Mac the Knife Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 A follow-up on my thread a few weeks ago... based on the standings currently listed on NFL.com and making the presumption that the Patriots beat the Bills and the Titans beat Denver Monday night - not gimmes but...In the AFC...-- New England (10-0-0) would be the AFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Indianapolis (8-2-0) would be the AFC South champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye-- Pittsburgh (7-3-0) would be the AFC North champs and the #3 seed,-- San Diego (5-5-0) would be the AFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- Jacksonville (7-3-0) and Tennessee (7-3-0) would each earn a wild-card berth and be either the #5 or #6 seed, depending on the outcome of common games (games against common opponents) bewteen the two.In the NFC...-- Dallas (9-1-0) would be the NFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Green Bay (9-1-0) would be the NFC North champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye. The Packers lose out to the Cowboys on the basis of conference record tiebreaker, 7-0-0 to 6-1-0.-- Tampa (6-4-0) would be the NFC South champs and the #3 seed,-- Seattle (6-4-0) would be the NFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- New York (7-3-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #5 seed, and-- Detroit (6-4-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #6 seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coast2CoastAM2006 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 A follow-up on my thread a few weeks ago... based on the standings currently listed on NFL.com and making the presumption that the Patriots beat the Bills and the Titans beat Denver Monday night - not gimmes but...In the AFC...-- New England (10-0-0) would be the AFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Indianapolis (8-2-0) would be the AFC South champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye-- Pittsburgh (7-3-0) would be the AFC North champs and the #3 seed,-- San Diego (5-5-0) would be the AFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- Jacksonville (7-3-0) and Tennessee (7-3-0) would each earn a wild-card berth and be either the #5 or #6 seed, depending on the outcome of common games (games against common opponents) bewteen the two.In the NFC...-- Dallas (9-1-0) would be the NFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Green Bay (9-1-0) would be the NFC North champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye. The Packers lose out to the Cowboys on the basis of conference record tiebreaker, 7-0-0 to 6-1-0.-- Tampa (6-4-0) would be the NFC South champs and the #3 seed,-- Seattle (6-4-0) would be the NFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- New York (7-3-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #5 seed, and-- Detroit (6-4-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #6 seed.this is why i don't like divisional winners taking up the top 4 seeds. In the case of San Diego, they are 5-5 and yet Jax and Tennessee are 7-3 and far superior teams and they are only getting the bottom two seeds while San Diego gets the 4th seed. SD should be getting the 6th seed at best if any at all. in the NFC, New York should at least be getting the 3rd seed while tampa, seattle, and detroit occupy the final 3 spots. I could see the case of just letting teams with the 6 best records get in to the playoffs despite what happens in the division. Spoilers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemundo219 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 A follow-up on my thread a few weeks ago... based on the standings currently listed on NFL.com and making the presumption that the Patriots beat the Bills and the Titans beat Denver Monday night - not gimmes but...In the AFC...-- New England (10-0-0) would be the AFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Indianapolis (8-2-0) would be the AFC South champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye-- Pittsburgh (7-3-0) would be the AFC North champs and the #3 seed,-- San Diego (5-5-0) would be the AFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- Jacksonville (7-3-0) and Tennessee (7-3-0) would each earn a wild-card berth and be either the #5 or #6 seed, depending on the outcome of common games (games against common opponents) between the two.In the NFC...-- Dallas (9-1-0) would be the NFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Green Bay (9-1-0) would be the NFC North champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye. The Packers lose out to the Cowboys on the basis of conference record tiebreaker, 7-0-0 to 6-1-0.-- Tampa (6-4-0) would be the NFC South champs and the #3 seed,-- Seattle (6-4-0) would be the NFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- New York (7-3-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #5 seed, and-- Detroit (6-4-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #6 seed.this is why i don't like divisional winners taking up the top 4 seeds. In the case of San Diego, they are 5-5 and yet Jax and Tennessee are 7-3 and far superior teams and they are only getting the bottom two seeds while San Diego gets the 4th seed. SD should be getting the 6th seed at best if any at all. in the NFC, New York should at least be getting the 3rd seed while Tampa, Seattle, and Detroit occupy the final 3 spots. I could see the case of just letting teams with the 6 best records get in to the playoffs despite what happens in the division.I understand where you're coming from but then, what would be the point of a division championship? When you're playing in a certain division, you can't really control the records and play of second and third place teams in other divisions. If they just went by record, again what would be the point of divisions? What would be the reward for being the best in your division? The only way to make someone like you happy is to destroy the divisional alignment (and I think die-hard fans who cherish "traditional" rivalries wouldn't like this idea) or merge the four divisions into 2 then there would be only two division champs and the chance of the division champ having a bad record would be more less likely. College sports as we know them are just about dead. The lid is off on all the corruption that taints just about every major program and every decision that the schools or the NCAA make is only about money, money, and more money. We'll have three 16+ team super-conferences sooner rather than later, killing much of the regional flair and traditional rivalries that make college sports unique and showing the door to any school that doesn't bring money to the table in the process. Pretty soon the smaller schools are going to have to consider forming their own sanctioning body to keep the true spirit of college sports alive because the NCAA will only get worse in it's excess from here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coast2CoastAM2006 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I understand where you're coming from but then, what would be the point of a division championship? When you're playing in a certain division, you can't really control the records and play of second and third place teams in other divisions. If they just went by record, again what would be the point of divisions? What would be the reward for being the best in your division? The only way to make someone like you happy is to destroy the divisional alignment (and I think die-hard fans who cherish "traditional" rivalries wouldn't like this idea) or merge the four divisions into 2 then there would be only two division champs and the chance of the division champ having a bad record would be more less likely.thats pretty much what would have to happen. i personally don't care about division rivaries, thats just me. to me a division rival is here or there, i could get excited over a dallas/new england game as much if not more than a dallas/redskins game. again thats me, the nfl isn't going to radically alter the divisions anyway so its a moot point. whats interesting though with all these weak division winners, the wild card winners generally are showing why they are a far superior team than alot of these division winners. which doesn't surprise me when Pittsburgh can win a super bowl from the wild card spot. Spoilers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShinyHubCaps Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Yeah, the wild card winners should be as relevant as the division winners. Give the division winners the home field, and see if the non-division winners can do anything to bump them off... although you can't fault New York, for example, for being in the same division as the Cowboys. If they want a higher seed, they should beat the division leaders, because they play them twice a year.Would it be any different for Dallas and Green Bay if the Packers beat Dallas in two weeks? Or are tiebreakers not like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nolegboy Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 A follow-up on my thread a few weeks ago... based on the standings currently listed on NFL.com and making the presumption that the Patriots beat the Bills and the Titans beat Denver Monday night - not gimmes but...In the AFC...-- New England (10-0-0) would be the AFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Indianapolis (8-2-0) would be the AFC South champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye-- Pittsburgh (7-3-0) would be the AFC North champs and the #3 seed,-- San Diego (5-5-0) would be the AFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- Jacksonville (7-3-0) and Tennessee (7-3-0) would each earn a wild-card berth and be either the #5 or #6 seed, depending on the outcome of common games (games against common opponents) bewteen the two.In the NFC...-- Dallas (9-1-0) would be the NFC East champs and the #1 seed, earning a bye-- Green Bay (9-1-0) would be the NFC North champs and the #2 seed, earning a bye. The Packers lose out to the Cowboys on the basis of conference record tiebreaker, 7-0-0 to 6-1-0.-- Tampa (6-4-0) would be the NFC South champs and the #3 seed,-- Seattle (6-4-0) would be the NFC West champs and the #4 seed,-- New York (7-3-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #5 seed, and-- Detroit (6-4-0) would earn a wild-card berth and the #6 seed.And if the Broncos win they'll be a 5-5 team (though losing a current head to head tie breaker with SD) and Jax gets in at the 5 seed by virtue of a better record than Cleveland and Ten. The Browns and Titans haven't met and would both be .500 in conference & they only have one common opponent- so it goes to strength of schedule...and this tells us that it's at least a month too early to be doing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted November 19, 2007 Author Share Posted November 19, 2007 Personally I'd like to see the line between the AFC & NFC eliminated when it comes to playoff qualification for wild-cards... have 8 division champions, but have the 4 wild-cards come from whatever division. Seed the division champs 1-8 and the cards 9-12, giving the #1 - #4 seeds a bye in the first round. The odds of seeing the two best teams in football in the Super Bowl each year, or at least the "team that beat the team" as it were, would increase tremendously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illwauk Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Yeah, the wild card winners should be as relevant as the division winners. Give the division winners the home field, and see if the non-division winners can do anything to bump them off... although you can't fault New York, for example, for being in the same division as the Cowboys. If they want a higher seed, they should beat the division leaders, because they play them twice a year.Would it be any different for Dallas and Green Bay if the Packers beat Dallas in two weeks? Or are tiebreakers not like that?Head to head record is the first tiebreaker. So yes, the Packers would take over the spot assuming they had the same (or better) record as the 'boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormone Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Question...why would Seattle be ranked under Tampa when they beat Tampa head to head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted November 20, 2007 Author Share Posted November 20, 2007 Question...why would Seattle be ranked under Tampa when they beat Tampa head to head?They wouldn't - I just listed them as NFL.com had them at the time I posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nolegboy Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Personally I'd like to see the line between the AFC & NFC eliminated when it comes to playoff qualification for wild-cards... have 8 division champions, but have the 4 wild-cards come from whatever division. Seed the division champs 1-8 and the cards 9-12, giving the #1 - #4 seeds a bye in the first round.I like that. More often than not, I'd say...your "best" (or most exciting) matchup is a conference championship...AFC lately, NFC in the 80s and 90s. The problem would be a new format for tiebreaking procedures...obviously, after head to head- you couldn't use conference records. Would you use strength of schedule?? Common opponents? Would you re-seed after the opening round games??#1 N.E. #8 San Diego vs. #9 NY Giants#4 Indy #5 Pittsburgh vs. #12 Cle/Det/Ten#2 Dallas #7 Tampa vs. #10 Jacksonville#3 Green Bay #6 Seattle vs. #11 Cle/Det/TenAs it sets up now, I don't know that it creates much better matchups than the current system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted November 20, 2007 Author Share Posted November 20, 2007 If you eliminated the AFC/NFC distinction for wild-card tiebreakers, you'd almost have to use something along the lines of:(1) Head-to-Head.(2) Best record against common opponents (minimum of three).(3) Strength of Victory.(4) Strength of Schedule.(5) Best Average Net Points (points scored less points allowed) against common opponents.(6) Best Average Net Points, all games.(7) Coin toss.Of course swapping some stuff around as desired; the point being that these types of categories are the only ones that could be universally, uniformly applied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.