Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: NFL to consider play-off re-seeding « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3



Guest
#30 : February 06, 2008, 04:40:34 PM

lets do it like Hockey and basketball where you let HALF the league into the playoffs and then drag it out for 2 months..    thats why i cant stand those two sports, among other reasons.   

JasonOfthetower

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6891
Offline
#31 : February 06, 2008, 05:05:00 PM

No, no, no...you win your division you get an automatic bid to the dance - just like March Madness if you win your conference. If you don't earn anything for a division title, then there's no reason to have divisions.

Now...should an 8-8 division winner host a 12-4 wildcard team? No, I don't think that's right, either. I believe your reward for winning the division is your playoff berth. Once everyone's qualified - reseed based on record.

As for the argument about the 11-5 team being left out while the 8-8 division winner goes in - I say TOO BAD. Win a couple more games and win your division...or win another two games and earn one of the two wild cards.




Guest
#32 : February 06, 2008, 06:28:16 PM

I agree that there should be benefit from winning your division however I do have issue with shuttin it down as we did because we were locked into the 4 spot. IMO, a division winner should definitely get in but if the wild card has a better record, they should host the game. That would curtail the crap that we had to watch from our own team this year.

As a season tix holder, it sux that I didn't even go to our home finale vs the Panthers because it was no more than another preseason game.

Did you go to the playoff game?

Fo sho!!!!

Uncle Stan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17507
Online
#33 : February 06, 2008, 06:31:16 PM

Would appear some of the coaches who tried to outfox the league and they will now  lose.

I don't go to a regular season game and see scrubs.

Learn to disagree without being disagreeable-Ronald Reagan circa 1981

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46234
Offline
#34 : February 06, 2008, 06:48:02 PM

Why should there be a benefit to a division winner Hate - if they don't have a top 6 record too bad - they don't go to the tournament.

Then why have divisions at all?

I'm not in favor of any radical changes. Things are going to well for that, IMO.

That is the larger question and I will offer an answer.  The same as baseball - the top teams win regularly, those that would be out of the race early get to stay in the running - enabling the losers to still be in the race and make more money than they would have with the " false" winners of a loser division. 

So why "fix" it for the playoffs - just because they think they have sucked all the money they can out of fanbase of the team's  that shouldn't be there?  Nope - either just take the top teams or leave it alone. 

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

ABuccs Fan

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#35 : February 08, 2008, 03:25:07 AM

Though i don't necessarily agree with it, i can see the reasoning behind it if it forces teams to play all the way thru the final week.
Absolutely love the idea. Fans pay big money for tickets, and should'nt be forced to watch 6 preseason games. Week 16 and 17 were of preseason quality. Injuries happen, it's a collision sport. Play your startes, that's what the fans pay hard earned money to watch.

"The Gruden Rule."

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46234
Offline
#36 : February 08, 2008, 05:15:46 PM

Funny topic - some folks want starters, some folks want to reseed, some folks want to leave it alone.

No one seems to care that the top teams aren't assured of going because Division Champs get to go.  Who cares if a 4 team group stinks it up and that division is ignored?  Go with the best records period - and it is all fixed.  Of course teams that don't successfully compete for players and coaches won't get to go - like having a season with 15 mill in your pocket - but reseed - okay let's ignore the issue and give a loser a pass in because they are the best of a group that stinks.  Not -

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13714
Offline
#37 : February 08, 2008, 06:02:57 PM

For an 11-5 team NOT to make the playoffs, they'd have to be either a third-place or last-place team. That happens so infrequently as to not even merit discussion. OTOH, consider the power balance in the NFC in terms of ''national teams,'' teams with more TV exposure, greater history, more extensive media coverage.
NFC East (all four)
NFC North (2 of 4; Packers and Bears yes. Vikings and Lions on another tier).
NFC West (1 of 4; 49ers, but that could change in time. That's only a result of their 1981-97 dominance and they could revert to also-ran status.)
NFC South (0 of 4; the only division in the NFL without a national team per se).
So the real crux of this is that they'd want the Giants, Cowboys, Eagles or Redskins to have a home game over a team like us, Atlanta, the Saints or Panthers. Quieter voices, less resistance. In a way then our situation in the playoff game would have been the ultimate Catch-22; by forcing us to play our players MORE, we would have been at greater risk of injury. OTOH, if we lose the games, we not only sustain more injuries, but lose a home game to boot.
The question then becomes: Were the Giants a hot team at the right time, getting better as they went along or simply this good all along?
Furthermore, given Eli's troubles at home during the regular season (3-5), might we have actually fared BETTER in a playoff game there?
But I say NO to changing the alignment. Playing more stars in Weeks 15-17 won't help the playoffs. It will diminish their quality.

In Verner We Trust

ABuccs Fan

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#38 : February 09, 2008, 03:01:39 AM

Not playing your starters and worrying about injuries is for cowards.

The question then becomes: Were the Giants a hot team at the right time, getting better as they went along or simply this good all along?

Check their schedule, they lost to tough teams or division foes.

umguy1999

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#39 : February 10, 2008, 05:01:02 PM

It was the Giants that had a game up on us and that is what started this whole thing,  it can't be any more fair than it is now, unless every team plays one other.The only fair way to do it is to break it up into divisions and the winners of each one get a playoff home game, and 2 (or even if they made it 4 teams) that could not win their division make the wildcard. Winning your division should amount ot more than a tie breaker, if they change it that is all it will be. Right now its about the division, if they change it, then it will be all about the schedule and to me there is way too much room for foul play if we start to play that game, plus with the flex games, and the Europe games, its just not fair and someone will al ways get the short end of the stick, plus it just complicates things.
It is fair right now, within each divison you play one another 2 times plus you play the same team's outside of the division, so within each division you are pretty much going head to head with the other teams in your division. Everything balances out this way. Second best in your division should not give you a home playoff game its not fair to the team in your division that DID WIN the division, and earned the home game by winning the division.
Give me a break the NFC East is tough now, but a few Years back the South was tougher, the more equal a division the harder it is to win, its just that Dallas, SKins, New York and Philly are big market teams and the unspoken undertones of this whole argument is "its not fair that true footbal fans like them don't get a home playoff game", and the Buccaneers did get one.

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13714
Offline
#40 : February 11, 2008, 07:48:30 PM

The difference between the Bucs and the Giants in the regular season is not so dramatic. They had ONE win over a team with a winning record. We lost a few games at the end vs. losing teams when resting people. Would us winning those games have proved that we were the better team? No. We also beat the Redskins (without our starting QB for most of the game) and the Titans. That's TWO playoff teams. We lost to Indy and Jacksonville. The Giants got to play the AFC East so the tougher sked equation doesn't really cut it. The total records of the opponents were the same, were they not?
The Giants did a better job of beating bad teams. Does that make them better? It's a double-edged sword; when we beat bad teams, people say we didn't beat anyone. But when we lose to them, it's used as a weapon against us. That's called playing both sides of the fence.

In Verner We Trust

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46234
Offline
#41 : February 11, 2008, 09:32:57 PM

Not playing your starters and worrying about injuries is for cowards.

The question then becomes: Were the Giants a hot team at the right time, getting better as they went along or simply this good all along?

Check their schedule, they lost to tough teams or division foes.


Damned if you lose a player, damned if you don't put your starters on the field.  Abuccs - the buccs weren't going anywhere in the playoffs - so I just think it was a lose - lose issue for the organization.  It stinks that the fans who pay the freight feel like a couple more preseason games were put out there - but they had to get those guys healthy... or as healthy as they could get them or there was really no chance.

So suck in the regular season or take your best shot at a playoff win?  Who really knows?!

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant
Page: 1 2 3
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: NFL to consider play-off re-seeding « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools