Time for NFL to update seedings for playoffs

[mattjames2010]

True, they won the DIVISION and got into the playoffs - you know since they won the DIVISION - but if a team team wins a DIVISION, and a wildcard team has a better record, they should host the playoff game, not the team that won the ***** DIVISION. ...division.

The argument here that a wildcard team should host a playoff game because of record is silly - they are a WILDCARD team. Emphasis on wildcard. You lost the benefit of hosting a playoff game by not winning the division. The wildcard team already got their benefit, and it was sneaking into the playoffs despite not winning their division.

If a team doesn't like it, well should have won the games in front of them that was needed to win their division to have a surefire way of hosting a playoff game. Cry more.

 

[Diehardblues]

There are times where you'd be better off as a 5th seed playing the 4-seed division winner than, say, the 3-seed division winner playing the 6 seed.

I would rather be the Cowboys playing at TB than SF hosting Seattle, Buffalo hosting Miami or Cinci hosting Baltimore.

I understand but I can imagine over time there will be more or greater impacts with higher winning records playing at lesser winning record divisional teams. Surely a some point they’ll make a tweak to seedings .

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

I understand but I can imagine over time there will be more or greater impacts with higher winning records playing at lesser winning record divisional teams. Surely a some point they’ll make a tweak to seedings .

You're too obsessed with records. A 10-7 team can be better than a 12-5 team. It's never going to be "fair" all the time.

I agree that 14 teams is too many, but there's no structure at 12, 14, or 16 that doesn't prevent better teams from getting a worse playoff draw.

 

[Diehardblues]

You're too obsessed with records. A 10-7 team can be better than a 12-5 team. It's never going to be "fair" all the time.

I agree that 14 teams is too many, but there's no structure at 12, 14, or 16 that doesn't prevent better teams from getting a worse playoff draw.

Well, everything is based on records. Divisions, conferences and playoffs. Even the seedings are based on records except for division winners . It doesn’t make sense.

It did initially perhaps when we only had 1 WC . But with over 40% WC playoff teams it’s time to evolve.

 

[mattjames2010]

Well, everything is based on records. Divisions, conferences and playoffs. Even the seedings are based on records except for division winners . It doesn’t make sense.

It did initially perhaps when we only had 1 WC . But with over 40% WC playoff teams it’s time to evolve.

It still makes sense - the first priority of a regular season record isn't the complete conference, it's about divisions. There is a reason teams within divisions have nearly identical schedules, those records determine who is the best within each division. That's the first priority of a regular season records, who is the best in each division. After that, you then put the records against each division winner. Then you put teams in contention for wildcard spots against each other.

Rewarding a wildcard team for losing out on their division crown while punishing a team that DID win their division is backwards. The way it is set up now makes sense.

 

[Diehardblues]

It still makes sense - the first priority of a regular season record isn't the complete conference, it's about divisions. There is a reason teams within divisions have nearly identical schedules, those records determine who is the best within each division. That's the first priority of a regular season records, who is the best in each division. After that, you then put the records against each division winner. Then you put teams in contention for wildcard spots against each other.

Rewarding a wildcard team for losing out on their division crown while punishing a team that DID win their division is backwards. The way it is set up now makes sense.

We’ve been made to believe that because that’s how it’s been done.

I see how much more sense it makes with additional playoff teams in NBA and will continue to argue it’s time for the NFL to evolve as well.

Hopefully it’s just a matter of time. It would still maintain lesser record division winners with automatic bids.

Winning individual divisions with only 4 teams which consist of 6 of the 17 games played doesn’t carry the same weight as it originally did with less divisions.

 

[KingCorcoran]

That’s the most reasonable argument I’ve heard but schedules based on how you finished in division only impact 2 of your conference games and the 1 non conference 17th game.

IMO these are minimal factors which don't outweigh the greater factor of lesser record division winners having home field over better record Wild Cards.

I hope it’s just a matter of time where this issue continues to occur and the league takes action. We shall see.

Understood, but if you’re in a division that is comparatively weak, like the NFC South this season, a team can end up the top seed when they’re not the best team. There are too few games to do playoff seeding like the NBA. And scheduling can impact one team more than another inside the same division. Philly won the division last season yet have arguably an easier schedule than Dallas. Cowboys get Detroit, Eagles get Minnesota. Cowboys get Carolina, Eagles get Tampa Bay. Cowboys get LAC, Eagles get the Chiefs, now that’s a more difficult draw for Philly, but KC does not have the Eagles very recent OC on their staff. In the games Philly and Dallas have in common, the three toughest, Miami, Buffalo and San Francisco, Philly gets all three at home, Dallas gets all three on the road. (it’s like they let Roseman make the schedule) I’m sure there are similar differences for other teams in the league. These imbalances make pure seeding impossible.

 

[Diehardblues]

Understood, but if you’re in a division that is comparatively weak, like the NFC South this season, a team can end up the top seed when they’re not the best team. There are too few games to do playoff seeding like the NBA. And scheduling can impact one team more than another inside the same division. Philly won the division last season yet have arguably an easier schedule than Dallas. Cowboys get Detroit, Eagles get Minnesota. Cowboys get Carolina, Eagles get Tampa Bay. Cowboys get LAC, Eagles get the Chiefs, now that’s a more difficult draw for Philly, but KC does not have the Eagles very recent OC on their staff. In the games Philly and Dallas have in common, the three toughest, Miami, Buffalo and San Francisco, Philly gets all three at home, Dallas gets all three on the road. (it’s like they let Roseman make the schedule) I’m sure there are similar differences for other teams in the league. These imbalances make pure seeding impossible.

We really won’t know the difficulty of the schedules until this season plays out. Basing them on last years results is premature.

We’re going on a couple years into this new playoff format. We shall see how it plays out but I’ll continue arguing for my proposed seeding format as I believe it’s represents the better teams on the most part . Always exceptions of course .