Something has to change with these divisions

[CCF151]

Why? That would be such a rare case....a 5 seed having a stronger record than a 2 or 3 seed.

Meh, it could happen. I also think things should be reseeded for the CCG, as well, say the 6 seed and 4 seed make it if the 6 seed had the better regular season record they should get to host.

 

[flyerhawk]

I'm fine with the division winners getting a playoff spot but it is pretty silly that a 7-9 team gets home field over an 11-5 or 12-4 wild card team.

 

[Broncosr0k]

Anyone else see the humor in a dolphins fan complaining about divisions when the Patriots have won it 12 of the last 15 times?

 

[Broncosr0k]

I'm fine with the division winners getting a playoff spot but it is pretty silly that a 7-9 team gets home field over an 11-5 or 12-4 wild card team.

Why would it matter if the 11-5 or 12-4 is so clear cut better than the 7-9 team?

 

[flyerhawk]

Why? That would be such a rare case....a 5 seed having a stronger record than a 2 or 3 seed.

A WC team has had a better record than the #2 seed 3 times in the past 5 seasons. A WC team has had the same record, or better, 5 times in the past 5 seasons.

 

[flyerhawk]

Why would it matter if the 11-5 or 12-4 is so clear cut better than the 7-9 team?

Well its football and home field is a big deal.

But regardless, that argument isn't particularly compelling. The question is who deserves a home game more, the 12-4 team or the 7-9 team?

 

[GeekSportsFan]

It's not fair at all how the NFC East and AFC South get rewarded with home playoff games for playing like shit all year long.

I've always wanted a playoff format where a team that 'wins' it's division with a sub .500 record is replaced with a third WC team that has at least a 9-7 record. No way should any team with a sub .500 record be allowed in the playoffs.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

It's been pointed out, and it's true, that not all records are equal. A team with an 11-4 record as a WC may not be as good as the division winner with a 9-7 record simply because of who they played. That WC team could have played cupcakes while the division winner may have played the leagues toughest schedule.

However, I suppose the league could through a caveat in there in the playoff system by adding a clause that if the WC team has a better record than the division winner by 3 or more games then they are awarded the home game instead of the division winner. If you've won 3 or more games than your opponent it probably means you are the better team regardless of schedules so I would be ok with a format like this.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

I think its time to re-align when over the past 15 seasons, the best QB the AFC East has seen, besides Brady is Chad Pennington

At least there are signs in the AFC South that the arrow can be pointing up with the Titans and Jaguars specifically..

The AFC East continues to be the Bradys' and a bunch of garbage 15 years running

 

[Broncos6482]

You want a home playoff game? Win your division. If you can't win your division, you're lucky the NFL even lets you play in the playoffs at all. And if you're really so much superior to that division winner with a 7-9 record, it shouldn't be any problem to go to their house and beat them.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Meh, it could happen. I also think things should be reseeded for the CCG, as well, say the 6 seed and 4 seed make it if the 6 seed had the better regular season record they should get to host.

Well, not so fast...let's explain why there would be a need to reseed after the WC round? I haven't gotten my head around there being a need to do that very often at all.

Just using this as an example.

CIN 13-3, 1 seed
DEN 12-4, 2 seed
NE 10-6, 3 seed
IND 9-7, 4 seed
KC 11-5 WC 5 seed
PIT 11-5 WC 6 seed

In the 2nd round...I'm struggling to find a way a road team will have a better record. I'm not saying it could never happen, but the likelihood of is not strong enough to take action imo.

 

[flyerhawk]

It's been pointed out, and it's true, that not all records are equal. A team with an 11-4 record as a WC may not be as good as the division winner with a 9-7 record simply because of who they played. That WC team could have played cupcakes while the division winner may have played the leagues toughest schedule.

That goes both ways. Maybe the 9-7 played a weak schedule and still only managed 9 wins. Given that 9 wins was the best in the division and they play 6 games against each other, I would say that the number of times that a 9 win team won a division after playing a really tough schedule is pretty rare.

 

[Groo]

You want a home playoff game? Win your division. If you can't win your division, you're lucky the NFL even lets you play in the playoffs at all. And if you're really so much superior to that division winner with a 7-9 record, it shouldn't be any problem to go to their house and beat them.

This......

 

[dkmightyhammer]

That goes both ways. Maybe the 9-7 played a weak schedule and still only managed 9 wins. Given that 9 wins was the best in the division and they play 6 games against each other, I would say that the number of times that a 9 win team won a division after playing a really tough schedule is pretty rare.

There's no perfect system. I lean towards keeping the status quot, but I understand the appetite to give a home game to a team with a better record. I still think winning your division should matter, but I'm willing to meet in the middle and say if the WC is 3 or more games better they could be allowed the home game instead. It's a compromise which still gives both teams at a shot a home game but allows the advantage to get it to the division winner.

 

[Uhsplit]

In winning your division, a home playoff game is the reward.

Well its football and home field is a big deal.

But regardless, that argument isn't particularly compelling. The question is who deserves a home game more, the 12-4 team or the 7-9 team?

The division winner does. If you are a HC/GM, you draft and build your team to win your division. That guarantees you and the team's fans a home playoff game. From there, a little luck and get on a little roll and it's SB time.

 

[flyerhawk]

In winning your division, a home playoff game is the reward.

The division winner does. If you are a HC/GM, you draft and build your team to win your division. That guarantees you and the team's fans a home playoff game. From there, a little luck and get on a little roll and it's SB time.

So it isn't about the best team winning. It's about the luckiest team winning?

 

[Uhsplit]

So it isn't about the best team winning. It's about the luckiest team winning?

Luck often plays a part.

 

[Money]

I have no problem with the current format. Winning a division should be rewarded. It is generally understood that winning a division is a teams primary goal, not to be confused with the ultimate goal which has something to do with a great big game that Owls go to, I guess.

I get what you are saying, but if a 7-9 team makes the playoffs because they win their division, then that is reward enough. They don't need the cherry on top.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

So it isn't about the best team winning. It's about the luckiest team winning?

Luck always plays a part (especially in Indy....ZING!) in football games. Look at the Philly/NE game on Sunday. Does anyone think Philly is better than NE? It took a lot of things to bounce right for Philly to win that game (luck) and in the end it changed the entire AFC playoff seeding. That's football. The best team doesn't always win, particularly nowadays when parity has evened things out a lot more.

 

[flyerhawk]

Luck always plays a part (especially in Indy....ZING!) in football games. Look at the Philly/NE game on Sunday. Does anyone think Philly is better than NE? It took a lot of things to bounce right for Philly to win that game (luck) and in the end it changed the entire AFC playoff seeding. That's football. The best team doesn't always win, particularly nowadays when parity has evened things out a lot more.

I fully realize that luck plays a part. But shouldn't we do whatever we can to minimize how much luck is a factor?

I hate seeing a year like 2011 where the mostly hapless Giants somehow won a Super Bowl based on just about ever bounce going their way.