instead!

Only 2 points separate first from last in the west. But 6 games are too few and may not be indicative of how teams rank after 18 games. In other words, statistically insignificant.

Some of you are forgetting this from my original post:

If you don't care, fine. Some of us like to talk about this.

We would have to start over, ro, since it is now a new tie. Calgary has dropped out, and is in third; so the games that Edmonton and Saskatchewan played against Calgary are now irrelevant.

Continue on to E) Wait until next week to see what happens in the standings.