- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sub .500 division winners should not be guaranteed a playoff spot
Posted on 12/15/14 at 7:53 am to Sentrius
Posted on 12/15/14 at 7:53 am to Sentrius
quote:
Give up your spot to another WC team with a better record.
quote:
that WC team failed to win their division and are the second best team in the division.
Actually we could be arguing about the 3rd best team in another Division...it may not even be the runner up.
0
Posted on 12/15/14 at 7:53 am to AlaTiger
quote:
It means that you went 7-9 with the easiest schedule of all of the playoff teams.
This statement is logically flawed.
It doesn't mean that at all. You can't possibly draw that conclusion.
Pitt, Baltimore, Indy, Dallas, Detroit, Cincy, and Philly all rank behind the Saints and NFC South in SOS so far.
Highly doubtful that we'll drop all the way behind all of them
This post was edited on 12/15/14 at 7:57 am
Posted on 12/15/14 at 8:15 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
If it's an anomoly and only happens rarely, why not make a rule against it? Wouldn't affect anything most years and when it did, a good team gets in and a sorry one gets left out. The playoffs is where the good teams go to decide a champion. No losers allowed.
So big baller, give us this rule that would fix this issue and not affect the rest of the playoff seeding scenario? No matter what you do, if you make a rule you are discounting the importance of divisional games. Lets go over the most likely system you are proposing, since you won't put ink to paper and state what system is better.
Just seed playoffs by record. Best 6 averages gets in. Guess what? Even that isn't perfect. You have 16 teams in a conference. You alternate a separate division in your conference every year (4 teams) and play 2 additional in-conference opponents. Add your 3 divisional rivals in that makes 9 conference opponents that you play. You don't play 6 teams out of your conference, therefore how can you say a straight record is a truly fair method of gauging the best out of 16? It's just as "flawed" as the system we have now.
In conclusion, unless you play every opponent every year, you cannot justly put into effect a straight record system for seeding into the playoffs. If you did play every opponent in your conference that leaves you only one additional game to play an AFC opponent. If you add more games you are looking at a football season being a war of attrition even more than it is now. The system we have now is correct, if you win your division you have proven that you are better than 3 other teams in your division. It's called a process of elimination, and is just as effective as a playoff game; except in my opinion it is more accurate because if you have a bad game you have the entire system to make it up, you aren't just eliminated.
This post was edited on 12/15/14 at 8:18 am
Posted on 12/15/14 at 8:30 am to efrad
quote:
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...
Actually you are incorrect. If you view a division playoff spot in the NFL in the same context as a spot in the SEC Championship (SECE v SECW), and a division in the NFL in the same context as a division in the SEC, then they are exactly the same.
If you win your division you get a chance to prove your team is the best in the conference. Both scenarios are very similar, especially considering the conference championship game in college has ramifications in the college playoffs now.
This post was edited on 12/15/14 at 8:31 am
Posted on 12/15/14 at 8:48 am to bountyhunter
quote:
Actually you are incorrect. If you view a division playoff spot in the NFL in the same context as a spot in the SEC Championship (SECE v SECW), and a division in the NFL in the same context as a division in the SEC, then they are exactly the same.
Yet in college, you can win your division and win your conference and still not even make the playoffs.
You can try to force a certain analogy here all you want but the systems are so different that they really aren't comparable.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 9:02 am to noonan
quote:
I agree, but after we had to travel to 7-9 Seattle, I say frick'em. Change the rule next year, but this year we get to piss people off.
The Saints aren't even in 1st place right now in this shitty division. So I'm not too worried about pissing other fan bases off.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 11:58 am to FleuryNipples
quote:
System is perfect as is.
Case closed move on.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 11:59 am to LooseCannon22282
quote:
first year I can ever remember the NFC South being this bad
This is the first year this has happened. Ironically, this year the South was suppose to be one of the best, if not the best. Saints & Carolina were SuperBowl favorites, Atlanta had a chance to be a 10+ wine, and TB was expected to ale a rebound.
On the other hand, in years where the South was suppose to be the worst, one of the teams made the SuperBowl.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 2:11 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
Posted on 12/15/14 at 2:15 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
Fluke a division is this way
Posted on 12/15/14 at 2:29 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
_________________________________________________
Love the Saints, but no team with a losing record should ride a shitty division into the playoffs and bump a worthy team in the process.
_________________________________________________
NO SUBPAR TEAM SHOULD GET IN DEAL WITH IT TOOTS, HAPPENED BEFORE, GONNA HAPPEN AGAIN
Posted on 12/15/14 at 3:05 pm to Sentrius
quote:
the most fair and accurate format for determining a champion
In what universe is it fair to have a 10-6 team sit at home when a 7-9 or 6-10 team doesn't just get in but actually hosts a playoff game?
quote:
you will have proven yourself as the best team out of the 4 shittiest teams
Fixed it for you.
quote:
highly unlikely this will happen again for a long time
It just happened three years ago and will again this year. It's not an anomaly. That's a trend.
quote:
No playoff format is perfect
Yes, it's called The Top Six Records Get Into The Playoffs.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 3:07 pm to LSUFreek
quote:
In what universe is it fair to have a 10-6 team sit at home when a 7-9 or 6-10 team doesn't just get in but actually hosts a playoff game?
This one last time I checked the rules. Any more questions?
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:06 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
The only way to not allow division winners with a losing record to enter the playoffs is to do away with divisions altogether. Simply have 2 conferences and have teams ranked that way. No more home and away between division teams. Everyone plays everyone in each conference and 1 additional game from the other conference. Send the top 6 teams to the playoffs and give the top 2 a bye.
If you are going to have divisions then you have to award a playoff spot to division winners. It makes no sense to have divisions and not do so. Once in a blue moon a shitty division winner will make the playoffs but that is the nature of such a system.
If you are going to have divisions then you have to award a playoff spot to division winners. It makes no sense to have divisions and not do so. Once in a blue moon a shitty division winner will make the playoffs but that is the nature of such a system.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:11 pm to whodatfan
If you want the top 6 records then do away with divisions. Then play the entire NFC and you will at least have a solid head to head tie breaker.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 4:15 pm to GEAUXTIGER23
Didn't I just say that (with a lot more words)? 
Posted on 12/15/14 at 6:54 pm to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
Sub .500 division winners should not be guaranteed a playoff spot
I dissagree. The keague is set up to have 4 divisions in each conference. What is the point of divisions if winning said division is not rewarded.
If you think sub-.500 teams should not make the playoffs, fine. Just get rid of the division format, or have just 2 divisions in each conference.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 7:04 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
If you aren't good enough to win your division there are still 2 spots left to make it in. If you aren't good enough to take one of those spots then too bad frick ya sorry for ya.
Posted on 12/15/14 at 7:09 pm to bonethug0108
Agreed. End of a worthless discussion.
Posted on 12/18/14 at 3:25 am to PokerPlayingTiger
quote:
The only way to not allow division winners with a losing record to enter the playoffs is to do away with divisions altogether.
It's not the only way and I'm not sure why you and everyone else who said this are having trouble understanding this concept.
Keep the format as-is. If team a sucks, but happens to be in a division with three other teams that suck even more, and, in the process of losing most of their games, "wins" the division, they stay their asses home while the other 3 division winners and 3 wild card teams move on.
The system now is good. This one rule change would make it better. Only amretard thinks the whole system would have to be scrapped to achieve this.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News