Something has to change with these divisions

[Money]

14-2...You created a great hypothetical, but had to go to an obvious extreme to do it...I ask...are we trying to fix something that's not really broken?

You are correct. I didn't need to go to such an extreme to make the same point.

I'm not trying to fix something that is broken. I'm trying to adapt something to changes that have already been made (see above post).

 

[Broncos6482]

So winning the division is so important that it should net you a home playoff game, but non-divisional games (10) have more importance than division games (6) in determining the division winner.

Times are a changing. Teams didn't used to have more non-divisional games than divisional games. Some things need to change right along with this (the playoff seeding process included IMHO).

Who said they have more importance? Divisional games are so important you play them twice every single year. It just happens that there are more non-divisional games.

So yes, it's possible (although extremely rare) for a team to go undefeated in divisional games and not win their division. In fact, without looking it up I'd wager that's the only time that's ever happened. So I don't believe in changing things just because one time one extreme thing happened.

The wild card is a second chance. It's a well, you didn't win your division, but you've got a good record so we're going to give you another shot at this. Second chance winners don't get to play at home, they have to do it the hard way.

This will never happen, but I'd rather they eliminated wild card teams than give a wild card team a home game against a division winner.

 

[Broncos6482]

Win your division. Don't cry to me about a home game if you can't even accomplish that.

 

[Money]

So to sum up

I don't agree with continuing to reward division winners so greatly when, in fact, divisions and division play are significantly less important than even 15 years ago.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

So winning the division is so important that it should net you a home playoff game, but non-divisional games (10) have more importance than division games (6) in determining the division winner.

Times are a changing. Teams didn't used to have more non-divisional games than divisional games. Some things need to change right along with this (the playoff seeding process included IMHO).

Well to use a golf analogy here...I'm guessing the NFL looks at DIV games as more difficult like a major vs a regular tour event.

Just doing the math...as you say, there should be some tweaking in the playoff seeding.

The NFL is straddling the line from the old and today. To bring it more in line with the 16 game schedule, but the only way to do that is chip away at the DIVs.

The NFL is clearly a national brand, but the teams with a few exceptions (DAL, PIT, GB, NE, a few others) are very much regional brands and you confirm that with the regional broadcasting of the games. If you get too far away from the geographical ties, I think you stand to lose something on the rivalry front. The DIV format kind of fosters those rivalries.

If you take that home game away...the Steelers owners might say, why do we have to play the damn Ravens twice a yr. I'd rather play them once every other year and play JAX or MIA and compile the best record I can get in a conference format.

 

[Money]

Well to use a golf analogy here...I'm guessing the NFL looks at DIV games as more difficult like a major vs a regular tour event.

Just doing the math...as you say, there should be some tweaking in the playoff seeding.

The NFL is straddling the line from the old and today. To bring it more in line with the 16 game schedule, but the only way to do that is chip away at the DIVs.

The NFL is clearly a national brand, but the teams with a few exceptions (DAL, PIT, GB, NE, a few others) are very much regional brands and you confirm that with the regional broadcasting of the games. If you get too far away from the geographical ties, I think you stand to lose something on the rivalry front. The DIV format kind of fosters those rivalries.

If you take that home game away...the Steelers owners might say, why do we have to play the damn Ravens twice a yr. I'd rather play them once every other year and play JAX or MIA and compile the best record I can get in a conference format.

I don't want to do away with the divisional format. I want the reward to be more in line with how divisional play has evolved. 15 years ago, teams played 10 division games and 6 out of division games. It is now the reverse. Keep divisions, keep automatic playoff bids as rewards for winning those divisions and seed according to teams' whole bodies of work. It's that simple.

 

[Money]

Finish .500. Don't cry to me about a home game if you can't even win more games than you lose.

FIFY

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I don't want to do away with the divisional format. I want the reward to be more in line with how divisional play has evolved. 15 years ago, teams played 10 division games and 6 out of division games. It is now the reverse. Keep divisions, keep automatic playoff bids as rewards for winning those divisions and seed according to teams' whole bodies of work. It's that simple.

I'm not pushing back on what you want to accomplish...it makes sense based on the DIV game % of the season, but you must effect DIV play to accomplish it...I don't expect owners to give up that home game for the DIV winners...I wouldn't either....if every year I know I have to beat BAL, CIN and sometimes CLE to have a chance at the playoffs and NE can pretty much count on 5 wins annually in the AFCE...no way I would vote to give up that home game....my best chance to advance in the playoffs is to play at home.

 

[Broncos6482]

I don't want to do away with the divisional format. I want the reward to be more in line with how divisional play has evolved. 15 years ago, teams played 10 division games and 6 out of division games. It is now the reverse. Keep divisions, keep automatic playoff bids as rewards for winning those divisions and seed according to teams' whole bodies of work. It's that simple.

That's not accurate. Only the AFC Central played 10 division games, and they only did that from 1999-2001, when the Browns came back and they had 6 teams in the division. Every other division played 8 games, 2 games against each of the other 4 teams in their division. Then in 2002, the Texans expansion year, the NFL realigned the divisions into the 4 teams, 8 division format we have today.

That 10 division game thing was always temporary, it was more common to play 8 division games and 8 out of division games.

 

[Money]

I'm not pushing back on what you want to accomplish...it makes sense based on the DIV game % of the season, but you must effect DIV play to accomplish it...I don't expect owners to give up that home game for the DIV winners...I wouldn't either....if every year I know I have to beat BAL, CIN and sometimes CLE to have a chance at the playoffs and NE can pretty much count on 5 wins annually in the AFCE...no way I would vote to give up that home game....my best chance to advance in the playoffs is to play at home.

I agree completely. I'm not an owner. I don't have their perspective.

BTW...the bolded part completely counters everyone else's argument against me in this thread. The comments like "oh if you are so much better you should have no problem going on the road and winning".

 

[Broncos6482]

I agree completely. I'm not an owner. I don't have their perspective.

BTW...the bolded part completely counters everyone else's argument against me in this thread. The comments like "oh if you are so much better you should have no problem going on the road and winning".

No it doesn't. It's easier to win at home, yes, but a good team can win at home or on the road. If you can't beat a bad division winner on the road, you weren't a Super Bowl contender anyway.

 

[Money]

That's not accurate. Only the AFC Central played 10 division games, and they only did that from 1999-2001, when the Browns came back and they had 6 teams in the division. Every other division played 8 games, 2 games against each of the other 4 teams in their division. Then in 2002, the Texans expansion year, the NFL realigned the divisions into the 4 teams, 8 division format we have today.

That 10 division game thing was always temporary, it was more common to play 8 division games and 8 out of division games.

Okay...the Ravens were in the AFC Central so that is what I was using as a reference. My point is divisions and divisional play mean less than in the past. That is the trend. If the league ever goes to an 18-game schedule, that trend will continue.

 

[Broncos6482]

Okay...the Ravens were in the AFC Central so that is what I was using as a reference. My point is divisions and divisional play mean less than in the past. That is the trend. If the league ever goes to an 18-game schedule, that trend will continue.

And if they ever go to an 18 game schedule, it can be revisted then. But until that point, it's good the way it is.

Division rivalries are good for the NFL, and if you take away a home playoff game from a division winner you've diminished the importance of divisions. Now the Broncos aren't competing with the Chiefs, Raiders, and Chargers for a home playoff game, because they don't have to win the division to get that. So now I've got less reason to hate those teams.

So leave it alone. Getting into the playoffs is consolation prize enough for non division winners, you don't need to reward them further with a home game, no matter what their record is.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I agree completely. I'm not an owner. I don't have their perspective.

BTW...the bolded part completely counters everyone else's argument against me in this thread. The comments like "oh if you are so much better you should have no problem going on the road and winning".

Well...I sold my interest a few yrs ago...lol...good point.

Even as a fan I would want to see my team at home as a DIV winner because of the point in bold...To put a cap on it...I look at it like this...and the reason I say it's not really broken. I don't think the current format has ever kept a team from winning the SB...you've had WC teams run the table on the road and win it all and you've had #1 seeds go one and done.

Imo...I think winning in the postseason has less to do with your overall record and more to do with how you are playing when the playoffs start.

 

[Money]

And if they ever go to an 18 game schedule, it can be revisted then. But until that point, it's good the way it is.

Division rivalries are good for the NFL, and if you take away a home playoff game from a division winner you've diminished the importance of divisions. Now the Broncos aren't competing with the Chiefs, Raiders, and Chargers for a home playoff game, because they don't have to win the division to get that. So now I've got less reason to hate those teams.

So leave it alone. Getting into the playoffs is consolation prize enough for non division winners, you don't need to reward them further with a home game, no matter what their record is.

I don't agree with this. Teams aren't saying to themselves "who cares about making the playoffs if we don't have a home playoff game". Teams want to make the playoffs...period.

Your point implies that a 7-9 team winning the NFCE is a greater accomplishment than Seattle finishing (let's say 10-6) and finishing 2nd in the NFCW. I couldn't disagree more. I guess that's what it boils down to.

 

[Broncos6482]

I don't agree with this. Teams aren't saying to themselves "who cares about making the playoffs if we don't have a home playoff game". Teams want to make the playoffs...period.

Your point implies that a 7-9 team winning the NFCE is a greater accomplishment than Seattle finishing (let's say 10-6) and finishing 2nd in the NFCW. I couldn't disagree more. I guess that's what it boils down to.

I'm talking about fans, not players. Most players don't care much about traditional rivalries, they aren't on teams long enough to hate division rivals.

And yes, winning your division is a greater accomplishment than winning a wild card. That's why you get a home playoff game.

 

[Money]

I'm talking about fans, not players. Most players don't care much about traditional rivalries, they aren't on teams long enough to hate division rivals.

And yes, winning your division is a greater accomplishment than winning a wild card. That's why you get a home playoff game.

No...you get a home playoff game because that's how it's been forever and winning the NFCE is hardly an accomplishment this year. The only reason a team is even going to win it is because one of the teams has to.

 

[Broncos6482]

No...you get a home playoff game because that's how it's been forever and winning the NFCE is hardly an accomplishment this year. The only reason a team is even going to win it is because one of the teams has to.

At the beginning of the season, do you think the Seahawks were thinking, "gee, I really hope we finish with a better record than whoever wins the NFC East"?

Or course they weren't. They were primarily thinking of finishing with better records than the Cardinals, 49ers, and Rams.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

That's literally never happened in the history of football, and is extremely unlikely to ever happen.

But if it did, and that 13 win team couldn't go and beat the crap out of that 3 win team even if they were on lthe road, then they didn't deserve to be there in the first place.

Not necessarily ... We beat the 11-5 Saints and we were 7-9 that year ... No one gave us a chance in hell to beat the Saints, but the home field advantage paid dividends... And I exaggerated the 3 win thing, just trying to make a point ... But look at the NFC East this year, 5 or 6 wins might win that division, that division winner does not deserve a home field playoff game ...

 

[Money]

At the beginning of the season, do you think the Seahawks were thinking, "gee, I really hope we finish with a better record than whoever wins the NFC East"?

Or course they weren't. They were primarily thinking of finishing with better records than the Cardinals, 49ers, and Rams.

They were primarily thinking they wanted to make the playoffs. I don't want to change that for division winners.