The NFL should get rid of divisions

[JDM]

I'll also ask you this:

How certain are you that a 10-6 team that went 3-3 against division opponents, all with 9-7 records is worse than an 11-5 team that went 5-1 against one team with an 11-5 and two with 0-16 records? What if the 10 win team beat the 11 win team head to head?

This scenario is slightly extreme, but not more than most of yours. Each team has a clear way to the playoffs, and it is simple. WIN YOUR DIVISION.

 

[msgkings322]

Because there is not a league in any sport at any level with a better system than the NFL.

Each team has a division, partly as a scheduling tool, partly because division rivalries are the heart of the NFL.

Each team builds to beat their division. They are rewarded for this by making the playoffs and earning a home game.

Two teams that weren't good enough to win their division are given the gift of a wildcard spot. If they are truly superior, they should have no issue going on the road to win. If they can't win on the road, how much better were they?

Teams that were both not good enough to win their division and not good enough to beat the rest of the field for the gift of a wild card spot don't make the playoffs, as they don't deserve to. They should focus on improving their team to win their division.

I think this is a fair summary of the 'pro-divisions' stance, which I support.

Here's another point: the 'anti-division' crowd holds that the record determines the 'better' team, that a 10-6 team shouldn't miss the playoffs when a 9-7 team gets to go...that a 12-4 team shouldn't have to go on the road to play a 10-6 division winner, etc. This all presupposes that the record is the only way to tell the 'better' from the 'worse'. But there aren't enough games in the sport (16) to really determine that...if they played 25 games maybe the 9-7 team would end up winning 15 and the 10-6 team end up with 14. And even then you wouldn't be able to say who was 'better'. 'Better' teams (by record) lose to 'worse' teams all the time, sometimes for no reason at all, sometimes due to injuries, or weather...that's how the sport is, and it's one of the reasons it's so successful, every team has a shot every Sunday. So to sum up, records aren't the only criteria you can use to determine who is more 'deserving' of playoff seeding.

Now let's hypothetically say you do get rid of divisions. It solves one injustice but creates others. Unless every team plays the same schedule, some 9-7 team will be able to point at some 10-6 team and say well we played tougher opponents. The fact is no matter HOW a sport determines who advances, there are always the marginal or better teams with a beef (NCAA basketball tournament bubble teams, BCS teams that just miss the cut, wild cards in baseball, football...heck even in the NBA where some team below .500 is probably going to win the Atlantic division and get a 4th seed).

It's simply a part of sports, the arguing is a part of it and has been forever. Even the eventual crowned champion isn't always the 'best' team from the regular season. It's often who got hot in the playoffs. Really only the NBA seems to get its best team crowned most years, mainly because the playoffs and regular season have so many games.

So this thread could theoretically go on forever, because there's no absolute 'right' way to set up playoffs where there are no unfair seedings or exclusions. It's just impossible. Both 'sides' have a point.

So why not stick with the current, imperfect system, because the sport is hardly suffering with it, and it's what's been in place, and there are no perfect alternatives.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Because there is not a league in any sport at any level with a better system than the NFL.

Each team has a division, partly as a scheduling tool, partly because division rivalries are the heart of the NFL.

Each team builds to beat their division. They are rewarded for this by making the playoffs and earning a home game.

Two teams that weren't good enough to win their division are given the gift of a wildcard spot. If they are truly superior, they should have no issue going on the road to win. If they can't win on the road, how much better were they?

Teams that were both not good enough to win their division and not good enough to beat the rest of the field for the gift of a wild card spot don't make the playoffs, as they don't deserve to. They should focus on improving their team to win their division.

The other leagues is incomparable to the NFL. The NBA plays 82 games, the MLB 160+. When you play that many games, the cream will always rise to the top. That's not the same in the NFL. Every single game counts, and every game has to be equated on the same level.

Arizona has a better record than the Cowboys, Eagles, Bears, and Packers, and all four have a better shot at making the playoffs, despite Arizona playing in a tough division and playing a tougher conference. So Arizona edges out these teams in record, SOS, and divisional strength, yet all of these teams currently have a better shot at making the playoffs than Arizona.

If you're fine with a system like this, I feel sorry for you.

 

[clyde_carbon]

I'll also ask you this:

How certain are you that a 10-6 team that went 3-3 against division opponents, all with 9-7 records is worse than an 11-5 team that went 5-1 against one team with an 11-5 and two with 0-16 records? What if the 10 win team beat the 11 win team head to head?

This scenario is slightly extreme, but not more than most of yours. Each team has a clear way to the playoffs, and it is simple. WIN YOUR DIVISION.

How certain are you that they are not? And why stop there? How certain are you that a 10-6 team is better than an 8-8, or a 7-9 team? Should the 7-9 team have an equal shot of making the playoffs because you can never be sure?

GTFO of here with that logic.

 

[RoboticDreams]

The logic of this thread reads something like this...

 

[whysies]

I know it's all a part of the Clyde (Mystique? Schtick?) but maybe it's time to drop the rude, overly aggressive, borderline mentally unstable posts and just acknowledge that this isn't a very good idea, nor will it ever catch on.

Just a thought.

 

[RoboticDreams]

I know it's all a part of the Clyde (Mystique? Schtick?) but maybe it's time to drop the rude, overly aggressive, borderline mentally unstable posts and just acknowledge that this isn't a very good idea, nor will it ever catch on.

Just a thought.

"Stop being a sensitive, puss. It's not my fault your a dumbfuck for questioning an incredible idea."
- clyde_carbon

 

[bvanthielriceyoung]

I know it's all a part of the Clyde (Mystique? Schtick?) but maybe it's time to drop the rude, overly aggressive, borderline mentally unstable posts and just acknowledge that this isn't a very good idea, nor will it ever catch on.

Just a thought.

 

[clyde_carbon]

The above three posts are what happens when no one has anything of value to contribute, or when a thread goes completely over someone's head.

 

[whysies]

The above three posts are what happens when no one has anything of value to contribute, or when a thread goes completely over someone's head.

Counterpoint: your idea isn't a very good one, nor is it likely to catch on.

Even if it was a good idea (again, it's not), it won't ever catch on. Cuz history and stuff. Also, cuz you're just a dude on a message board spitting into the wind. None of it matters.

I mean, if you want to go on for another ten pages insulting people that's cool. It just seems to me that the chemically imbalanced rage monster act is a little played out in this particular thread, especially coming from a moderator on this site.

That's all I was saying broseph. Carry on.

 

[jds_49ers]

I dont have a problem with the division, my problem is why cause your won a division does that make you rank in position higher? win the division and you are in the playoffs, but seeding should be based soley on your record. The 12-4 team is #3 and the 9-7 team is #6. Seems completely fair.

 

[erckm510]

I dont have a problem with the division, my problem is why cause your won a division does that make you rank in position higher? win the division and you are in the playoffs, but seeding should be based soley on your record. The 12-4 team is #3 and the 9-7 team is #6. Seems completely fair.

Would you be ok with the wild card team getting the bye?

 

[520GGATO]

I dont have a problem with the division, my problem is why cause your won a division does that make you rank in position higher? win the division and you are in the playoffs, but seeding should be based soley on your record. The 12-4 team is #3 and the 9-7 team is #6. Seems completely fair.

 

[RoboticDreams]

The above three posts are what happens when no one has anything of value to contribute, or when a thread goes completely over someone's head.

Somebody can't let go :frown:

 

[jds_49ers]

Would you be ok with the wild card team getting the bye?

If the 2nd best record in the conference is a wild card then nope. Rankings from 1-6 should be based off what you did in the year.

 

[Davis_Mike]

I like the divisions the way they are. What should change is that there should be 2 more wildcard teams per conference. Get rid of the bye week for the 2 best conference teams. Get rid of the automatic top 4 seeding & home games for division winners. Winning a division only guarantees that you make the playoffs. Seed the playoff teams by record & the head-to-head/SOS for tie breakers. Top 4 teams record wise, host games in round 1. Then reseed the winning teams after each round.

It's not that hard to solve this issue while maintaining divisions & divisional rivalries.

 

[Toolrulzz]

Counterpoint: your idea isn't a very good one, nor is it likely to catch on.

Even if it was a good idea (again, it's not), it won't ever catch on. Cuz history and stuff. Also, cuz you're just a dude on a message board spitting into the wind. None of it matters.

I mean, if you want to go on for another ten pages insulting people that's cool. It just seems to me that the chemically imbalanced rage monster act is a little played out in this particular thread, especially coming from a moderator on this site.

That's all I was saying broseph. Carry on.

Hold on, maybe Clyde works for the NFL Network?

Should top six teams in each conference make playoffs? - NFL Videos

 

[clyde_carbon]

Counterpoint: your idea isn't a very good one, nor is it likely to catch on.

Even if it was a good idea (again, it's not), it won't ever catch on. Cuz history and stuff. Also, cuz you're just a dude on a message board spitting into the wind. None of it matters.

I mean, if you want to go on for another ten pages insulting people that's cool. It just seems to me that the chemically imbalanced rage monster act is a little played out in this particular thread, especially coming from a moderator on this site.

That's all I was saying broseph. Carry on.

Oh my hyperbole overload. Chemically imbalanced? Rage monster?

And I don't see 10 pages of "insulting people". But if that's what you see, I couldn't give two fucks.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Somebody can't let go :frown:

All you've been posting for the last 5 pages are gifs and pictures. Your hypersensitivity has really manifested itself after being called out for not actually reading the thread.

If that's all you're good for, carry on son.

 

[JDM]

I like the divisions the way they are. What should change is that there should be 2 more wildcard teams per conference. Get rid of the bye week for the 2 best conference teams. Get rid of the automatic top 4 seeding & home games for division winners. Winning a division only guarantees that you make the playoffs. Seed the playoff teams by record & the head-to-head/SOS for tie breakers. Top 4 teams record wise, host games in round 1. Then reseed the winning teams after each round.

It's not that hard to solve this issue while maintaining divisions & divisional rivalries.

Absolutely not. Half the teams in the playoffs is unacceptable.