Program Info > Standings > Regular Divisions

ENYTB teams compete in regular season play for berths to entry-level tournaments in three different sanctioned National Championship Tournament Series (NCTS): AABC, NABF and PONY. Thus, except for host berths, ENYTB teams earn these berths on the field. Developing a rational structure for determining who wins what in the face of multiple competition levels and multiple sanctioning choices, as well as competitively balanced and customized schedules that are unique to each team, is a challenge and is the subject of this section.

Who wins what is determined by the divisional structure and the Standings methodology employed in each division. How divisions and their corresponding Standings methodologies are defined, and even how available berths are distributed among divisions, are matters of choice i.e., reasonable people could disagree on the best approach. Regardless of the specifics of different approaches, what is essential of any approach is that it produces rational and fair outcomes and that it can be widely understood. Also, all else being equal, approaches with more built-in flexibility are preferable to those with less.

It is logical to begin our search for the best approach by looking at how Major League Baseball (MLB) constructs its schedule, maintains its divisional standings and awards post-season berths. It is important to recognize that MLB's divisional standings include more than each team's divisional record, they include each team's overall record. This is significant because no two teams play an identical schedule.

While the MLB approach for determining who wins what is instructive, the structure of MLB is significantly different from ENYTB in several important ways. The challenge is to build a rational and fair system, similar to that of MLB, but which properly and effectively incorporates the structural differences between MLB and ENYTB.

Divisions......The key issues in defining divisions is who is included in the division, how many berths are earmarked to the division and in the case of divisions that mix competition levels, are there are any "berth guarantees" for each competition level. These three considerations effectively define who is competing for what.

Standings......The key issue with standings is in defining the basis on which teams will compete i.e., in defining what games will count in that standings. Also, when cross-over games count, inclusion of a strength-of-schedule adjustment is rational and logical.

All of the above, taken together, suggests several reasonable postulates for constructing divisions and standings in a multi-sanctioned league that balances each team's schedule according to its competition level: Like MLB, ENYTB uses FLEX-scheduling i.e., it does not require teams to play identical schedules. In the case of ENYTB, teams are not even required to play the same number of games. Because of this, it is necessary that ENYTB standings include rank teams according to their won/loss percentage, adjusted by a strength-of-schedule factor (SoS). The RML website used by ENYTB has several variants for this type of standings methodology that differ as to what games count: Consistent with MLB, ENYTB relies exclusively on the last two methodologies. When a single class (competition level) division is used, the represented class is guaranteed a certain number of berths. When multi-class divisions are used, there may or may not be berth guarantees for individual classes. It is possible to earmark any number of berths berths to the highest finishing team in each level of competition. For example, a berth could be earmarked to each competition level and all remaining berths could be awarded as wildcard berths i.e, going to the team with the next highest SoS adjusted win/loss percentage, regardless of competition level, then next highest and so on and so forth, until all berths have been distributed. ENYTB usually relies on multi-class divisions with earmarking whenever reasonable.