Has a Team with the Best Record in the Conference... (3 Viewers)

[Kamara 4 MVP]

there is also a flip side to the arguement of letting the best 6 teams in.
what if for sake of arguement the chargers and chiefs went 11-5 each and the rest of their division went 1-15 losing all their games to chargers and chiefs, and that division was scheduled to play the nfc west that is also really crappy. Would it be fair to let those teams in over say a 10-6 patriot team that played in a tough division where all teams are decent and the were scheduled to play say the nfc south.
This scenario is why I too believe that it will never get changed, because it can go both ways.

 

[tenordas]

All I can say to all this head-spinning tie-breaker talk is:
Go Bucs (temporarily!).

 

[St. PJ]

there is also a flip side to the arguement of letting the best 6 teams in.
what if for sake of arguement the chargers and chiefs went 11-5 each and the rest of their division went 1-15 losing all their games to chargers and chiefs, and that division was scheduled to play the nfc west that is also really crappy. Would it be fair to let those teams in over say a 10-6 patriot team that played in a tough division where all teams are decent and the were scheduled to play say the nfc south.
This scenario is why I too believe that it will never get changed, because it can go both ways.

Those in favor of change would like to see an NBA style of seeding- where the best 6 teams make the playoffs, regardless of division. If the NFL were to do that, playing two games against division opponents would be pointless. The NFL would be better suited (in this scenario) playing the 15 teams in conference and maybe the opposite conference team that finished the same ranking of 1-16 the previous year.

So gone would be playing division rivals twice per year (as gone would be home/away aspect of this), and gone would be the purpose of having divisions.

Truth be told, I like this better. I think the NFC should play everyone in the NFC to determine the best 6 NFC teams, and vice versa with the AFC. Maybe you keep divisions just for the sake of scheduling 3 out of conference games should the schedule go to 18 games. Or maybe you keep divisions and play your division opponent twice, along with the other 12 conference opponents, and have no interconference games till the superbowl. But too much $ is to be made having NFC vs AFC games during the season. You have to factor in tV ratings (which is what pays the bills) in the discussion. And because of TV ratings, you won't see them do away with divisions, you won't see everyone in one conference play everyone, and by default, you won't see the top 6 teams get in the playoffs every year.

A team builds itself in order to win its division. If you are in the AFC North, you need a team that can stop the run, run it in cold weather, and withstand stout defenses. Surviving that division counts for something, even if it is at 8-8. Playoffs is reward for winning your division. You don't add a free agent with the mindset that he can get you a match-up advantage over a team that you will play every 3 years. You add the player who best helps you beat the 3 teams in your division. And coming out on top in your division means something because those other 3 teams are built to beat you. This is why division winners "deserve" a top 4 playoff seed, regardless of record.

 

[LSSpam]

Those in favor of change would like to see an NBA style of seeding- where the best 6 teams make the playoffs, regardless of division.

Why do people who obviously do not watch the NBA keep citing the NBA playoffs?

The NBA Playoffs are not like that. Division winners in the NBA automatically get in, like every other professional league in America.

 

[Complex Kid]

Why do people who obviously do not watch the NBA keep citing the NBA playoffs?

The NBA Playoffs are not like that. Division winners in the NBA automatically get in, like every other professional league in America.

However the NBA does reward the team with the better record home court advantage and a higher seed. Winning your division only means you will not get a seed lower than 4th.

 

[RockyMtnSaint]

That can be debatable judging by how the entire NFC West have played this season against the best teams in the conference, but they all will probably be improved next season..hopefully.

The least the league can do is to have two more seeds or seed the original 6 team playoff system differently by teams having the best record.

I don't think anything needs to change. I especially don't want to see more teams get in. If it ain't broke...

 

[Cougar 1]

There has been discussion. Two issues. First is one that will NEVER change-- all 4 division winners will get into the playoffs. Period. That is the immovable object that the competition commitee and all involved pretty much agree on.

The other issue is how the seeding occurs. You might get a healthy discussion of taking the 4 division winners and two wild cards and simply seeding them by Overall record. But I doubt it will change, because the biggest perk of winning your division is getting to host your first playoff game.

Or they could split the difference......

The 2 division winners with the best records get the bye, everyone else, even the 7-9 division winner, then gets seeded by won loss record. Won't solve everything, just a thought.

 

[Sophandros]

I think it sucks that the winners of the NFC West are given seeding precedence over the wild card teams. They need to change playoff seeding to go by record. Division winners still get it, but not insured top seeding.

Why make a major systematic change to accommodate for an anomaly?

 

[seagull]

Did anyone see Gruden last night, go off on that it would not be right for a team with a record below .500 to make the playoffs, when there is better record teams on the table. He was some funny and having a good time with it, also stated that we should let the season end first and see how the cards fall and expects one of these teams to make a run at winning some games.

 

[Sarcastic]

I think the current system is good as far as who gets in. A division champ should never be held out of the playoffs. But the seeding could be redone according to record. Seeding is redone every round. That's how the NBA does it, right?

My first tiebreaker for seeding would be division champ over wildcard though. If you won the division, and a wildcard has the same record, you should get the home field, regardless of head-to-head.

IMO.

 

[bergeaux]

I hope we don't have to worry about this. I would rather the Failclowns just fall apart...

Man I really hate the dirty birds.