- Thread starter
- #1
PhilSimms11
Well-Known Member
I'm not exactly advocating this, but I think it would be interesting.
(8)TEN (9-7) @ (1)NE (13-3)
(7)ATL (10-6) @ (2)PHI (13-3)
(6)JAX (10-6) @ (3)PIT (13-3)
(5)NO (11-5) @ (4)MIN (13-3)
If the seeding held up you could have (1)NE vs (4)MIN and (2)PHI vs (3)PIT in the semifinals. I've been a proponent of doing away with the conference affiliation for a few years now. If they seeded them 1-12 from the start it would be this:
(1)NE (13-3)
(2)PHI (13-3)
(3)PIT (13-3)
(4)MIN (13-3)
(12)BUF (9-7) @ (5)LAR (11-5)
(11)TEN (9-7) @ (6)NO (11-5)
(10)ATL (10-6) @ (7)CAR (11-5)
(9)KC (10-6) @ (8)JAX (10-6)
(8)TEN (9-7) @ (1)NE (13-3)
(7)ATL (10-6) @ (2)PHI (13-3)
(6)JAX (10-6) @ (3)PIT (13-3)
(5)NO (11-5) @ (4)MIN (13-3)
If the seeding held up you could have (1)NE vs (4)MIN and (2)PHI vs (3)PIT in the semifinals. I've been a proponent of doing away with the conference affiliation for a few years now. If they seeded them 1-12 from the start it would be this:
(1)NE (13-3)
(2)PHI (13-3)
(3)PIT (13-3)
(4)MIN (13-3)
(12)BUF (9-7) @ (5)LAR (11-5)
(11)TEN (9-7) @ (6)NO (11-5)
(10)ATL (10-6) @ (7)CAR (11-5)
(9)KC (10-6) @ (8)JAX (10-6)