North American
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
09 Jan 11
00:56
Joined:
Date Joined:
22 Jun 02
Well done Seattle but no doubt their huge home advantage was the difference, they would have got smashed in New Orleans.
Does this add weight to the argument that division winners should not be given the #3 and #4 seeds? It seems enough of an advantage that a team in a poor division gets 6 easy games and an easier route into the playoffs, should they also benefit from homefield against a superior team?
Does this add weight to the argument that division winners should not be given the #3 and #4 seeds? It seems enough of an advantage that a team in a poor division gets 6 easy games and an easier route into the playoffs, should they also benefit from homefield against a superior team?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 19
|
By:
Nope, argument works the other way as well. In many seasons you would have a wild-card with a better record than a division winner - the reason usually being they have a couple of "soft" division matches, as compared to the winner of a tough division. The 'double disadvantage' you speak of would happen more often.
In general making laws/rules aroound exceptions is dubious at best. Thats my thoughts anyway. |
|
By:
not for me. if they wanted to play at home they should have won their division.
|
|
By:
Should be changed IMO
The winner of a weak division already gets into playoffs (I've no issue with this) but they shouldn't be rewarded with a home game as well |
|
By:
Thats where it gets complicated, a weak division is not necessarily defined by the record of the winner, that would be unfair. It's the record of the teams against other non-division teams. Messy.
|
|
By:
Come's back to : If you want to WIN a Superbowl you have to play to WIN resting on Repution is for " Mug's "
You have to take the Chance when it's there ! This is Why any Non - American coach would ' Blow these Guy's ' out of the water ! |
|
By:
they all know what happens...its crazy...tampa dont make the playoffs just cos they are in a good division yet seahawks make it
 |
|
By:
Wallflower 09 Jan 11 01:07
Nope, argument works the other way as well. In many seasons you would have a wild-card with a better record than a division winner - the reason usually being they have a couple of "soft" division matches, as compared to the winner of a tough division. ------------------------ Fair point but it's a lot less common that way round. A division winner with a poor record (say 10 wins or less) is more likely to be in a poor division than a very tough one. Look at this year for example, all 4 WC matches would be flipped and the markets agree that the WC team is better in all 4 matchups. Have looked at the previous few seasons and it's a similar story, the WC team is normally better than the division winner (when they have a better record). Surely it follows that the BETTER team should get home advantage? |
|
By:
Scrap the divisions and seed them 1 to 6 in the conference, you could still keep home and home rivalry games.
|
|
By:
Dolphins can't get out of the division either most years but thats the way it is
 Some day though some day!! |
|
By:
What goes around...
The argument has come up only because THIS year's NFC West is so poor. But in other years it will be another division. It's a massive fluke that all of the Rams, 49ers, Seahawks and Cardinals are in a rebuilding phase at the moment. This time next year I expect at least one of those sides to have a winning record. And let's not forget that FOUR of the last eleven NFC Championship games were won by teams from the NFC West. So it's not like the West or the division system is always so badly flawed. I like it as it is - you win your division, you get homefield advantage. You might not get a week off as well but that's where the seeding DOES come into effect. The point is, that the West got a bit of a free pass this year, but next year it will be someone else. It always evens out, over time. |
|
By:
Just to add (because I've only just heard it!) - the NFC West has the BEST record since 2005 in playoff games in the whole of the NFL. 9-6. What goes around...
|
|
By:
There's not much wrong with the NFL and I would keep curret qualification and seeding as it is.
As for Saints, they may well have won in the dome but the great thing about the sport is the fact teams travel to domes, CA/FL states, cold North and North East, to win superbowl you have to win in all conditions and Saints have proved they're unable to do that, last year they faced no cold weather games en route to their superbowl win |
|
By:
no,no,no most definately not!!!
if u goin to go in that direction u may as well just have 1 division and make playoffs purely based on overall record nothing wrong with the way it is.the main benefit is that most games mean something till the end of reg season |
|
By:
Also, it keeps the divison match-ups so important...the battle within the battle.
(What about the English Premiership moving to a divisonal based system, and away from a league woth a myriad of meaningless matches  . Wouldnt care its unwatchable anyway unless you're having a punt |
|
By:
It's all swings and roundabouts. You think Indy complained when they got the away tie to Seattle?
|
|
By:
indy @ seattle !!!!!
|
|
By:
not that long ago the nfc west was a tough division and the nfc south was the easy one. its just the way the biscuit breaks.
|
|
By:
But it's irrelevant whether one division is weak or not. It's not about one division in this season.
An 11-5 team shouldn't have to travel to a 7-9 team (nor should a 11-5 team (Jets) have to travel to a 10-6 team (Colts) nor should a 12-4 team (Ravens) have to travel to a 10-6 team (Chiefs)) |
|
By:
It is completely relevant - it is division-based league, not one league of 16 teams.
|