NFC West is going to screw a good team out of a playoff spot (1 Viewer)

[FiveToOne5891]

Have you SEEN your division this year?

/On a side note, I hope the Rams do end up being the West champs. Mainly because the other three teams have spent the last year or so going backwards. The Rams look like the only team in that wasteland that look like they actually want to play football this year.

Yeah, looks similar to the last couple of years. I do think that if a wild card team has a better record than a division champion that they should get HFA, but there should also be a representative for each division in the playoffs.

 

[smchls23]

So what. It's about winning your own division. If you don't, it's a system that is already set.

The playoffs are about the best teams of the conference. Where on earth does your division come into play? That division winners get automatic playoff spots seems so to arbitrary to me.

If the team is good enough to win the division, then good for you. But a playoff team should be good enough to out win the non-playoff teams--no matter what you say..

 

[smchls23]

but there should also be a representative for each division in the playoffs.

Why?

There is no real reason, other than tradition tbh. The playoffs are not about divisions; it's about conferences.. The playoffs should be a representation of the conferences' best teams..

 

[SonOfNOLA]

Why?

There is no real reason, other than tradition tbh. The playoffs are not about divisions; it's about conferences.. The playoffs should be a representation of the conferences' best teams..

I agree.

The NFL are the only ones in professional sports that have that type of playoff system. Just because you win your division doesn't mean you should automatically make the playoffs if your record says otherwise compared to the other teams in the conference that actually deserves it. If they don't wanna change that, then they can at least expand the playoffs to two more seeds and have it at 8 to make the postseason more competitive and not leave anyone out with a winning record.

 

[44slayer]

The NFC West is even worse than you think - they play eachother twice. If they didnt get wins from each other, you might see a 5 win team in the playoffs. Chances are that someone will win the division with a 7-9 record and there will be 10 win teams in the conference at home and a team with 11 wins will be on the road and were 4 games better than the NFC west champ. There is really no way to fix this. Its a shame that one of those teams will host a playoff game.

 

[DomeDude]

The best team in the West is Seattle at 5-5 and they could potentially host a playoff game. I'm going to feel bad for the team who gets put out because of whoever wins the West

No team will get put out from the team that wins the west, there will still be 2 wildcards, and 4 division winners. Its that simple, and has been like this for a long time. At least now they have 2 wildcards instead of just one like it used to be. I remember this same subject being raised a few years ago about the west, and the winner of that division ended up going to the Superbowl.

 

[bradman1965]

There is no real reason, other than tradition tbh.

There is a *lot* of value in football for tradition. Mucking with the game too much is not a winning formula. I could see a seeding change, but division rivalries are a big deal in the NFL.

 

[msusaintsfan]

I think a seeding change should happen. Its doesn't make sense for a 12-4 team have to play at a 9-7 team just because they won their division. I also think you should have to be .500 or better to get into the playoffs. If a team wins their division with a 7-9 record they shouldn't be allowed in the playoffs...IMHO.

 

[Danneaux]

If you don't wanna get screwed, win your division.

Who's to say a 10-6 team should get in over a 9-7 division winner?

Maybe the 10-6 team had a patsy schedule, and the 9-7 division winner had a brutal schedule?

Its fair as it is.

I'd rather not go to a straight seeding, because of the above scenario.

 

[SonOfNOLA]

No team will get put out from the team that wins the west, there will still be 2 wildcards, and 4 division winners. Its that simple, and has been like this for a long time. At least now they have 2 wildcards instead of just one like it used to be. I remember this same subject being raised a few years ago about the west, and the winner of that division ended up going to the Superbowl.

He's talking about the NFC West division winner will prevent a team from making the playoffs that have a better record than them and deserves it more like the Bucs or Giants

 

[DomeDude]

The only thing I would change would be seed ranking

A 9-7 team should NOT get HFA over a 12-4 team

There will not be a 12-4 wildcard. I'm willing to bet 12-4 will win you HFA throughout this season.

 

[jlam]

everyone is undefeated once post-season begins... regular season records don't count

Lmao. Jesus.

 

[DomeDude]

He's talking about the NFC West division winner will prevent a team from making the playoffs that have a better record than them and deserves it more like the Bucs or Giants

They wont prevent a team from making the playoffs though. If you dont win your division you have to rely on getting one of the two wildcards. I can see the argument with seeding, but it would be plain stupid to go to a system where the 6 best records in the conference go to the playoffs regardless of who won what division, otherwise why even have divisions ? Can you imagine the NFL without the divisional rivalries that exist today ? There would be no rivalries, because they exist mainly because these teams fight to win their division each year. If you took away the meaning of having the best record in your division then you also take away the inner division competition. How would you feel if the Saints won the NFC South but didnt make the playoffs because 6 teams had better records ? And who's to say who deserves to make the playoffs ? Remember the Cardinals a few years back ? Everyone was saying they didnt deserve to be in the playoffs because of their weak division, but they won out in the playoffs and went to the SB. Seems to me they deserved it more than people want to admit since they beat the best teams in the NFC to get to the SB.

 

[rich006]

Meh. Every team knows the playoff seeding rules. They know what they have to do to get in. All of the contenders right now control their own destiny.

A correction to something that was said above: the 4th place division winner (seed #4) hosts the top wild card team (seed #5). The #3 seed hosts the #6 seed.

One disadvantage of the system that has been proposed here (to seed all teams based on conference ranking and ignore divisions) is that more teams would be eliminated earlier, making for more "meaningless" games late in the season. Using the NFC West as an example, suppose all the NFCw teams are at 6-7 or below with 3 games left, and there are 6 NFC teams with (at least) 10 wins each. Then none of the NFCw teams have any chance of making the playoffs. The current system keeps more teams in the hunt longer and makes the end of the regular season more exciting.

Another disadvantage of the proposed system is that it would weaken divisional rivalries. If playoff seeds were ranked conference-wide, divisional games would be no more important than other conference games. The current system boosts intra-divisional rivalries by raising the stakes of each game. Those rivalries make the game more enjoyable for everyone. Weakening them in the name of "fairness" would be lame.

I say don't change a thing.

 

[SonOfNOLA]

They wont prevent a team from making the playoffs though. If you dont win your division you have to rely on getting one of the two wildcards. I can see the argument with seeding, but it would be plain stupid to go to a system where the 6 best records in the conference go to the playoffs regardless of who won what division, otherwise why even have divisions ? Can you imagine the NFL without the divisional rivalries that exist today ? There would be no rivalries, because they exist mainly because these teams fight to win their division each year. If you took away the meaning of having the best record in your division then you also take away the inner division competition. How would you feel if the Saints won the NFC South but didnt make the playoffs because 6 teams had better records ? And who's to say who deserves to make the playoffs ? Remember the Cardinals a few years back ? Everyone was saying they didnt deserve to be in the playoffs because of their weak division, but they won out in the playoffs and went to the SB. Seems to me they deserved it more than people want to admit since they beat the best teams in the NFC to get to the SB.

That Cardinals team had Kurt Warner as their QB so these are two different scenarios. IIRC, they started the season out 7-3 and had the division from the start. Everyone knew they were playoff worthy and capable of making a run. People were only saying they didn't deserve it because they loss 4 out of their last 6 games of the season, not because of talent. The Cardinals team of 2010 isn't anything close to being wildcard round caliber.

In fact, anytime NFC West teams have played 4 of the current top 6 or 7 teams in the NFC they've lost every last one of those games (i.e. Saints beat San Fran and Seattle 34-19/25-22, the Bucs beat San Fran 21-0, Failcons beat St. Louis 34-17, Giants beat Seattle 41-7, Failcons beat Arizona 41-7, etc.) so that would be every indication that they wouldn't stand a chance if the faced off against one of 'em in the playoffs. Of course, any team can win any given week. But to think the top teams would allow any of the NFC West teams to defeat them in the playoffs at a crucial moment after they've already beat them silly in the regular season would seriously be kidding themselves.