Tiebreaker rules

[endersdragon]

Ultimately what I think hurt us more than anything else are the tiebreaker rules in the NFL. This isn't to say they are wrong or anything, they are what they are, but I believe without any doubt that we would have played better had the game been in Dallas. GB is a hard place to play, as is Seattle, there is a reason those teams went a combined 15-1 at home this year, and going 12-4, finishing with the same record as the best teams in the NFC/NFL, but having to play one extra game, and then go on the road... just sort of sucks, especially when we beat one of those teams. Luckily, this is part of what gives me confidence for next year, the fact is we were just as good as those teams in most every way, and I see us being even better next year once we can close a few of our holes through FA/drafting.

P.S. No we didn't have a home problem this year, we had a Tony Romo being unready / not finishing the game problem this year... those 4 games just happened to be in Dallas.

 

[MagicMan]

Not sure if Dallas would fare any better at home with their history at home----not just this year. But I think the seedings should be revised during the playoffs. For example, if Dallas would have beat Green Bay then should not have to go to Seattle. Seattle and Dallas tied and Dallas beat them head to head. They should not be rewarded with a home game and an NFC championship game at that. Now Green Bay does deserve to go to Seattle since they lost to them head to head.

Anyway, just my 2 pesos.