Should the Playoff format change (used to be the Dallas- Bears TNF thread)

[TheKillerNacho]

2 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Stop worrying about what you get if you don't win the division. Simple as that. You don't deserve didily poo for losing

Right. Which is why the eagles and cowboys, who have lost more games than won, have no business being in the playoffs.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

4 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Right. Which is why the eagles and cowboys, who have lost more games than won, have no business being in the playoffs.

Whoever finishes first in their division deserves to be there just like anyone else that finishes first in their own division. Winner gets the reward, a home playoff game, and loser sits out in the cold. The NFC East being a joke is irrelevant to the goal.

Edited December 6, 2019 by PapaShogun

[TheKillerNacho]

24 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Whoever finishes first in their division deserves to be there just like anyone else that finishes first in their own division. 

Why? Whats so sacred about a division , other than it's the way it's always been (in a time there were more teams in each division midigating the chance of this scenario)?

What are the advantages to a system enables losers, letting laughably bad teams into the playoffs, diminishing the quality of playoff football? What's the purpose of the playoffs at all if not to decide who should be champion from a pool of the top teams?

I think anyone being perfectly honest with themselves knows there is none. It's just rewarding bad teams based on lines in the sand.

 

[lolsurebro]

10 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Why? Whats so sacred about a division , other than it's the way it's always been (in a time there were more teams in each division midigating the chance of this scenario)?

What are the advantages to a system enables losers, letting laughably bad teams into the playoffs, diminishing the quality of playoff football? What's the purpose of the playoffs at all if not to decide who should be champion from a pool of the top teams?

I think anyone being perfectly honest with themselves knows there is none. It's just rewarding bad teams based on lines in the sand.

 

Solid logic, no argument there.

Perhaps they figure that people will go from rooting for their team, to their division next? Is there such a thing as divisional pride, lol?

[Malfatron]

11 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Why? Whats so sacred about a division , other than it's the way it's always been (in a time there were more teams in each division midigating the chance of this scenario)?

What are the advantages to a system enables losers, letting laughably bad teams into the playoffs, diminishing the quality of playoff football? What's the purpose of the playoffs at all if not to decide who should be champion from a pool of the top teams?

I think anyone being perfectly honest with themselves knows there is none. It's just rewarding bad teams based on lines in the sand.

 

Because divisional teams plays each other twice.

Now if we want to merge into 2 divisions per conference with each division winner getting a bye, and 4 at-large conference WCs, i would be good with that.

[TheKillerNacho]

8 minutes ago, Malfatron said:

Because divisional teams plays each other twice.

Now if we want to merge into 2 divisions per conference with each division winner getting a bye, and 4 at-large conference WCs, i would be good with that.

This fact actually makes it worse, not better. It leads to bad division winners being even less deserving because their schedule is easier and they still couldn't find ways to win, and teams who don't get in for to having a really competitive division more deserving. Provided you want the teams with the most impressive resume in the playoffs, that is

A better argument wild be that each division has the same common opens outside the division, save two, and thus, certain divisions may have a harder or easier schedule as a whole so it's not fair to compare a 10-6 team if one division to an 8-8 one in about. Of course, the current system also has this exact same problem anyway in ordering playoff seeding and determine wild cards.

[Malfatron]

1 minute ago, TheKillerNacho said:

A better argument wild be that each division has the same common opens outside the division, save two, and thus, certain divisions may have a harder or easier schedule as a whole so it's not fair to compare a 10-6 team if one division to an 8-8 one in about.

ok this then

[TecmoSuperJoe]

28 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Why? Whats so sacred about a division , other than it's the way it's always been (in a time there were more teams in each division midigating the chance of this scenario)?

What are the advantages to a system enables losers, letting laughably bad teams into the playoffs, diminishing the quality of playoff football? What's the purpose of the playoffs at all if not to decide who should be champion from a pool of the top teams?

I think anyone being perfectly honest with themselves knows there is none. It's just rewarding bad teams based on lines in the sand.

 

Then get rid of divisions. Get rid of rivalries. Probably won't make a better product though.

Edited December 6, 2019 by PapaShogun

[TheKillerNacho]

1 minute ago, Malfatron said:

ok this then

I'm unsure this one point, which is still present anyway in the current system, outweighs everything else, though.

[ChazStandard]

We have this argument every year, and every year you have to come the same conclusion - there are 4 home play-off games up for grabs. If you want one, win your division.

You get a home play off game for winning your division, NOT because you could have won somebody else's division. Re-writing the rules because of a series of hypotheticals is silly.

If Dallas really are so bad they don't deserve to be in the play-offs, then whichever WC team has to go into Dallas gets an easy play-off win against a sub-standard team, right?

[TheKillerNacho]

3 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Then get rid of divisions. Get rid of rivalries. Probably won't make a better product though.

You could easily keep divisions while removing the free ticket for being so if one. Playing each other team twice per season is more than enough to preserve rivalries.

I think a better solution would be to increase the size of divisions, but this wouldn't work it out well mathematically given the current number of teams.

[TheKillerNacho]

3 minutes ago, ChazStandard said:

We have this argument every year, and every year you have to come the same conclusion - there are 4 home play-off games up for grabs. If you want one, win your division.

You get a home play off game for winning your division, NOT because you could have won somebody else's division. Re-writing the rules because of a series of hypotheticals is silly.

If Dallas really are so bad they don't deserve to be in the play-offs, then whichever WC team has to go into Dallas gets an easy play-off win against a sub-standard team, right?

Those arguing for the current format: restates how things are now as if we no one knows that, without providing any actual advantage to it.

Those arguing to change it: Here's reasons why the current format is flawed.

Also it's not hypothetical. The reason we have this argument every year is because there's a bad team in the playoffs and a good one missing out virtually every year.

[acowboys62]

6 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Those arguing for the current format: restates how things are now as if we no one knows that, without providing any actual advantage to it.

Those arguing to change it: Here's reasons why the current format is flawed.

Also it's not hypothetical. The reason we have this argument every year is because there's a bad team in the playoffs and a good one missing out virtually every year.

Then how "good" is the team who missed the playoffs then? Clearly not good enough so what does it matter?

[TheKillerNacho]

1 minute ago, acowboys62 said:

Then how "good" is the team who missed the playoffs then? Clearly not good enough so what does it matter?

Better than the bad team making it in by a considerablee margin.

[patriotsheatyan]

Who cares about whether it’s fair for an 8-8 division winner to make it over a 10-6 team?

What about any of this is fair? Why should the 7th team miss while the 6th team doesn’t? Why do two teams get a bye instead of three or one? Why are tiebreakers determined the way they are? Why should a team that wins five straight to finish 9-7 miss while a team that loses 3/4 to finish 10-6 get in? There is nothing objective about any of this. If you disagree, that’s just your opinion and not objective or fair. 

Divisions and Division winners should stand because it creates sub cultures and rivalries within the NFL. Fans get to know the same teams every year who they root for and against, keeping a close eye on, smack talking with those fans, sharing a history and traditions together, knowing their rivalries will lead to at least one team making it while the others stay home, and knowing a home post season game will be the prize for at least one team.

You also only win a SB on average every 32 years and a conference title every 16 years around the league. Division titles gives fans something that is actually reasonably obtainable. They can actually get a division championship hat more than twice in a lifetime. It creates an obtainable goal that gives you the ability to gloat over 75% of the league.