Jump to content

NFL should remove seeding priority from division winners


pf9

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, pf9 said:

Besides, people were fine with wild card teams opening the playoffs at home (and division winners on the road) when there were just six divisions. We will be fine with that now.

Not at the expense of division winners.  Also, when it was introduced initially we weekend was literally 2 WC:s facing off with the other division winners getting the week off before expanding.  Your arguments are getting weirder and still failing to make a legitimate argument for why a WC team deserves a home game.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CasperX22 said:

Not at the expense of division winners.  Also, when it was introduced initially we weekend was literally 2 WC:s facing off with the other division winners getting the week off before expanding.  Your arguments are getting weirder and still failing to make a legitimate argument for why a WC team deserves a home game.

They're only illegitimate to you.

Without seeding priority for division winners, the same division producing the top 2 seeds and having them meet in the conference title game would create perhaps the biggest game in the history of that division rivalry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, CasperX22 said:

No I just don't think you understand the purpose of playoffs.  You also have failed to in any way answer my question which tells me your only argument for why you want to reseed playoff teams is because you don't like the format.  That's not a reason.

The purpose of the playoffs is to determine a champion - that's it.

Again, there is precedent. And in many things precedent matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you clearly don't not.  Divisions were created for a reason and you clearly do not get that.  There isn't even precedent for what you are suggesting 😂.  You have zero leg to stand on whatsoever, and i'm even giving you an out, but you clearly have nothing.  You're clearly wasting everyone's time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pretty simple and it's the same answer every single time this notion is brought up. 

1. Every team faces a different schedule. 

2. The teams within a division have the closest schedule to each other. 

3. The fairest comparison between teams for playoff placement is to compare the 4 teams with almost identical schedules, that also face each other multiple times. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/29/2023 at 8:39 PM, Football_Bachelor08 said:

I agree wholeheartedly. The current format rewards teams who played mediocre football as long as they ended up being the least mediocre in their group. Meanwhile it punishes 11 or 12 win teams for the crime of playing in a tougher division 

You do realize this scenario is just as likely. 

A) A team in one division finishes 10-7 against a very difficult schedule and secures a top 4 seed. 

B) A seperate division has all of it's teams playing a piss easy schedule because they got a good draw in the opposite conference division (something mediocre like the NFC South) and they all feasted so you have a 13 win team, an 11 win team and a 10 win team. All 3 end up as wildcards. 

You aren't comparing apples to apples either way. The 3 other teams in a division are always going to be the fairest comparison for any team. Hence why, winning the division has the most weight when it comes to the playoffs. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ravens are winning 35-13 as we speak.

The Browns are on their way to having the longest active home playoff game drought.

At this rate the NFL should just move this season's Super Bowl to Cleveland and give 62 to Las Vegas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pf9 said:

The Ravens are winning 35-13 as we speak.

The Browns are on their way to having the longest active home playoff game drought.

At this rate the NFL should just move this season's Super Bowl to Cleveland and give 62 to Las Vegas.

So the Browns should host the Ravens no doubt right?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, INbengalfan said:

So the Browns should host the Ravens no doubt right?

That's not how my proposal works. What I am saying is the 7 playoff teams in each conference should be seeded according to their record, with tie-breakers if needed, without guaranteeing a top 4 seed for division winners.

I applaud the NBA for having realized the problems with seeding priority for division winners. But in that league at least every playoff participant is guaranteed a home game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, pf9 said:

That's not how my proposal works. What I am saying is the 7 playoff teams in each conference should be seeded according to their record, with tie-breakers if needed, without guaranteeing a top 4 seed for division winners.

I applaud the NBA for having realized the problems with seeding priority for division winners. But in that league at least every playoff participant is guaranteed a home game.

I have 10 pages this year, countless more from years past to understand the proposal.  

 

So what is the point of the post I quoted?  That Cleveland deserves to host the Super Bowl?  What an empty take.  

 

I mean, Indy lost their starting QB, was left for dead several games behind the Jags, and yet are tied for the division title with one game to play.  Should the league arbitrarily move the SB there too?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, INbengalfan said:

I have 10 pages this year, countless more from years past to understand the proposal.  

 

So what is the point of the post I quoted?  That Cleveland deserves to host the Super Bowl?  What an empty take.  

 

I mean, Indy lost their starting QB, was left for dead several games behind the Jags, and yet are tied for the division title with one game to play.  Should the league arbitrarily move the SB there too?

Cleveland Browns Stadium is the oldest NFL stadium never to have hosted a playoff game of any sort. This is a by-product of the NFL not handling the Modell situation correctly.

What the NFL should have done in 1995 was force Modell to sell the Browns to an owner willing to keep the team in Cleveland, while the team would temporarily play games at Ohio State while the new stadium was under construction, where the Browns would have been treated to OSU's gameday traditions in the process, while Modell is awarded a version of the Ravens built through an expansion draft in 1998, meaning Memorial Stadium would never see a Ravens game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...