Welcome to PatsFans.com

Should the NFL change the playoff system?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Brady_to_Moss, Nov 23, 2010.

?

Should NFL change the playoff seeding system?

  1. Leave it

    33 vote(s)
    76.7%
  2. Change it

    10 vote(s)
    23.3%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brady_to_Moss

    Brady_to_Moss Revis Island is here PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Messages:
    19,099
    Likes Received:
    470
    Ratings:
    +1,324 / 13 / -5

    #95 Jersey

    Should they change the playoff system to go just based on record? Either the Pats or the Jets are going to get shafted here by having a say 12-4 team go to play a team at their field that is 9-7 or 10-6...to me that just sounds messed up. Whats your take?
     
  2. D-Money

    D-Money In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Lets hope its not us.That jet game might be our season.The jets are still undefeated in the division and losing that game would be like being 2 games back.

    I think they definetly should take a look at it although i doubt they would change it.The chargers might win the division at 9-7 but they arent a 9-7 team.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2010
  3. Sicilian

    Sicilian Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    233
    Ratings:
    +617 / 2 / -3

    As long as a league plays an unbalanced schedule (aka, more games against teams within your division), you have to reward the division winners.
     
  4. aluminum seats

    aluminum seats In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    This comes up periodically, then thankfully goes away. The division structure is great--creates rivalries, heightened importance of certain games, etc. It's cyclical how good the divisions are; it's just the nature of the beast. I didn't bat an eye when the Pats didn't get in w/the 11-5 record--all teams know the deal from the get-go. Teams that complain are whining crybaby losers.
     
  5. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    43,528
    Likes Received:
    798
    Ratings:
    +2,750 / 134 / -97

    Disable Jersey

    It's bad enough that they are screwing with overtime in the playoffs. Let's not have them completely screw the entire playoffs by changing to a straight record system.
     
  6. Disco Volante

    Disco Volante Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,242
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +58 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    No, it's part of what makes football great.
     
  7. Elijah

    Elijah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,340
    Likes Received:
    47
    Ratings:
    +135 / 9 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    You're giving up on the Pats' chances of winning the division already? I feel like this thread wouldn't exist otherwise.
     
  8. juxtapoz15

    juxtapoz15 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    #54 Jersey

    I don't think the OP was suggesting that it be a straight record system. I am guessing what he meant was that division winners would still get in, but the seeding would be based on record and division winners wouldn't automatically get a 1-4 seed.

    Example:

    1. Patriots 13-3 (East Winner)
    2. Jets 12-4 (WildCard)
    3. Ravens 10-6 (North Winner)
    4. Steelers 9-7 (Wild Card won tiebreaker over Colts)
    5. Colts 9-7 (South Winner)
    6. Chargers 8-8 (West Winner)
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2010
  9. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    43,528
    Likes Received:
    798
    Ratings:
    +2,750 / 134 / -97

    Disable Jersey

    How is that any more fair? The whole problem with all of this is that people want to define "fair" from their perspective. It's not "fair" for a 9-7 team to have a home game instead of a 10-6 team. Well, perhaps it wasn't fair that the 10-6 team played the toughest schedule in the league, and the 9-7 team played the easiest. Why does an 8-8 winner deserve to make the playoffs over a 9-7 team that came in 3rd place in another division?

    There's no way to have a 'fair' seeding system as long as there's an unbalanced schedule, just as there's no way to have a 'fair' overtime system other than eliminating overtime entirely.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2010
  10. Brady_to_Moss

    Brady_to_Moss Revis Island is here PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Messages:
    19,099
    Likes Received:
    470
    Ratings:
    +1,324 / 13 / -5

    #95 Jersey

    yeah thats what i ment
     
  11. patsfaninpittsburgh

    patsfaninpittsburgh Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    The straight record method would minimize the whole division concept and many of the "big" games are division rivalries.

    My guess is the league would define "fair" as having the maximum number of games that create interest and rivalries and ratings.

    The other point is that it's not really six spots per conference. It's actually four groups of four teams playing a majority common schedule fighting for four separate spots.
     
  12. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    21,143
    Likes Received:
    362
    Ratings:
    +971 / 18 / -8

    #3 Jersey

    You can't have perfect fairness, period, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a fairer system than the present one.

    Basically, the current value judgment by the NFL is that a team that wins its division, no matter how bad its overall record might be, is more worthy of a home playoff game than a team that might win more games but fails to win its division.

    Some people would argue this is the fairest system, others that it isn't.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2010
  13. sieglo

    sieglo In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,291
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    If they didn't change it after 2008 when the 8-8 Chargers beat the 12-4 Colts in San Diego, then they never will. Basically, it means that Polian doesn't want it changed, and we all know that whining bastard gets what he wants.
     
  14. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    43,528
    Likes Received:
    798
    Ratings:
    +2,750 / 134 / -97

    Disable Jersey

    I agree, which is why I made the point about how "people want to define "fair" from their perspective".
     
  15. Palm Beach Pats Fan

    Palm Beach Pats Fan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Messages:
    3,498
    Likes Received:
    42
    Ratings:
    +176 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    I hate it when a 8-8 or 7-9 team hosts a playoff game. Sure they won their division and they do deserve a spot in the playoffs. It seems more fair that a team that is not even over 0.500 should travel to face a wild card team with a better record.

    Maybe a workable system would be that you need 9 wins to be "home field eligible" just like you need 6+ wins to be "bowl eligible" in college. This doesn't destroy the divisonal rivalries and the division setup- you still know that if you win the division you make the playoffs.

    You still might have a 9-7 team hosting a 11-5 team. But someday a division will be so crappy that a 6-10 team will win it, then play at home. Ugh. Sure the other team should win anyway if they are better, and they knew the rules and shouldn't whine about it. But the rule could be made (in my opinion) more fair.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2010
  16. bradydaman29

    bradydaman29 Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2 / 2 / -0

    The easiest way to make it more fair would be, keeping the same system so that division winners and wild cards get in the playoffs under current rules, then, once those teams are established, re-seed based on record and the top 2 teams receive the bye, 3rd best record plays worst record, etc.
     
  17. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Did you think it was messed up when a 12-4 Jags team came to foxboro to play a 10-6 Pats team? :confused:
     
  18. Off The Grid

    Off The Grid Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,704
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +305 / 5 / -0

    #3 Jersey

    What I would love to see get changed, is the ATROCITY that is our current TieBreaker system.

    There are exactly TWO TieBreakers that matter, in no particular order:

    1 ~ Head to Head
    2 ~ Strength of Schedule


    When one team plays an inferior, weak schedule, but beats out a better team for its rightfull playoff spot, due to some pathetic derivative like "Divisional Record" or "Common Teams", because Strength of Schedule is unfathomably relegated to the bottom of the list...it makes me want KILL somebody. :mad:

    In case anyone's not aware of the recent circumstance: Our 2008 team was playing very strong at the end of the year, and might've gone far, indeed, against a very weak crew of Play Off teams.
     
  19. KontradictioN

    KontradictioN Do you even lift? PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    28,057
    Likes Received:
    795
    Ratings:
    +2,478 / 33 / -54

    No Jersey Selected

    Nope. Division winners deserve to be rewarded first with home games in the playoffs. Division runners-up with the highest records get in as Wild Card teams. If they don't like it, they should have done more to win the division.
     
  20. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    71
    Ratings:
    +192 / 3 / -1

    I don't see any realistic way to change it.

    As long as we have divisions with two games played against each division rival, the division winners have to be rewarded.

    I don't see how one could get all of the "unfairness" out of the seedings unless records were somehow adjusted for "strength of current year schedule" in such a way that a 9--7 team with a tough schedule could be jumped ahead of a 10--6 team with an easier schedule. But, that would be so complicated and prone to argument that it would be impossible to implement.

    I think that history proves that Home Field advantage all the way to the CCG, while important, isn't the Holy Grail of post-season play. If memory serves me, most of the SB winners since 2001 didn't have the best record (with tiebreakers) in their conference (the 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 SB Winners all didn't have Homefield all the way).

    IMO, what is important is that extra week off, though the Giants managed without it in 2007.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2010
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>