NFL Scheduling Quirk - Patriots @ Indy for three years straight

[neuronet]

Of course we've been here before:
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...s-have-tough-schedule-2009-a.html#post1197289

 

[SHOWTIME15]

You have a source to share on that?:singing:

no i'm wrong. i thought we played five straight in indy.

 

[ScottieC]

I think it's just random. We played home vs. SD in 07 and then @ SD in 08 so there's no specific pattern when it comes to home/away.

It's not random.

The only thing Random about the NFL is the way they call penalties and distribute fines.

 

[Patsrock]

I think it's just random. We played home vs. SD in 07 and then @ SD in 08 so there's no specific pattern when it comes to home/away.

If the Pats and SD had finished in the same slot (i.e 1st and 1st 2nd and 2nd) The Pats would have played @SD again this year. Here is how the Pats schedule was since 2002.

vs NFC teams

2002 NFCN (@Chi, @Det)(GB, Min) reverse for 2006
2003 NFCE (@Phil, @Was)(NYG,Dal) reverse for 2007
2004 NFCW(@STL, @AZ)(Sea, SF) reverse for 2008
2005 NFCS(@Car, @ATL)(NO,TB) reverse for 2009

vs AFC teams
2002,2008 AFCW(@SD, @Oak)(Den, KC) reverse for 2005
2003,2009 AFCS (@Indy,@Hou)(Jac, Tenn) reverse for 2006
2004 AFCN(@Pitt, @Clev)(Cincy,Balt) reverse for 2007

vs AFC like finishing teams

2002 @AFCS 1st(Tenn) AFCN 1st (Pitts)
2003 @AFCW 2nd(Den) AFCN 2nd (Clev)
2004 @AFCW 1st (KC) AFCS 1st (Indy)
2005 @AFCN 1st (Pitts) AFCS 1st (Indy)
2006 @AFCN 1st(Cincy) AFCW 1st (Den)
2007 @AFCS 1st (Indy) AFCW 1st (SD)
2008 @AFCS 1st (Indy) AFCN 1st (Pitts)
2009 @AFCW 2nd (Den) AFCN 2nd (Balt)

 

[jmt57]

It's not random.

This year the Pats are playing the Colts as part of the division rotation (AFC East teams vs AFC South teams.) This happens every three years with one home and one away game every six years against each of those teams. In 2006 the Pats were in Foxboro for the Colts and Texans, and at Jacksonville and Tennessee. In 2009 (and 2003) it is/was the reverse.

The other part of the equation is the final two games of every team's schedule, where teams that finished first the previous season face each other, as do teams that finished second, third and fourth in their divisions. For 2009 that results in the Pats playing Denver and Baltimore. One of each of these games is home and the other is away. It is this portion of the schedule that resulted in the Pats playing the Colts in 2008, 2007, 2005 and 2004 as both teams finished first in their division the previous year.

The 'quirk' is the fact that the 1st place AFC East team was at the 1st place AFC South team two years in a row. Here are the schedules of the 1st place AFC East team the last few years, and you can see why that happens:

2009: at AFC west; home vs AFC north
2008: at AFC south, home vs AFC north
2007: at AFC south, home vs AFC west
2006: at AFC north, home vs AFC west
2005: at AFC north, home vs AFC south
2004: at AFC west, home vs AFC south
2003: at AFC west, home vs AFC north

As you can see, there is a very specific pattern - nothing random at all to the schedule. It is similar to the fact that once every eight years AFC East teams have to play both the AFC West and NFC West (and vise versa.) There is no conspiracy, and nobody in the NFL offices is trying to help or hurt a specific team.

Now you can argue perhaps that the pattern should have been set up differently, but I would counter that by saying that at the time very few expected so many AFC teams to dominate their divisions for a lengthy time. The NFL had been set up for parity with the salary cap, free agency, and reverse order of standings for the draft to insure that few teams remained on top, or on the bottom, for very long. Obviously that did not happen as the best organizations figured out how to remain competitive within the salary cap era, while those that did not seldom won their divisions.

 

[upstater1]

Is there a medicine a doctor can prescribe for involuntary knee jerking?

Jeez, sometimes the responses are written before the first poster even hits send.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I get what you are saying where it is quirky, but I'm not sure there is a better solution.

Actually, there is, and Patsrock did the legwork to show it.

If the Pats and SD had finished in the same slot (i.e 1st and 1st 2nd and 2nd) The Pats would have played @SD again this year. Here is how the Pats schedule was since 2002.

vs AFC like finishing teams

2002 @AFCS 1st(Tenn) AFCN 1st (Pitts)
2003 @AFCW 2nd(Den) AFCN 2nd (Clev) [played all South teams]
2004 @AFCW 1st (KC) AFCS 1st (Indy)
2005 @AFCN 1st (Pitts) AFCS 1st (Indy)
2006 @AFCN 1st(Cincy) AFCW 1st (Den) [played all South teams]
2007 @AFCS 1st (Indy) AFCW 1st (SD)
2008 @AFCS 1st (Indy) AFCN 1st (Pitts)
2009 @AFCW 2nd (Den) AFCN 2nd (Balt) [play all South teams]

Note that in the two intervening years between playing an entire division, both years have the same host for the matches (i.e., NE in 2004, 2005; IND in 2007, 2008). If they switched that around (e.g., AFCE@AFCS then AFCS@AFCE), you'd never have this bizarre situation.

Then again, it's still better than the pre-2002 days, when you had the spectacle of NE@PIT something like nine times in a row.

 

[jmt57]

Note that in the two intervening years between playing an entire division, both years have the same host for the matches (i.e., NE in 2004, 2005; IND in 2007, 2008). If they switched that around (e.g., AFCE@AFCS then AFCS@AFCE), you'd never have this bizarre situation.

So rather than this current setup of AFC east first place teams:
2009: at AFC west; home vs AFC north
2008: at AFC south, home vs AFC north
2007: at AFC south, home vs AFC west
2006: at AFC north, home vs AFC west
2005: at AFC north, home vs AFC south
2004: at AFC west, home vs AFC south
2003: at AFC west, home vs AFC north

The NFL could adjust to something like this, perhaps:
2009: at AFC west; home vs AFC north
2008: at AFC north, home vs AFC south
2007: at AFC south, home vs AFC west
2006: at AFC west, home vs AFC north
2005: at AFC north, home vs AFC south
2004: at AFC south, home vs AFC west
2003: at AFC west, home vs AFC north

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I see, thanks for the explanations.

So following the pattern in 2010 we will be at AFC west, home vs AFC south for the teams that finish alike in their division... therefore if we and Indy finish alike they'll be coming to Foxboro?

 

[godef]

OK - I know enough about the schedule making process to understand why the Pats have had to play @ Indy each year since 2007.

Of course, one can't claim its unfair - given that Indy played at Foxboro three years straight (2004-2006)

2003 it was Pats @ Indy. 2002 was the last time we didn't have a regular season Indy game (the year after the Colts left the division). So what's up with the NFL schedule makers? Presumably next year is @ Foxboro assuming they play each other - but what's with the three year cycles?

Your presumption is correct.

The reason we have played the Colts continuously for so many years is because both teams typically wind up in 1st place. In 2 out of 3 consecutive seasons, you play the team in another division in the conference that's in the same position as you.

In the 1 out of 3 seasons, you play round robin vs that division. That's what is happening this year. In 2006, the last time we played the South in round-robin, we hosted the Colts. This year we play at the Colts. In three years, we will host the Colts again.

Note that means two intervening seasons, which means no two teams in opposing divisions can continuously play home-and-away every other year. In the case of the East Division 1st vs the South Division 1st, both games are either home or away in the non round-robin seasons.

This is not true for all combination of teams/divisions, but it's literally impossible to avoid in some cases. And when you play that team round robin, that makes 3 consecutive home or away games since the one before or the one after will be home or away.

The NFL counts on continual changes in division standings from year to year to mix things up. The fact that the Pats and the Colts both dominated 1st place in their divisions so far is what causes the quirk.

 

[godef]

Man it's gonna be fun to stick it to them in their new stadium for three straight years.

That won't happen unless we play there in the play-offs in the 2010-2011 seasons.

 

[godef]

starting next year the colts will play the pats in foxborough five years straight. peyton will be 38 during the fifth year.

That's impossible unless some of these games are in the play-offs. No more than 3 consecutive seasons at home or away against another team in the regular season can be projected into the future.

It can happen if one or both teams' division positions flunctuate in consecutive seasons. Of course, this can not be projected.

 

[godef]

But your telling me that the NFL has formula that says that the games are on a three year Home and Away cycle?

Only if those teams continue to place in the same positions in their division. Even then, not for all combinations.

 

[ScottieC]

That's impossible unless some of these games are in the play-offs. No more than 3 consecutive seasons at home or away against another team in the regular season can be projected into the future.

It can happen if one or both teams' division positions flunctuate in consecutive seasons. Of course, this can not be projected.

I think 2009 is the Final year of that scheduling - The NFL can now redo or keep the current format.

 

[godef]

I think 2009 is the Final year of that scheduling - The NFL can now redo or keep the current format.

No reason to change it unless there are new teams added. I believe the NFL plans to continue this rotation indeinitely in lieu of that.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

That's impossible unless some of these games are in the play-offs. No more than 3 consecutive seasons at home or away against another team in the regular season can be projected into the future.

It can happen if one or both teams' division positions flunctuate in consecutive seasons. Of course, this can not be projected.

you're right. i messed up.

 

[ScottieC]

No reason to change it unless there are new teams added. I believe the NFL plans to continue this rotation indeinitely in lieu of that.

I would agree - but I don't know if they like it or if they don't - Ultimately it will be discussed at the next owners meeting (In May, I believe) and they will make the decision to keep it or change it.

 

[jmt57]

I see, thanks for the explanations.

So following the pattern in 2010 we will be at AFC west, home vs AFC south for the teams that finish alike in their division... therefore if we and Indy finish alike they'll be coming to Foxboro?

Yes, that is correct - assuming the NFL continues the current scheduling formula. 2010 would be like '04 (at west, home vs south), 2011 would be like '05 (at north, home vs south), etc. With CBA negotiations and hints of a 17-game schedule, we'll just have to wait and see though.

2009: at AFC west; home vs AFC north
2008: at AFC south, home vs AFC north
2007: at AFC south, home vs AFC west
2006: at AFC north, home vs AFC west
2005: at AFC north, home vs AFC south
2004: at AFC west, home vs AFC south
2003: at AFC west, home vs AFC north

 

[JoeSixPat]

I'm so sick of this question. No offense, Joe.

NFL announces teams' 2009 opponents - NFL - SI.com

National Football League - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's not random.

Each team plays the other three teams in its division twice: once at home, and once on the road (six games).
Each team plays the four teams from another division within its own conference once on a rotating three-year cycle: two at home, and two on the road (four games).
Each team plays the four teams from a division in the other conference once on a rotating four-year cycle: two at home, and two on the road (four games).
Each team plays once against the other teams in its conference that finished in the same place in their own divisions as themselves the previous season, not counting the division they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games).

I'm not trying to be a smartass - nor do I think you are....

I know why we play the Colts so much... duh! I think everyone does.

I know that we play other divisions and have 2 games on the road and 2 games at home. (again, duh!)

Where I have a legitimate "duh" is trying to find the rule that says the NFL schedule makers are prohibited from having the Patriots and Colts swap home games each year?

I'm just not seeing where it say the Patriots have to be the visitor for three years straight and then the home team for three straight years against the same opponent (which given the standings has been the Colts.)

It seems to me that if the schedule makers wanted to they need not make the AFC central game an away game three years in a row. Either of the two could be on the road and any two could be at home? But they've chosen to make the Colts the home game for three years in a row and the visiting game for three years in a row.

What am I missing?

 

[cavtroop]

I'm not trying to be a smartass - nor do I think you are....

I know why we play the Colts so much... duh! I think everyone does.

I know that we play other divisions and have 2 games on the road and 2 games at home. (again, duh!)

Where I have a legitimate "duh" is trying to find the rule that says the NFL schedule makers are prohibited from having the Patriots and Colts swap home games each year?

I'm just not seeing where it say the Patriots have to be the visitor for three years straight and then the home team for three straight years against the same opponent (which given the standings has been the Colts.)

I seems to me that if the schedule makers wanted to they need not make the AFC central game an away game three years in a row. Either two could be on the road and any two could be at home? But they've chosen to make the Colts the home game for three years in a row and the visiting game for three years in a row.

What am I missing?

That they don't want to? :-D