A simple proposal for improving parity

[Apparition]

This year's Ravens have the league's easiest schedule (based on last year's records) despite having had the best record last year. Some of that is due to their division last year having been bad, and that should improve this year. There's no real way to fix that without altogether doing away with divisions. But another significant reason is that they get to play their interconference games against the NFC East, which was won by a 9-7 team last year. 

So how about, instead of each AFC division playing a specific NFC division, we have each first-place AFC team play each first-place NFC team, and so forth? It wouldn't be 100% foolproof, obviously, but it would raise the tension in inter-conference games, which are usually the least crucial on a team's schedule, since they mean the least in tiebreaking.

[ET80]

7 minutes ago, Starless said:

So how about, instead of each AFC division playing a specific NFC division, we have each first-place AFC team play each first-place NFC team, and so forth? It wouldn't be 100% foolproof, obviously, but it would raise the tension in inter-conference games, which are usually the least crucial on a team's schedule, since they mean the least in tiebreaking.

I actually like this. A lot.

[LeotheLion]

It's an interesting idea. The one benefit of the rotating games is you know every 8 years your team gets a home game against every team. Under that format a Lions season ticket holder would never have seen Brady play. 

[Apparition]

1 minute ago, LeotheLion said:

It's an interesting idea. The one benefit of the rotating games is you know every 8 years your team gets a home game against every team. Under that format a Lions season ticket holder would never have seen Brady play. 

Well, with the 17-game schedule coming in, the solution to that would be to add a fifth inter-conference game where a team would play the one it's gone the longest without facing. 

[LeotheLion]

Just now, Starless said:

Well, with the 17-game schedule coming in, the solution to that would be to add a fifth inter-conference game where a team would play the one it's gone the longest without facing. 

From a parity perspective, I like your idea. As a Rams fan living in KC, I like knowing when I can easily attend a "local" Rams game.

[SalvadorsDeli]

I think that creates too much variance between the schedules of different division rivals. The playoff format - even with the extra wild card - is still largely geared towards winning your division to create a more advantageous pathway in the playoffs. That can at least be justified in the current format because the divisional races are largely played on even footing right now, where teams have 14 shared opponents out of 16 games (including head to head). You know you're in a mini-tournament with those teams from the start but at least you're all on reasonably equal footing. 

Your formula would change that to 10 shared opponents out of 16, or barely over half. At which point you're going to likely have teams win their division purely because they got to play a significantly easier schedule if say, they played the 3rd or 4th place schedule and their rival had to play the 1st place schedule. 

For example, looking at division like the NFC West right now where the Cardinals are likely on the rebound, they basically start the year with an inside track on the division compared to the Niners because they get to play:

Dolphins
Bengals
Chargers
Jaguars
Lions
Panthers

Whereas the Niners would play as alternatives: 

Patriots
Ravens
Chiefs
Texans
Packers
Saints 

The difference is just too big in terms of SoS for there to really be a justification to have divisions at all at that point. There's no shared competition between the teams anymore really. 

Anyways, I find it interesting that this offseason a Pats fan would become a lot more interested in finding ways to improve parity. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by BaltimoreTerp

[Daniel]

19 hours ago, Starless said:

This year's Ravens have the league's easiest schedule (based on last year's records) despite having had the best record last year. Some of that is due to their division last year having been bad, and that should improve this year. There's no real way to fix that without altogether doing away with divisions. But another significant reason is that they get to play their interconference games against the NFC East, which was won by a 9-7 team last year. 

So how about, instead of each AFC division playing a specific NFC division, we have each first-place AFC team play each first-place NFC team, and so forth? It wouldn't be 100% foolproof, obviously, but it would raise the tension in inter-conference games, which are usually the least crucial on a team's schedule, since they mean the least in tiebreaking.

I could get behind a modified version of this.  You'd still want some wiggle room to create individual games people would want to see, but otherwise, I like it.

Although, I expected the solution to be eating the Irish babies.

[DontTazeMeBro]

Giving the worst teams higher picks in the draft is enough. Anything else is overkill and imo trying to fix a problem that isn’t really a problem.

That said, I don’t hate the idea. It would create more big games. But I think there’s enough parity. Maybe even too much.

[Matts4313]

I dont think it is needed. We already have a ton of turnover from division champs year to year.