All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > NFL should seed by record
12/19/2013 12:31 PM
Posted by AlCheez on 12/19/2013 10:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 12/19/2013 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Indy had 2 games against Houston, 2 games against Jacksonville, and 2 games against Tennessee.  Sure the NFC west is pretty tough, but their own division is terrible and should give them 6 wins right there. 
KC had a game each against those teams since those divisions played each other.  So, they had 7 games in common (one against each other, 1 each against the 3 teams in each of their divisions)

The remaining 9 games: 
KC: Denver, San Diego, Oakland, Philly, NYG, Dallas, Washington, Buffalo, Cleveland (combined record 54-90)
Indy: Houston, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Seattle, SF, Arizona, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Miami (combined record 65-79)

Yeah, the very bottom of Indy's schedule is awful which drags the overall record down, but there's no comparison at the top - and Indy has actually defeated some of those top tier opponents.


sure and they lost to some crappy teams. 
12/19/2013 12:51 PM
Their worst loss is St. Louis - not good, but St. Louis might be a .500 team in a different division.  They also lost to San Diego - so did KC.  Other three losses are to Cincinnati, Miami, and Arizona, 2 teams who are better record wise than anyone KC has beaten, and one who is even with their best win.  And again, KC will still finish ahead of Indy even if they lose to them this week.

And let's not forget, you're not just wanting to put them ahead of Indy - you're wanting to put them in the running for a bye - unless you only want to seed the 3-6 by record...
12/20/2013 10:35 AM
All true, but when Kansas City beats Indianapolis, it will look a little different.  And what if KC wins out but Denver slips up and at 12-4 has to travel in the first round (maybe even to Baltimore a team they crushed earlier this year). 

Or how about  a possible 12-4 San Francisco being relegated to go to an at best 10-6 team in the first round.

12/20/2013 10:38 AM
Why have divisions if a division championship means nothing?  
12/20/2013 10:59 AM
Posted by moranis on 12/20/2013 10:35:00 AM (view original):
All true, but when Kansas City beats Indianapolis, it will look a little different.  And what if KC wins out but Denver slips up and at 12-4 has to travel in the first round (maybe even to Baltimore a team they crushed earlier this year). 

Or how about  a possible 12-4 San Francisco being relegated to go to an at best 10-6 team in the first round.

You want me to have sympathy for a Denver team that would have just lost to either Oakland or Houston?  I don't really know what to say to that.   I'm glad that you did realize that KC as a #2 seed is pretty much indefensible since you just let that one go.

San Francisco is a better argument - should have gone there first.  But regardless, schedules are too disparate in the NFL for me to agree that record should drive everything.  I wouldn't care that much if they started using it to determine home field in the first round, but I don't think the top two seeds should be able to come from the same division.
 

12/20/2013 11:01 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/20/2013 10:38:00 AM (view original):
Why have divisions if a division championship means nothing?  
This.  Fighting for the division is fun.  And when you play your division 6 out of 16 times, winning it should mean something.  Home-field in a playoff game.
12/20/2013 1:58 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/19/2013 11:55:00 AM (view original):
As an aside - ever since Seattle made the playoffs at 7-9, I've felt this way - if you win your division and you have a losing record, you don't get in.  The next wild card team does.  There's little reason why a team that can't win half their games deserves a playoff spot over teams that go 10-6.  The best WC team gets a home playoff game against the next best wild card team.
This gave us the Beastquake game though!  It would totally be fitting that the NFL would change rules because of Seattle.  We're like the redheaded stepchild out here.  Sometimes referred to South Alaska!
12/20/2013 7:41 PM (edited)
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/20/2013 10:38:00 AM (view original):
Why have divisions if a division championship means nothing?  
It would mean you are automatically in the playoffs no matter your record.  So that 7-9 Seattle would be in the playoffs (instead of10-6 NY or 10-6 Tampa) they just wouldn't be hosting a playoff game against a 11-5 New Orleans team that had beaten Seattle by 15 during the season.
12/21/2013 12:48 AM
Posted by moranis on 12/20/2013 7:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/20/2013 10:38:00 AM (view original):
Why have divisions if a division championship means nothing?  
It would mean you are automatically in the playoffs no matter your record.  So that 7-9 Seattle would be in the playoffs (instead of10-6 NY or 10-6 Tampa) they just wouldn't be hosting a playoff game against a 11-5 New Orleans team that had beaten Seattle by 15 during the season.
Burnsy's post on the previous page said if a division winner is worse than the 7th place team, they don't get in. That's pointless.

Bottom line: Win the games you need to win. SF lost winnable games at home to Indy and Carolina, and got blown out of the water in Seattle. And as was previously pointed out, if KC beats Denver even once, they're in the driver's seat for top seed.

The only way to create a truly "fair" playoff scenario would be to have two 16 team conferences, no divisions, each team plays every other team in the conference once, with the 16th game against the team in the other conference who finished at the same place in the standings the previous year. Then you let the top 6 in each conference in.

As long as there are divisions, winning the division has to mean something.
12/21/2013 9:36 AM
Posted by Jtpsops on 12/21/2013 12:49:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 12/20/2013 7:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/20/2013 10:38:00 AM (view original):
Why have divisions if a division championship means nothing?  
It would mean you are automatically in the playoffs no matter your record.  So that 7-9 Seattle would be in the playoffs (instead of10-6 NY or 10-6 Tampa) they just wouldn't be hosting a playoff game against a 11-5 New Orleans team that had beaten Seattle by 15 during the season.
Burnsy's post on the previous page said if a division winner is worse than the 7th place team, they don't get in. That's pointless.

Bottom line: Win the games you need to win. SF lost winnable games at home to Indy and Carolina, and got blown out of the water in Seattle. And as was previously pointed out, if KC beats Denver even once, they're in the driver's seat for top seed.

The only way to create a truly "fair" playoff scenario would be to have two 16 team conferences, no divisions, each team plays every other team in the conference once, with the 16th game against the team in the other conference who finished at the same place in the standings the previous year. Then you let the top 6 in each conference in.

As long as there are divisions, winning the division has to mean something.
Right, it means you are in the playoffs.  It certainly doesn't have to mean you get a home game.

You want to point out the Niners, but look at all the games the Eagles and Bears **** the bed this year, yet one of them would be hosting the Niners and the other the Panthers, two teams with significantly better records. 
12/21/2013 11:17 AM
Unlike other sports, it's a one game series.    You give the fanbase something by giving them a home game in the playoffs for winning the division.   Think of it as more of a reward for the fans rather than justice for the teams.
12/21/2013 11:55 AM
Honestly, it's a reactionary thing. Seahawks fans would complain if they end up as the 5 seed this year and go on the road, but they weren't complaining when they won the division at 7-9 a few years back.

As a Broncos fan, I've seen it both ways - the 8-8 team upsetting Pittsburgh in Denver a few years ago, and the Broncos being a 12-4 WC team in 1997, when KC was 13-3 (very similar to this year, so far). I'm fine with the current setup.
12/22/2013 5:48 PM
Posted by moranis on 12/20/2013 10:35:00 AM (view original):
All true, but when Kansas City beats Indianapolis, it will look a little different.  And what if KC wins out but Denver slips up and at 12-4 has to travel in the first round (maybe even to Baltimore a team they crushed earlier this year). 

Or how about  a possible 12-4 San Francisco being relegated to go to an at best 10-6 team in the first round.

Heh. "when Kansas City beats Indianapolis."

Oops.
12/23/2013 6:36 PM
If Arizona had any fans, THEY would be the ones compaining about the playoff structure.  They could go 11-5 and miss the playoffs completely.
12/23/2013 6:52 PM
They could go 11-5 and still finish third in their division.  Mystery solved.
of 2
All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > NFL should seed by record

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.