U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2011, 11:02 PM
 
2,057 posts, read 3,161,275 times
Reputation: 980

Advertisements

So a 7-9 Seahawks team gets to host an 11-5 Saints team because the Seahawks won arguably the worst division in NFL history, while the Saints finished second in the obviously better NFC South. (Three out of the four teams there had ten wins.)

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2011, 05:33 AM
 
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
9,114 posts, read 15,694,576 times
Reputation: 3695
I don't think they should change things.....yes, crazier things have happened (the Pats a couple years ago won 10 or 11 games and missed the playoffs...)

No matter how bad your division is, you should be rewarded somehow for winning it.


Leave it alone, don't change the regular season to 18 games either....

just my .02
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 09:27 AM
 
Location: southwestern PA
20,419 posts, read 37,760,095 times
Reputation: 39059
I agree, CouponJack!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:58 PM
 
368 posts, read 803,814 times
Reputation: 285
I don't think it's going to matter a whole lot as far as the outcome of this game.

Division winners host a game.

Wildcard teams travel.

If Seattle had won the division at 10-6 nobody would care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 04:32 PM
 
4,577 posts, read 7,079,434 times
Reputation: 4233
I disagree...I think if no team in a division has a winning record, then the game should default to the next highest wild card team. This only confirmed to me that the NFL is watered down with too many bad teams.

I do agree that 18 games is not a good idea. I guess they will have 2 of the pre-season games change to regular season games, but really is anybody ready for the season to start in August? We have too many injuries as it is with 16 games. Just greed...more games, more money for the owners, TV and NFL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 06:01 PM
 
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
9,114 posts, read 15,694,576 times
Reputation: 3695
I don't understand when someone makes the comment the leagues is "watered down"...

When is it not watered down? I think parity is a good thing for the NFL. Like I said, there are 5 out of 6 playoff teams in the NFC that can make a case for going to Dallas. Do you consider that watered down? There will always be an equal amount of bad teams as there are good teams every year so this makes no sense.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 06:03 PM
 
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
9,114 posts, read 15,694,576 times
Reputation: 3695
Two years ago, two 11-5 teams did not make the playoffs (atlanta and New England).

What's more of a travesty? Two 11-5 teams not making it in one year, or a 7-9 team going to the playoffs...?

Lets not get overly excited about this....chit happens....the NFL isn't perfect but its damn close.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 09:51 PM
 
Location: Indianapolis
2,295 posts, read 2,155,931 times
Reputation: 3109
Three years ago, the 12-4 Colts had to travel TO the 8-8 Chargers on Wild Card Weekend. Where was the outrage then? Is it only happening now because the Seahawks actually have a losing record instead of a .500 record?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 11:05 PM
 
2,057 posts, read 3,161,275 times
Reputation: 980
When you can claim that in your first year as head coach, you get to the postseason AND get home field advantage (via a losing record, though it is only for a game), it just seems ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 11:11 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,347,563 times
Reputation: 29451
I don't have a big issue with division winners automatically making the playoffs even if other teams with better records get excluded. That's the trade-off for having more teams with a stake later into the season. If playoffs were determined strictly by record, you'd have a lot more teams with nothing left to play for by the 10th week or so, which in turn would diminish fan interest and dilute rivalries. However, I can get on board with having playoff seeding based on record, even if that means a wildcard gets home field advantage over a division winner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top