SkippyX Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 Browns wins: NFC East x4 Bungles x2 Jags Texans OK so Colts and Titans were nice wins. Do we put teams on the pity list because they went 2-6 against decent to good teams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 2 minutes ago, SkippyX said: Browns wins: NFC East x4 Bungles x2 Jags Texans OK so Colts and Titans were nice wins. Do we put teams on the pity list because they went 2-6 against decent to good teams? That's an interesting point. I see what you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 I also just want to say that the Ravens are 6-5 in conference which is tied for 6th through 8th best in a 16 team conference. (9th if the Patriots win on Monday) The industry term for this is Middle of the Pack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 4 hours ago, SkippyX said: This was a fluke based on the following The complete destruction of the Cowboys O-line The complete destruction of the Eagles O-line They would have had at least a 9-7 champ if either the Eagles of Cowboys O-line held up. (IMO) AFAIK the 1984 - 1985 AFC Central is the only division that did not have a 10 game winner 2 years in a row and had a winner without a winning record in one of those years. The pathetic 2010 NFC West had a 13 win 49ers team the next year. Lets look at these so-called deserving teams that may miss the playoffs: If the Colts miss the playoffs, its because they lost to the 1-15 Jags (possibly twice to the 2-14 Jags!) If the Browns miss the playoffs its because they lost to the 2-13 Jets and went 2-4 in their division. If the Ravens miss the playoffs it will be because they could not beat the Bengals in week 17. If the Rams miss the playoffs its because they lost to the Jets and went 2-4 in their division. If the Bears miss the playoffs its because they lost to the Lions and went 2-4 in their division. If the Cardinals miss the playoffs its because they lost to the Lions and went 2-4 in their division. There is nothing here that needs to be fixed. I agree with all this, except the part about Dallas. Our defense and QB dying is what did us in. Not our OL. Our OL was bad but it was no where near as bad as our def. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 Two teams won before at 7-9 right? And they didn't care then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemike778 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 (edited) No. There are 4 teams in a division. If you want to claim to be champion you should be able to win a 4 team division. If you don't then you have failed regular season objective one. You get another chance in the play-offs but have to to play away. No sympathy to good teams who didn't win their division and don't get a home game, they should feel themselves lucky they get another chance. Yes a good team from the AFC isn't going to make the playoffs. But they will finish 8th out of 16. The playoffs should be the best teams from the AFC against the best from the NFC. If you finish 8th out of 16 then you aren't one of the best teams in the AFC. The NFC East team are lucky but they have a difficult road to win the super bowl. They will have to beat four teams that are considered better than them. And two of those games are away. If you are going to ignore division winners for seedings then you need to revise schedules. Yes it looks odd if a 6-10 team is seeded above a 10-6. But what about if it was a 9-7 division winner and a 10-6 wildcard team. The 9-7 team may have had a much harder division schedule so surely they would deserve the seeding. So where do you draw the line. Teams in the same division have roughly the same schedule so the winner of each division should be rewarded. The current system is fair and more exciting. I don't see any reason to change it. If you want a home game win your division. If you fail to win a four team division the count yourself lucky to get another shot in the playoffs. Edited December 28, 2020 by mikemike778 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich homie Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 9 hours ago, Superman(DH23) said: You could also say that the WC team had a competitive advantage going against a weak division. For instance the NFC west could end up with 3 teams in and it just so happens that they played the NFC east this year and won every single game. Likewise the div winner from the NFCE could say they were at a disadvantage bc they played against the NFCW which could send 3 teams in. It's fine as is. No, the wild card team doesn't have a competitive advantage, because they are in a division with a team that has more wins than them. Either way, the complete lack of balance in schedules is an argument against the current system, not one for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucsfan333 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 Nope. And I hope they don't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich homie Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 This is the one thing that's always fascinated me about NFL fans vs most other sports, this weird inherent conservatism that feels the need to defend everything just for the sake of keeping it the same. The point of the playoffs in any sport is to pit the best teams from the regular season against each other in a tournament to determine the champion right? So when the current system is clearly not conductive to that it should be changed. It makes absolutely no sense why the Giants can make the playoffs at 6-10 while the Colts could miss out at 11-5. Any other sport would have figured this out back in 2007, or in 2008, or in 2010, or in 2011, etc. (maybe not baseball) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 7 minutes ago, rich homie said: This is the one thing that's always fascinated me about NFL fans vs most other sports, this weird inherent conservatism that feels the need to defend everything just for the sake of keeping it the same. The point of the playoffs in any sport is to pit the best teams from the regular season against each other in a tournament to determine the champion right? So when the current system is clearly not conductive to that it should be changed. It makes absolutely no sense why the Giants can make the playoffs at 6-10 while the Colts could miss out at 11-5. Any other sport would have figured this out back in 2007, or in 2008, or in 2010, or in 2011, etc. (maybe not baseball) And thats why football is kicking their arses. We have preserved the sanctity of divisions and its importance to playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsoxsuck05 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 (edited) 15 hours ago, pf9 said: Absolutely. I feel a division winner with a losing record should be saddled with the lowest seed in their conference, and possibly have to face a real murderer's row in the playoffs just to get to the Super Bowl. I feel a weak division winner going on to win it all would be more believable if they did NOT have a home playoff game along the way. Take 2010 for example. The Saints, the defending champs, had tied for the second best record in the NFC and even would have won a tie-breaker over Chicago. Yet because of the insistence of division winners getting a home game, the Saints were saddled with the #5 seed, and had to play at 7-9 Seattle. At the point, the Saints had only ever played three road playoff games - all three against NFC North teams, two against Chicago, and none of them victories. It ended up costing the Saints dearly as they lost 41-36. Had seeding priority been removed from division champions, the Falcons and the Saints could had the potential of meeting in the NFC championship game, which would have been the biggest game ever in their storied rivalry (let that sink in). I am also against seeding priority for division champions because of what my Packers experienced as the defending champions in 2011. The Giants held a 9-7 record, which was the worst among NFC playoff teams. Yet they won their division, and thus would go on to beat Atlanta in the first round, then my Packers the next round, which upset me because the Packers failed to do something their biggest rivals the Bears did in 1985 and win the Super Bowl as a 15-1 team. Adding insult to injury, the Giants won the Super Bowl over the Patriots (repeating what happened in 2007 - Giants win at Lambeau in the postseason, then beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl). Had seeding priority been removed from division winners, the Giants would have been the 6 seed and had to open the playoffs against the Saints at the Superdome, where they have not won since a 1993 MNF game, and were thoroughly beaten there in 2011 by the score of 49-24. The Giants winning the Super Bowl at 9-7 embarrassed the league, it was avoided twice before because the 9-7 NFC champions in each of those games were facing the Steelers, who lost in the wild card round in 2011. The Giants did get their comeuppance though, they missed the playoffs for four years in a row (which was a record following a Super Bowl title until the Broncos, winners of Super Bowl 50, also being led by a Manning brother in defeating a 15-1 team, missed the playoffs for the fifth straight season this year). Thankfully the NBA has realized the problems of giving seeding priority to division winners. In 2006, the top two teams in the West both came from the Southwest Division, but were seeded 1 and 4 so could only meet in the conference semifinals. Thus, several other Western playoff teams were trying to play their way into the portion of the bracket where they could avoid the Mavericks and Spurs until the conference finals. To prevent future occurrences of this, starting the following year, the NBA allowed the best second place team in each conference to rise as high as the #2 seed depending on their record. Later in 2016, they not only removed the top 4 seed guarantee for a division winner, but also a playoff spot guarantee, but in practice all division winners play well enough to make the playoffs. Similarly in MLB, during the 2015 season, the top 3 teams in the NL all came from the Central. But because of the seeding system, the Cubs and Pirates had to play each other in the wild card game, and the winner had to play the Cardinals. The other NL division winners, the Dodgers and Mets, got to avoid the NL Central until the NLCS. It worked to the Mets advantage (frustrating me as a Yankees fan; they were shut out by Houston in the AL Wild Card game that year) when they swept the Cubs in the NLCS, the Cubs won the World Series only a year later. Back in 2012, when the wild card game was introduced, the Tigers had the worst record of all playoff teams that year, but got to skip the Wild Card game because they won the AL Central, which propelled them to the World Series, sweeping my Yankees in the ALCS in the process. So, division winners don't always deserve seeding priority. They sometimes need to face a murderers row without home-field advantage in any round (whether in the NFL or another league). So, yeah the NBA should be used as a model for determining playoff seeding in the other major sports leagues, it was for the NHL this year due to the pandemic. What a bizarre post, dude. Giants decisively beat your 15-1 team that was apparently entitled to make the Super Bowl, then they beat two other 13-3 teams. The only entity embarrassed about a 9-7 team whooping *** is you because your team laid an egg against said 9-7 team. Edited December 28, 2020 by redsoxsuck05 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJaxxenGuy Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, SkippyX said: I also just want to say that the Ravens are 6-5 in conference which is tied for 6th through 8th best in a 16 team conference. (9th if the Patriots win on Monday) The industry term for this is Middle of the Pack. This guy has to make an NFC East thread about the Ravens because he’s still mad no sane person will crown Jalen Hurts over the reigning MVP Ur mad bro. Lamar lives in your head rent free and it’s getting silly. Edited December 28, 2020 by ThatJaxxenGuy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJaxxenGuy Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 (edited) Back to the topic: I’ve enjoyed NFC East football this year. The games are usually close (except the Eagles stinking yesterday) and it’s good to keep divisions because teams become familiar with eachother and it makes for tight games. just stop the marriage between the NFC East and Sunday night football. I’ve liked the division. I don’t want to watch them every Sunday night in a race to find out who’s quarterback can turn the ball over more erratically. Let us lol at the dumpster fire over NFL red zone. edit- spelling Edited December 28, 2020 by ThatJaxxenGuy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 25 minutes ago, rich homie said: This is the one thing that's always fascinated me about NFL fans vs most other sports, this weird inherent conservatism that feels the need to defend everything just for the sake of keeping it the same. its definitely weird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slingin' Sammy Posted December 28, 2020 Author Share Posted December 28, 2020 53 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: And thats why football is kicking their arses. We have preserved the sanctity of divisions and its importance to playoffs. That’s not a significant reason why the NFL gets better ratings then the other sports. Football is simply more exciting to watch then the others, and with far fewer games played per season then any other sport, each one means a lot more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.