*same rules apply
1. Go strictly by final regular season standings.
3. Go by playoff finishes for the top four and final regular season standings for the bottom four.
2018-19 Conference Honors & Awards
7 years ago
July 24, 2009
Official Run-Off Ballot
Official Run-off Ballot
*same rules apply
1. Go strictly by final regular season standings.
3. Go by playoff finishes for the top four and final regular season standings for the bottom four.
*same rules apply
1. Go strictly by final regular season standings.
3. Go by playoff finishes for the top four and final regular season standings for the bottom four.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3
ReplyDelete3
ReplyDeleteWhy are we having a run-off ballot. 1 was the winner with 4 votes to 3. Now there really will be a tie.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOne option needed 5 votes to achieve a majority. Please review the rules and vote again. We will deal with how to break a tie if the time comes.
ReplyDelete3
ReplyDelete1 and I agree with Scott, four votes out of eight with four possible options is all but a mandate.
ReplyDelete1
ReplyDeleteI would argue that a 4 votes out of 8 scenario hardly constitutes a mandate when another option receives 3 votes -- especially considering the ballot itself set forth the run-off scenario if no one option received the majority of the vote.
ReplyDeleteUnless, of course, we are speaking of a sort of Bush II mandate circa 2000 whereby the mandate is both questionable and in violation of election laws.
ReplyDeleteI was hoping that comment would elicit a mathematics lesson from the Admiral. I don't feel that strongly about 1 over 3, but I think everyone could agree that when all eight voted, choice 1 won, and now we are going to leave it to Tyler typing a random number, that the means of determining draft order has veered off course. My pick is the same either way, so I can understand some of you guys feeling a little more passionately about the outcome, but let's not act like we owe an undying allegiance to the spirit of a law that was created 24 hours ago. Amen?
ReplyDeleteAnd I wasn't even alive for that election, so I don't know how to respond to the latter comment.
ReplyDeleteSorry to ruffle your feathers. And no mathematics lesson intended. You were a physics major, and I hear there is math involved in that subject. When I am dealing with single-digit numbers I feel like I'm still splashing around in the shallow end of the pool. I just couldn't help myself. It was like you threw one right down the center of home plate, though, with your talk of a mandate.
ReplyDeleteAnd, as to the insinuation that where I will be picking under the two scenarios somehow affects my vote, I think you know me better than that (with my social benevolence and all).
Feathers unruffled, old friend. My main concern is that by nitpicking now we are going to be like the House of Lords when it comes to deciding on something where people actually care. You really are one benevolent fuckface, though. But you already knew that.
ReplyDeleteAnd, no, we're not all going to agree that option 1 "won." Are you just ignoring the ballot instructions that require a majority and provide for a run-off?
ReplyDeleteI read those instructions, but my comments have been based on the fact that there is clearly going to be a tie, and there was no explanation of the process if the run off results in a tie. Instead of random numbers, a more sensible tie breaker would be reverting to the former vote where there was no tie. And Option 1 did win, it had the most votes.
ReplyDelete"Second place is just the first loser."
-Dale Earnhart
So, you think option 1 won, despite the facts that it did not have a majority and a majority was explicitly required by the ballot? And you don't just think option 1 won, you think everyone should be able to agree on this fact? And the results of the election are so clear that option 1 possesses a mandate?
ReplyDeleteNo, I think I made it clear that in the event of a tie in a run off, I believe it makes more sense to pick the option that had the most votes prior to the run-off instead of randomizing the outcome. There is no rule about run-off tie breakers, so I’m not arguing to ignore any of the rules.
ReplyDeleteWhen I hear you say option 1 has already "won" and possesses a "mandate," it seems to me that are arguing more than simply that you prefer reverting to the initial vote to a randomized outcome.
ReplyDeleteI have no problem debating and voting on how to handle tie-breaker situations. However, if ties are to be handled by reverting back to the initial vote, that will obviously change the significance of the initial vote. Rather than voting for our favorite option, we may feel pressured to vote a certain way so as to avoid the situation we have in this very case. Additionally, if certain owners foresee a tie, they can agree before hand how to vote. (Go ahead and argue that this would never happen.)
Then again, maybe someone will change there vote this time. Who knows?
3
ReplyDelete1
ReplyDelete