How do you think the Cowboys feel about the Cardinals?

Colts vs chargers..

Colts 11-5

Chargers 8-8

Head to head tie breaker- Colts

Best conference record-colts

Best winning % common opponents-colts


Now i want somebody who is logical and sober to tell me what in the hell the chargers have done to deserve a higher seeding? Had the good fortune of not being in a division with the titans?

Winning your division should still guarantee a playoff spot.

Winning your division should guarantee a higher seed than a wild card

unless
unless
unless
unless

The 2 teams played and the division winner lost. Then the wildcard gets the higher seed. Is this make too much sense for the nfl?

 

Once again, not the system I'm in favor of.

Just pointing out that there can be a fair system without the divisional format. Also making the point that if the NFL were to switch to that system, it's not like NFL would dramatically lose fan interest which is what another poster implied.

 

There's no right or wrong answer, just preference. I'm in favor of the current format, but can completely see how making it more 'fair' could be a favorable format too.

However, I don't think anyone could argue the exponential rate of growth the NFL has seen in viewership during the 1990's through now. That viewership has grown by the current format...and I think the 2 wildcard spots in each conference are what keeps the 'fair' doctrine alive.

Even if we adopt a new system, there will ALWAYS be room for some team(s) to gripe. There are 32 teams in the league and unless we played a round-robin 31-game season which obviously will never happen, and it can never be 100% fair year in and year out.

The only 'fair' solution I can imagine would be to have a 15-game season in which you played every conference opponent 1 time. And the top 6 records are seeded 1-6. But, even then you may end up with the best 3-4 teams in 1 conference, so that conference would gripe at the unbalanced playing field. Also, the problem with this is that you NEVER play NFC teams except for the Super Bowl. So, if you live in a city like Seattle, you would never be able to see your favorite team play if they were in the AFC. It would be like a hybrid of the current NBA (conference records) and old MLB (only play your league/conference during reg. season) systems.

Call me old-fashioned (although I'm never against any progressive system as long as it makes sense), but I like the NFL just the way it is

 

Nate, what about my point about seeding? Do you think a division winner should automatically get the higher seed no matter what? Evdern if they lost a head to head game? Head to head has to matter somewhere right?

Only 37% of the schedule is in the division.

 

I think the divisional concept meant a lot more in the previous system when we were the afc central. In a division of 5 teams you were playing half your games in the division.

 

who cares how the cowboys feel about the cardinals...neither of them are a contender

 

The topic of conversation has gone way beyond those babies.

 

Although, it would be a great way to do it, I am still in favor of the current system. I feel that rewarding a team on their record over a 16-game schedule is more favorable than 1 matchup. That matchup could have been when a starting QB was out, which team had homefield advantage in that 1 game, or any number of short-term reasons.

It would make teams consider starting players in potential playoff seeding games that could unnecessarily injure a star player for a season or career.

Head-to-head does count as part of a tie-breaker though for division winners as well as wild-cards, although i think its a step or 2 down the line.

And, although I definitely can see re-seeding based on record meaning the Colts would potentially be a 2-seed if that system was used this year, I am still in favor of divisional winners hosting the games. It goes back to each of those teams within a division playing against the same 2 opponent divisions and not giving an advantage to a division who is matched up against the worst 2 divisions in the league as the AFC East was this year (both West divisions as opponents).

Great ideas though, all could be valid scenarios.

 

Huh? A better record comes first. If a wildcard has both a better record and the one on one edge they should have the higher seed. I never suggested a higher seed for simply winning that one game.

 

It read that way though.