I hate this NFL Playoff Rule

[Captain43Crash]

Says every second place NFL team…ever. No one has to follow the NFL.

If something is extremely easy to fix to make it much better, and more fair, I believe in fixing it.

Sadly, some football fans and Americans do not believe this. See Biological boys beating up on our daughters in sports.

 

[Captain43Crash]

Says every second place NFL team…ever. No one has to follow the NFL.

Says every rule follower ever! Even if it is a stupid rule!

 

[KingCorcoran]

If something is extremely easy to fix to make it much better, and more fair, I believe in fixing it.

Sadly, some football fans and Americans do not believe this. See Biological boys beating up on our daughters in sports.

It’s an owners issue. They get to have it any way they feel like having it. They do, after all, own the NFL. Fans’ opinion about it has no significance whatsoever.

 

[JoeKing]

I'm fine with division winners hosting a first-round wildcard game. It's a well-established tradition so all you young pups out there need to stop messing with the game and rethinking how things "should be". You are the ones that are ridiculous! I do like the newer format, 1-seed getting the only bye week and having three wildcard teams. It works fine so stop trying to fix something that isn't broken!

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

No way. If the Cowboys were 10-1 and in first place in their division every Cowboys fan, every, would be making the same argument.

if we were under .500 and hosting, the press would be all over it

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

Easy solution. Win the division.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I'm fine with the division winner making the playoffs. That's fine, and it's a good reward for winning the division. However, I hate the rule that they always host the first round because it allows a team with a 9-8 record or worse to host a playoff game over a team with a record that'd easily win any other division. I absolutely hate this rule.

What they should do is say, if you win the division, you automatically make the playoffs. However, the home games are determined by the records. If you have a division winner with a 9-8 record and a wild card team with a 12-5 record, the team with the 12-5 record should host because they were the better team during the season.

Absolutely not. Teams in different divisions play completely different schedules (I believe it's possible for teams in different divisions to have zero common games). Comparing records is meaningless when the schedules have nothing in common.

 

[xwalker]

I'm fine with the division winner making the playoffs. That's fine, and it's a good reward for winning the division. However, I hate the rule that they always host the first round because it allows a team with a 9-8 record or worse to host a playoff game over a team with a record that'd easily win any other division. I absolutely hate this rule.

What they should do is say, if you win the division, you automatically make the playoffs. However, the home games are determined by the records. If you have a division winner with a 9-8 record and a wild card team with a 12-5 record, the team with the 12-5 record should host because they were the better team during the season.

Those teams can't get the 1st week bye.

 

[DandyDon52]

Fans are rewarded with a home game for division winners.

that is a good point, but the owners like it as it is because they want to host a home game even if the other team
has a much better record. The reason is for the money they rake in as the home team.
that is main reason they went to 17 game seasons.
that gives them 1 extra home game every other year, which is more money for them. 18 game season will make it 1 extra home game EACH YEAR.

So the owners being the greedy boogers they are will not change that rule, because most of them are the bad teams that can only get a home game
if they win a weak division.

 

[DuceizBak]

Nah i'm fine with it. The only thing that is really hindering us is the Cardinals loss.

It sucks, but you should take care of business.
We lost to the Cardinals and the Eagles, both games we should have won. If we beat the Eagles the first time we're both 9-2 with a tie breaker. It's not like we played a brutal first half schedule and the Eagles just tip-toed through the tulips to get to 10-1.

Our only hope is both SF and Us beat them and they pick up another loss along the way. If we lose one more game they win the division.

 

[Captain43Crash]

So a team in a crappy division with 12 or 13 wins is more deserving than a team with 9 or 10 wins in tough division?

Almost every time this situation comes up the 12-13 win team is much better, and favored, over the 8-9 win team.

The team with the much better record should host the playoff game in this situation.

 

[Established1971]

I'm fine with the division winner making the playoffs. That's fine, and it's a good reward for winning the division. However, I hate the rule that they always host the first round because it allows a team with a 9-8 record or worse to host a playoff game over a team with a record that'd easily win any other division. I absolutely hate this rule.

What they should do is say, if you win the division, you automatically make the playoffs. However, the home games are determined by the records. If you have a division winner with a 9-8 record and a wild card team with a 12-5 record, the team with the 12-5 record should host because they were the better team during the season.

yeah Ive been thinking the same thing, give the top 2 teams a home game and seed the rest by record. Or at least do this after the wild card round. Lets say the South winner is 8-9 and wins their first playoff game. in the division round, seed by record