Division leader at 5-6..... (1 Viewer)

The NFL, apparently, disagrees

I mean, the Saints last year were the NFC Representatives, not the NFC South representatives.. We represented the conference...

The playoffs are about the best in the conference, idk. It's p much a general consensus.
 
Right, because that's how the NBA and other logical leagues are set up.

Oh wait.

Every professional league has automatic entry for division winners. The NBA flexes one wildcard team though into the top seeding bracket. In otherwords, the 3 division winners and the top wildcard are seeded 1-4, the remaining wildcard teams 5-8. Which means the lowest a division winner can be seeded is #4, but the top wildcard team could, in theory, be seeded #2 (after the team that won it's division obviously). There are some other practical differences not worth mentioning.

The MLB format is exactly like the NFL (albeit with a smaller field). 3 automatic entry division winners, one wild-card, the wild card seeded last with one small exception, if the #1 seed was the division winner from the wild-card teams division they play the #3 seed, not the wild-card (so the first round never has inter-divisional matchups)
 
It's a problem, but not a terrible one. There are lots of ways to fix it.

This kind of thing (8-8 division winner goes to playoffs, 10-win team misses playoffs) happens not infrequently in the NFL b/c the divisions are so small. Having 4 divisions of just 4 teams increases the odds that one division in any given year will have 4 teams in a down cycle.

You could have bigger divisions (2 eight-team divisions) and this would almost never be a problem. It'd be a bit goofy though.

If they add teams in LA and Toronto/London, then things will be goofy anyway. 34 is not a good number, except for RBs and sexually peaking women.
 
The playoffs are about the best in the conference, idk. It's p much a general consensus.

You keep saying that. Maybe you think you're Dorthy and simple repetition makes a truth, but the fact is every single professional league in America gives automatic entry to division winners. Every single professional league in America feels winning the division is a significant and consistently rewarded goal.
 
Why complain

The west division winner could be our first opponent in the playoffs. Take it and smile.
 
The only thing they need to change is the seeding. If the wildcard team has a better record than a division winner, they should be the higher seed. Or the wild card team should get the game at home. The NBA does this. The NFL should look at doing it that way.

Well, the NBA sort of half-***** it. They divide seeding up 1-4 and 5-8, the top wild card team is in the 1-4 bracket and could, in theory, be seeded as high as #2, but the #2 wild card team which, in theory, could have the 3rd best record in the conference, could still be seeded only #5.

There are some other weird aspects of the NBA (seeding does not equal homefield advantage, and homefield advantage is less meaningful in "best of" series then it is in one-and-done type formats, like the NFL, while seeding is more meaningful in "best of" series than it is in one-and-done type formats), but to your overall point I agree.

Keep automatic entry for division winners (the NFL wouldn't consider the alternative anyways) but seed according to record. I don't think division winners should be automatically seeded 1-4 with associated HFA. At the least, you can keep #1 and #2 the "top two division winners" and give them the bye week and seed 3-6 strictly according to record.
 
They been needing to actually expand the playoff format to 8 teams, its cried for that since they introduced the Salary cap.

Proof is the fact that some 9-7 teams go to the SB or Conference title game, then yet some 9-7 teams miss it playoffs completely, as well as some 10-6 ones, and a couple 11-5 teams missed it in the last 20 years, 11-5 team may end up missing it this year.

I think if the format changes to 8, you would need all 4 divisional winners with a bye.
 
They been needing to actually expand the playoff format to 8 teams, its cried for that since they introduced the Salary cap.

Proof is the fact that some 9-7 teams go to the SB or Conference title game, then yet some 9-7 teams miss it playoffs completely, as well as some 10-6 ones, and a couple 11-5 teams missed it in the last 20 years, 11-5 team may end up missing it this year.

I think if the format changes to 8, you would need all 4 divisional winners with a bye.

I think the NFL is more scared of consistently having multiple 8-8 teams make the playoffs then only occasionally having one team with a winning record being bumped by one 8-8 division champ.

Edit - The flip side though is it would add more interest in late season games (as more teams are involved in the playoff hunt) and give them an additional 4 playoff games to throw into the TV package (so more revenue).
 
I think the NFL is more scared of consistently having multiple 8-8 teams make the playoffs then only occasionally having one team with a winning record being bumped by one 8-8 division champ.


Could be, but it seems last few years a team that is even 8-8 or 9-7 can make strong pushes, they may of lost 7 or 8 games, but a schedule with right opponents at the right time can win or lose, some teams its a split even though they are better. Take 8-8 Chargers one season.
Some of that is the soul reason Indy and NE use to win 10+ games every year.
 
THe division winner should ALWAYS get to host a playoff game but after the wildcard weekend there should possibly be a re-seeding.

Lets say team A is 13-3 as a wildcard, team B is 9-7 as a division winner and team C is 10-6 as a division winner. If team A beats team B and is set to play team C in the next round then team A should host that playoff game because it has a better record.
 
They been needing to actually expand the playoff format to 8 teams, its cried for that since they introduced the Salary cap.

Proof is the fact that some 9-7 teams go to the SB or Conference title game, then yet some 9-7 teams miss it playoffs completely, as well as some 10-6 ones, and a couple 11-5 teams missed it in the last 20 years, 11-5 team may end up missing it this year.

I think if the format changes to 8, you would need all 4 divisional winners with a bye.

I agree that they should expand. But they should expand to 7, and only the 1 seed should get a first round bye.

Under the existing system, the 2 seed has a big edge on the 3 seed, since the 2 hosts the 3, who didn't get a bye and just beat the 6.

But the 1 seed doesn't get as big an edge over the 2, if seeds play to form. In the championship game, the 1 hosts the 2, just as the 2 would host the 3, but neither the 1 nor the 2 had a bye in the prior week.

Under the current format, the 2 has a better record over the 3 than the 1 does over the 2.

IMHO, if there should be a big drop off in giving advantages, it should be the 1 over the 2, not the 2 over the 3.
 
THe division winner should ALWAYS get to host a playoff game but after the wildcard weekend there should possibly be a re-seeding.

Lets say team A is 13-3 as a wildcard, team B is 9-7 as a division winner and team C is 10-6 as a division winner. If team A beats team B and is set to play team C in the next round then team A should host that playoff game because it has a better record.

Way it should be.
Whats going to be quite funny is a scenario may arise where the #1 or #2 seed if they make it to the NFCCG this season and if it aint the Saints that has a top 2 seed, you could see the Saints march in with a better record than the top seed playing.

Bears or Eagles 12-4 vs Saints 13-3????

Eagles could really be 11-5 as well as Bears.
 
I'm fine with division winners getting an auto-entry.

What I don't like is that it isn't open-seeding once playoff teams are determined. I like divisions mattering, I like winning your division being a big deal. But I don't like the idea of an 8-8 team hosting a 12-4 wild card team. Have open seeding in the playoffs. Seems like a fair compromise.

I agree with this. Division winners should get auto entry, otherwise whats the point of having divisions? It would be good though, if a division winner is 8-8 to be seeded below a wild card team that is 12-4, in stead of automatically being a #4 seed. I would be open to that. :9:
 
The way it's looking you could have a 13-3 wildcard in both conf.
NFC has the west and AFC has South where winner could be 8-8
What makes it right is those 8-8 teams face those 13-3 teams right off
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom