Louis Friend Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 minute ago, Malfatron said: The schedule isnt completely fair to start with so they should just do something reasonable and move on It's the moving on for me. The longer they prolong this the more convoluted it gets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BILLievers Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 43 minutes ago, Louis Friend said: All to appease 2-3 teams in the AFC. Lmao what do you not get. The NFL wants to protect the integrity of the league and so that there’s no asterisk about who the SB champion is at the end of the season. By not completing the Buffalo/Cincy game the seeds and SB odds change drastically. The Bills and Bengals both beat the Chiefs, why should they be robbed of getting that potential 1 seed? Odds to make the Super Bowl off seed: 1 seed - 53% 2 seed - 21% 3 seed - 5% 4 seed - 13% Quality of teams affected > quantity of teams affected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Just now, The BILLievers said: there’s no asterisk about who the SB champion is at the end of the season. If there hasnt been an asterisk yet, there wont be one now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 2 minutes ago, The BILLievers said: 1. seed - 53% 2 seed - 21% 3 seed - 5% 4 seed - 13% That means that its only 53% history with the one seed vs 47% history with another seed. Thats a coin flip! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis Friend Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 9 minutes ago, Malfatron said: That means that its only 53% history with the one seed vs 47% history with another seed. Thats a coin flip! Something a quality team should be able to face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twotonebluenation Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 You have to feel the answer is just void the game and go off win percentage. Unfortunate and isn't the best answer but you could pick holes in all of these solutions. Isolating one game causes too much unbalance to me especially with injuries and rest time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 23 minutes ago, The BILLievers said: Lmao what do you not get. The NFL wants to protect the integrity of the league and so that there’s no asterisk about who the SB champion is at the end of the season. By not completing the Buffalo/Cincy game the seeds and SB odds change drastically. The Bills and Bengals both beat the Chiefs, why should they be robbed of getting that potential 1 seed? Odds to make the Super Bowl off seed: 1 seed - 53% 2 seed - 21% 3 seed - 5% 4 seed - 13% Quality of teams affected > quantity of teams affected. I'm not going to pretend seeding doesn't matter, but I feel like that gap has way more to do with the fact that the #1 seed is usually the best team, and less to do with them actually getting the advantages of the #1 seed. Like, obviously I'd rather KC get the #1 seed than the #2 seed, but if we get the #2 seed and lose to a #7 seed in like Miami or Pittsburgh, it isn't going to be the fault of the seeding that we lost. Whether or not we play Buffalo in KC or Buffalo would also not be why we would lose. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 hour ago, The BILLievers said: so in this instance they push things back a week for the AFC and not NFC; essentially adding a week. the AFC teams all get a bye while the bills/bengals finish and determine who is the 1,2 and 3 seed. while the NFC plays on and gets an extra bye at the end of the season? EDIT: NFC teams that survive the wild card playoffs would get a bye in week 20 then in week 21 all teams resume playoffs. Sounds like the NFL wants the Bills/Bengals to finish to complete a full schedule but we'll see. Poni is a terrible reporter. Take this with a grain of salt. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BILLievers Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 26 minutes ago, Malfatron said: That means that its only 53% history with the one seed vs 47% history with another seed. Thats a coin flip! Or a 32% better chance to make the Super Bowl as a 1 vs 2 seed! It’s almost like seeding matters and has a direct correlation as to who makes the Super Bowl! Crazy stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BILLievers Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 4 minutes ago, Jakuvious said: I'm not going to pretend seeding doesn't matter, but I feel like that gap has way more to do with the fact that the #1 seed is usually the best team, and less to do with them actually getting the advantages of the #1 seed. Like, obviously I'd rather KC get the #1 seed than the #2 seed, but if we get the #2 seed and lose to a #7 seed in like Miami or Pittsburgh, it isn't going to be the fault of the seeding that we lost. Whether or not we play Buffalo in KC or Buffalo would also not be why we would lose. Yeah I’m more talking about home field advantage when either the bills bengals chiefs play each other. That matters greatly and reflects as the 1 seed with home field is the odds on favorite to make it out of that conference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelersfan43 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 9 minutes ago, The BILLievers said: Or a 32% better chance to make the Super Bowl as a 1 vs 2 seed! It’s almost like seeding matters and has a direct correlation as to who makes the Super Bowl! Crazy stuff. Correlation without clear causation. Look at any given season alone - the #1 seed is the team with the best record. The team with the best record is probably, usually, regarded as the best team. Of course the best team’s going to, generally, perform better than the teams below them. If you took that 16-0 Patriots team (or any other dominant team), and you just switched their seeding with the team in the third seed, without changing anything else - are their SB odds suddenly dropped from 53% to 5%? Too much context to try to use numbers this way. Last year’s #1 seed isn’t necessarily as good (or as bad) as this year’s #1 seed, and you can say that on and on. Again, there probably is a positive to playing at home vs playing on the road. But it makes way more sense that the better teams generally get the better seedings, and if we then assume that better teams also generally do better in the playoffs, then we can deduce that better seeded teams also generally do better in the playoffs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelersfan43 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 minute ago, Yin-Yang said: Correlation without clear causation. Look at any given season alone - the #1 seed is the team with the best record. The team with the best record is probably, usually, regarded as the best team. Of course the best team’s going to, generally, perform better than the teams below them. If you took that 16-0 Patriots team (or any other dominant team), and you just switched their seeding with the team in the third seed, without changing anything else - are their SB odds suddenly dropped from 53% to 5%? Too much context to try to use numbers this way. Last year’s #1 seed isn’t necessarily as good (or as bad) as this year’s #1 seed, and you can say that on and on. Again, there probably is a positive to playing at home vs playing on the road. But it makes way more sense that the better teams generally get the better seedings, and if we then assume that better teams also generally do better in the playoffs, then we can deduce that better seeded teams also generally do better in the playoffs. Yes but for this year in the AFC, there is a big difference between the first and second seed and it's not only for the bye week and homefield, it's in the divisional round, the team that will be in the first seed will most likely have a much less tough matchup than the 2nd seed since the second and 3rd seed will be 2 of his teams between the Bills, Chiefs and Bengals (assuming the Bengals win their division and after the second and third seed win their wild card game) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BILLievers Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: Correlation without clear causation. Look at any given season alone - the #1 seed is the team with the best record. The team with the best record is probably, usually, regarded as the best team. Of course the best team’s going to, generally, perform better than the teams below them. If you took that 16-0 Patriots team (or any other dominant team), and you just switched their seeding with the team in the third seed, without changing anything else - are their SB odds suddenly dropped from 53% to 5%? Too much context to try to use numbers this way. Last year’s #1 seed isn’t necessarily as good (or as bad) as this year’s #1 seed, and you can say that on and on. Again, there probably is a positive to playing at home vs playing on the road. But it makes way more sense that the better teams generally get the better seedings, and if we then assume that better teams also generally do better in the playoffs, then we can deduce that better seeded teams also generally do better in the playoffs. I mean not probably, it def does. But I do agree with what you’re saying and it makes sense. Hypothetical: bills at KC = -2 spread chiefs probably kc at Buffalo = -3 spread bills Vegas would clearly show having home field is a big bonus especially in the conference game. oh well, I’ve had enough back and forth lol I’m sure we’ll get some news tomorrow (hopefully). Edited January 4, 2023 by The BILLievers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drew39k Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 55 minutes ago, Malfatron said: That means that its only 53% history with the one seed vs 47% history with another seed. Thats a coin flip! And to think, the one seed is that much more of a favorite under the old system where both the one and two seeds got a bye. I'd imagine the odds are even more stacked now with only one bye 1 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.