re: Sub .500 division winners should not be guaranteed a playoff spot

Go to a seeding system ?

quote:

---

That's really not too much to ask.

---

Yes it is.

Look, your gripe is with the division format if you really hate the idea of sub .500 division winner. You should be advocating for a playoff format by record then.

If you were to do it by record, you could literally wind up one day with a system where the same few teams are in the playoffs nearly every year like college ball and the SEC was with the BCS. A playoff format by record favors the big market teams and you would never see small market teams like the saints or packers make it into the playoffs with any consistency. It's ftr the division format is the most fair playoff format in sports.

The playoff system is designed to find the best 10 teams of 32 and pit them against each other to find a champion, right?

If that's the case, I don't think it's too terrible of an idea to exclude sub-.500 teams and give that playoff spot to a third wildcard for that conference. The wildcard with the highest seeding would get to host in the first round.

But the thing is, the playoff system isn't really designed to find the best 10 teams. The NFL is here to make money, and when you exclude a division from the playoffs, you eliminate a lot of the eyeballs in some markets. If the Saints are out of the playoffs I typically still watch Carolina, Atlanta, or Tampa Bay's playoff runs, because those are the teams that are the most relevant to the Saints (we've been playing them all year, we will be playing them again next year, etc. etc.). I imagine a lot of people are the same way.

If the rules allow for the elimination of entire divisions from the playoffs, the NFL could not only lose revenue from the 4 markets that division represents during the playoffs, but from the later half of the regular season as well. So I don't really think they have a financial incentive to do this.

And the entire reason the current format is profitable to begin with is because it keeps each team's seasons interesting for the longest amount of time possible. Which I certainly don't have a problem with.

quote:

---

So losers

---

You keep saying this about the team who won their division as oppose to teams your talking about who didn't win theirs or enough games to be a Wild Card. So...your own logic is working against you.

I mean I'm making an argument that's pretty close to the 1/9 LSU/Bama debacle in which how Bama didn't deserve a spot in the natty when they didn't even win their own division much less the conference.

quote:

---

In college that'd be like saying one if the Eastern division champs can't play in the SEC champ game because they have a losing record. So you put another Western team in. It just doesn't work like that.

---

It's not like that at all. In the NFL playoff system, wildcards already can come from any division--It's not a strict East vs. West vs. South vs. North format, it's a "best 6 teams" format. After all, in current NFL rules you could see an NFC South vs. NFC South matchup in the NFC Championship game. Division rivals have played in conference championship games before...

quote:

---

If a division winner goes less than 8-8 and there is another Wild Card team with a winning record, then the sub .500 division winner should give up their spot.

---

No they shouldn't. They won the division fair and square and shouldn't be punished for three other teams in the division being so horrible.

quote:

---

I am a big Saints fan, but what has happened in the NFC South this year is horrendous.

---

I really didn't have a problem with this happening to Seattle at 7-9. They won their division fair and square and deserved to be rewarded as such.

What's also horrendous is that the rest of the NFL is counting the NFC south as wins and thereby inflating their records where we have three teams that are at least 10-3 or better and it not being a good indicator of how good they really are.

quote:

---

To change the playoff format would be an overreaction, indigent outrage seeking to punish an anomaly and only hurt the NFL brand and get rid of a great playoff format.

---

I think a lot of Saints fans just don't want to hear the media/fan flack that will come with it. But after bountygate nothing bothers me anymore.

If we make it to the 2nd rnd where will all the "tankers" be?

What determines a shitty team? Record?

Don't you think the quality of your opponents can effect your record? your rotating divisional opponents can inflate or hinder your record?

There have been some pretty awful teams in the AFC South, NFC West(Pre2011)...wouldn't having the occasional draw of a down year division inflate your overall record vs someone who drew the AFC or NFC North?

It is the NFL anything can happen on any given Sunday....Didn't the Greenbay Packers just lose to the Bills?

Some of those subpar 9-7 NYG teams beat a couple good teams to win a few SB's.

Wouldn't you say that a terrible, god awful 7-9 Seattle team that had no postseason experience as a team together used the 2010 postseason as a springboard to one of the most dominant NFL seasons as a team just a few short years later?
They must of had no talent at all on that 2010 roster...

Considering the Saints have lost 2 games this season in OT and another 3 games by 10 points in regulation all to teams that are still in Postseason Consideration with the exception of the 49ers who were eliminated yesterday...it seems that this terrible team can at least compete with the upper echelon of teams in the NFL.

Considering this Saints team has won at least 10 games under Sean Payton every year since 2008...I would lean more towards this 1 year being an anomaly.

The other "GOOD" team you are most likely lobbying for to get into the playoffs over a Division Champion is most likely going to wind up being the Philadelphia Eagles who have Mark Sanchez at QB vs a Saints team with a bonafide 1st ballot HOF'er...

Considering that potential WC team is .500 on the road and lost their starting QB for the year...I would say at this point we are arguing semantics...the Saints are just as likely to go on a run and win the SB as this same Philly team except I would put more money and better odds on the Saints running the table.

In short the playoffs will get the better team in.

quote:

---

If you go less than 8-8, it means that YOU are horrible too and do not deserve to be in the playoffs

---

I've been over this in the first post in this thread. Even in a shitty division like this, whoever emerges as the winner will have proved itself as the best team of a 4 team division in a 16 team conference that sends 6 teams to the playoffs and that deserves a playoff spot and a home game.

quote:

---

Give up your spot to another WC team with a better record.

---

Interesting choice of words and besides, that WC team failed to win their division and are the second best team in the division. That's not more deserving over a team that actually won theirs.

quote:

---

I thought this in 2010 with Seattle, too. It rarely happens and would be easily fixed.

---

I thought the opposite. Seattle won their division fair and square and deserved to host over a team that failed to win theirs. It didn't matter how crappy Seattle's division was.