Competition Committee: Playoff reseeding thoughts?

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

Daseal
03-28-2008, 11:57 AM
Hey Guys,

The competition committee is talking about seeding the playoffs based on record rather than division title. How do you feel about this?

Personally, I don't like it. Sure, folks that win a crappy division get a home playoff game -- but someone who plays in an NFC East / AFC South division is rewarded with a home playoff game even though they took bumps and bruises along the way and their record may not necessarily show it.

Schneed10
03-28-2008, 12:05 PM
I do like it. There's no reason that a wildcard team that went 11-5 should be seeded lower than a division winner who went 9-7.

Bumps and bruises? What the hell are you talking about, Daseal? Are you trying not to make sense on purpose?

Who cares what the competition is within the division. The bottom line is the team that won more games should get the better seed.

sbaughone
03-28-2008, 12:14 PM
It's stupid. To the victor go the spoils. Let's watch riggo run one more time: On the RAC: Redskins Appreciation Club, the Humurous Redskins' Fan Site. (http://www.ontherac.com).

HAIL Riggo!

GTripp0012
03-28-2008, 12:25 PM
I like it because it will make teams that play in a weak division play out the season in order to hold their seed.

If the Tampa Bay Buccaneers had played out the season, they would have finished with more wins than the Giants, probably 11 or so. But because they wrapped up the division in Week 15, they only got 9 wins.

That, in turn, changed our position in the draft. This new rule would at least lend more credence to overall record as a measuring stick of how good a team is because only the top two teams in each conference would be resting their players, and that's the way it should be.

JoeRedskin
03-28-2008, 12:51 PM
So long as all division winners are automatically entered, I am okay with it. Of course, it penalizes teams that play in tough divisions.

Daseal
03-28-2008, 01:02 PM
Schneed -- what I'm saying is that a division that's 4 deep will often accumulate more losses due to a tougher schedule then a good team in the NFC South for instance. Winning the division means something right now, if this goes into effect it's definitely diminished.

MTK
03-28-2008, 01:23 PM
I don't see the need for this at all. Why fix what isn't broken?

KLHJ2
03-28-2008, 01:28 PM
I look at it this way. The Browns should have made the Playoffs. The Colts rested their starters against the TItans. The sorry assed Titans made the playoffs instead of the Browns. Had the Colts had a reason to play their starters they would have easily beaten the Titans.

The last couple games of the season would have been more interesting and the Playoff picture would have looked different.

Yellow31
03-28-2008, 01:29 PM
I don't see the need for this at all. Why fix what isn't broken?

couldn't have said it better!

SC Skins Fan
03-28-2008, 01:55 PM
Schneed -- what I'm saying is that a division that's 4 deep will often accumulate more losses due to a tougher schedule then a good team in the NFC South for instance. Winning the division means something right now, if this goes into effect it's definitely diminished.

To make it more clear, he is pointing out that the rule would actually cut both ways (a good point that I had actually not considered). It is really obvious to point out that the Giants (10-6) had to travel to Tampa (9-7) for the Wildcard Round (a game which the team with the better record still won by the way). But what Daseal is saying is with the new rule it is conceivable that a division winner from the NFC East, who played a more difficult schedule, and finished 10-6 would have to go to (for instance) an NFC West team who failed to win their weak division but still finished 11-5.

As I write this, though, it occurs to me that if two teams in a division finish with 10+ wins (12-4 and 11-5 for example) then maybe the division isn't all that weak. At least two teams are very good (unless the other two teams are just horrible). Still, it seems like the pendulum could swing the other way and then people would be upset that a division winner would fail to get a home game.

I can see the logic for the change, though, and it might even add some spice to the end of the year forcing teams leading weak divisions to continue playing their starters (remember, Tampa pulled Garcia and didn't play him after he went down in the 'Skins game) even though they have the division title (but not a guaranteed home playoff game) wrapped up.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum