Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
NFC playoffs could see a 5-11 team in and a 12-4 team out (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Raider Nation
- Start date
Kool-Aid Larry
Footballguy
yeah, when brady went down in '08 pats lost the tiebreaker to the dolphins and missed the playoffs with 11 wins
that nfc south is crazy
that nfc south is crazy
Jack White
Footballguy
I'd be in favor of seeding the playoffs based on records and ignoring divisions.
At the very least, seed the playoff teams by record alone. It was ridiculous a few years ago when 7-9 Seattle got to host a playoff game just because it won a rotten division.
At the very least, seed the playoff teams by record alone. It was ridiculous a few years ago when 7-9 Seattle got to host a playoff game just because it won a rotten division.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
No point in having divisions then. I'm not really sure what the purpose of 8 divisions is. Why not have two 16-team conferences?
kutta
Footballguy
Divisions are awesome. Builds rivalries and allows for important games late in the season. It all rotates anyway. In a few years the NFC south will be the best division in football.
Kool-Aid Larry
Footballguy
the point in having divisions is so that more teams are in the hunt down the stretch, which keeps up fan interest.
if there were 2 16 team conferences all 4 nfc south teams would be hopelessly out of contention right now
I agree with teh other poster, though, about letting record determine seeding, while division winners still make the playoffs.
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
Ultimately, does it really matter? Whoever wins the SB is just going to lucksack there way into a championship. The playoffs are so high variance it's amazing that people put so much weight into them. It's like fantasy football playoffs..with more variance.
Ted Lange as your Bartender
Footballguy
Keep the divisions and the seeding system in place, but why couldn't you just do an NFL version of "bowl eligible"?
8 wins minimum to qualify for the playoffs. If a division can't produce an 8-8 team, another wild card team goes in and the top wild card team gets a 4 seed and a first round home game.
8 wins minimum to qualify for the playoffs. If a division can't produce an 8-8 team, another wild card team goes in and the top wild card team gets a 4 seed and a first round home game.
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
I've advocated for something similar... winning your division is still winning your division, so you should get that, but if you are 7-9 or worse, you should NOT host a playoff game.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
That would never get support because those home playoff games make big money, and every team in every division wants a chance at a slice of that pie. And it keeps fan interest up around the NFL.
FUBAR
Footballguy
the fun part will be seeing a 5-11 or 6-10 team get hot at the right time and win the Super Bowl.
FUBAR
Footballguy
We often under estimate the impact OL has on the success of a team. The Falcons and Panthers would be a lot better if they had average or better lines.
chickensoup
Footballguy
Division winners would still get playoff berths, they just wouldn't get an automatic home field spot based off of a weak division.
jurb26
Footballguy
I've complained about the way the NFL has their playoffs set up for years. Most think I'm crazy and it's fine, though. To me it's ludicrous that teams with losing records, in this case pathetic records, can get in the playoffs because of these silly divisions they've set up. If The NFC South sends a team to the postseason and gets to host a game with a say, 5-11 or 6-10 record. I think people will join the fight. It's embarrassing IMO.
zamboni
Footballguy
FUBAR
Footballguy
Add teams in LA, London, Toronto and San Antonio. Each conference would have 3 divisions of 6 teams each.
jon007
Footballguy
The thing that is messed up is with the seeding. The NFC South will produce the 4th seed that will play the 5th seed in the wild card round. The 3rd seed gets screwed here as they will play the 6th seed and possibly a 11-5 / 12-4 team.
This making the 1st round bye more important because you don't won't to be the 3rd or 6th seeds.
This making the 1st round bye more important because you don't won't to be the 3rd or 6th seeds.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jack White
Footballguy
Well, you would still play two games against each division opponent to preserve rivalries.
Mr. Irrelevant
IBL Representative
Yeah, it doesn't seem to me like this is a hard problem to solve.
There's no reason to mess with the divisional format - besides preserving rivalries, eight 4-team divisions is the cleanest way to make a 16-game schedule fair, non-arbitrary, and predictable years in advance. That's a lot harder to pull off with four 8's, six 6's, etc.
All you have to do is seed each conference 1-6 based on overall record come playoff time (with H2H followed by SOS as tie-breakers). The #3 and #4 seeds get home games regardless of whether they won their division or finished in 3rd place.
Personally, on top of that I'd set an 8-win qualifying threshold for the playoffs and have a third wild card take the place of any sub-.500 division winner, but that's just me.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
The top NFC WC team would play @ the NFC south, right?
Dondante
Footballguy
This is why it'll never change. I'm fine with the division winner getting into the tournament, but each side needs to re-seed for it. Low record should essentially be a wildcard team regardless of division championship.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Johnny Blood
Footballguy
The last time a team with a losing record made the playoffs all that happened was they won in the first round, then won a Super Bowl the next year and were a juggernaut everyone drooled over.
John 14:6
Jesus is Lord!
My thoughts exactly...
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
36 team NFL gets us 6 divisions of 6... which would be awesome
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Yes. I'd love to see GB go into Atlanta. My guess is the Packers would open at -7 or so, and might get bet up to near double-digits on the road.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Insein
Footballguy
Seattle won the division at 7-9 in 2010. They missed the playoffs the following year at 7-9. They won the super bowl in 2013.
Insein
Footballguy
10 division games 4 other Conference games and 2 non conference. Messy but maybe.
And Lynch caused an earthquake.
It would be interesting if Saints win their division and Seattle has to go there to play, the media would eat that story up.
Mr. Irrelevant
IBL Representative
Part of the reason the NFL went to the current format was the constant griping from fans (and, more importantly, owners) about how infrequently they got to play against (and, in their case, travel to) teams in the other conference. I doubt you'd find much support for a schedule with an 18-year cycle for hosting non-conference opponents.
Six 6's almost cries out for each division playing 10 in-division games and the 6 teams in one of the other five divisions on a rotating basis ... yeah, it works, but with that setup "conferences" become kind of a notional concept.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein
Footballguy
spodog
Footballguy
PlasmaDogPlasma
Footballguy
Run It Up
Footballguy
I would like keeping the playoffs as it is and having homefield advantage be determined by record. Matchups still go based off seed.
So if the 5-10-1 Panthers make it into the playoffs as the #4 seed they still play the 10-6 wildcard Niners in San Fran
Maintains the current system that creates late season interest while not doubling down on rewarding teams for playing in a bad division that year.
So if the 5-10-1 Panthers make it into the playoffs as the #4 seed they still play the 10-6 wildcard Niners in San Fran
Maintains the current system that creates late season interest while not doubling down on rewarding teams for playing in a bad division that year.
Last edited by a moderator:
Maelstrom
Footballguy
You guys are all assuming it would stay at 16 games if they added teams. Think 18, with only 2 pre-season games.
10 in-division games
6 games with rotating divisions
I could also see 3 games from 2 different divisions based on last year's record
2 non-conference games
Personally, I like that the divisions matter. It makes for good rivalries and even though you get a stinker division once in a while, that's the price you pay. Keep the emphasis on division play.
FairWarning
Footballguy
Simple solution is have the better record host the playoff game. If a 9-7 division winner plays a 9-7 WC team, the 1st tiebreaker to host a game is division winner
jurb26
Footballguy
I don't agree with this at all. The objective should be to put the best 6 teams from each conference into the playoffs. Teams getting in with losing records because they won a ridiculously small and weak division is BS.
Run It Up
Footballguy
I don't agree with your sentiment, if divisions exist then they should matter.
If we want the best 6 teams to make it to the playoffs then eliminate divisions.
Maelstrom
Footballguy
There are a lot of reasons to emphasize the divisions, and having the division winner get into the playoffs is the biggest way to emphasize it that they have. If you are the 7th team behind that team, sure you may have reason to cry, but tough luck. Win your division next time and you guarantee yourself a spot.
Similar threads
