Proposal: No Divisions
-
When have they even been a huge problem outside of last year?
-
When have they even been a huge problem outside of last year?
I would have to study it, but I think that just about every year or maybe every other year one team with a better record than another is left out of the playoffs.
-
Well, here is the study. I only went back to 2000 to determine if one team got into the playoffs over another with a better record. What I found was that it is starting to happen more frequently. Going to 4 divisions is the likely cause of this phenomena:
2014 Panther 7-8-1 got in over Eagles 10-6
2013 Packers 8-7-1 got in over Cardinals 10-6
2011 Broncos 8-8 got in over Titans 9-7
2010 Seahawks 7-9 got in over Bucs and Giants both 10-6
2008 Chargers 8-8 got in over Pats 11-5 and Jets 9-7
........Cardinals 9-7 got in over Falcons 11-5 and Buccaneers also 9-7 but who would have gotten in with better conf. record
2003 Ravens 10-6 got in over Dolphins 10-6 (but better conf. record.)
So, the switch to 4 divisions IS creating the phenomena of teams with better records staying home while teams with lesser records make the playoffs.
And, by the way this is NOT "Tradition"......per se. This started in 2002 when the league went to those 4 division setup.
The question is: is this what the NFL Owners want......or are these unintended consequences.
-
Your Fantasy is showing, Gip...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
-
It makes sense in the surface but then someone will argue, "that team doesn't play anyone, let's let the computers decide"
-
That's a turd of an idea.
WSS
-
Surely a team from one conference will make the playoffs with a worse record than a team from the other that did not make the playoffs. Guess we should get rid of conferences.
EOT.
-
I like the division set up as is.
Division winners should go into the playoffs, regardless of record.
Whether they should get home-field over a WC with a better record is the question...
I like the division set up as is.
Division winners should go into the playoffs, regardless of record.
Whether they should get home-field over a WC with a better record is the question...
I'm in a rut too, I don't like changing out of a division format. The NFL is obviously unique, as the 16 game schedule makes every game mean something. 3/8 of the schedule is in the division and heightens the importance. To me, games against Tennessee, Jacksonville, Miami for example just don't have any appeal, probably never will.
NBA, NHL, MLB have so many games that it does make some sense to eliminate divisions.
Nothing is ever going to be perfect- not even your suggestion Gip. I'm with Tour- if you have a losing record- you can never host a playoff game. Then again what happens if two division winners have losing records, and have to play each other in the playoffs?
I'm all for realigning the divisions- or conferences. That's certain to happen anyway assuming the market meisters have their way and relocate a team (or two) to La-La land. Kick the Ravens over to the AFC East- where they belong and add Indy or Buffalo. KC and Oakland have nothing in common geographically- other than a long standing fan hatred. Ditto the Cowboys and Redskins- blame Jerry Jones for that one.
LOL you could create a "Central division" with the Rams, Chiefs, Colts, and Cowboys. Jerrah might be old enough to remember the 'Pokes used to have a rivalry with the Chiefs.
Young 'Uns don't remember that the Browns and Giants used to have a long standing rivalry- that's so far in the past, I can't see it anymore.
-
Gipper, your system would work. As somebody said before it works pretty well in EU sports.
Only it would make a lot more games meanigless and December would become a boring month for many fans.
So, I would not "vote" for it.
All the way from Torino to Cleveland: GO BROWNS!!!!!!! -
Gipper, your system would work. As somebody said before it works pretty well in EU sports.
Only it would make a lot more games meanigless and December would become a boring month for many fans.
So, I would not "vote" for it.
Gipper, your system would work. As somebody said before it works pretty well in EU sports.
Only it would make a lot more games meanigless and December would become a boring month for many fans.
So, I would not "vote" for it.
I think you're right there. Our soccer leagues for example can be all sorted a month before the end, or they can be down to the wire. American sports have engineered it to be down to the wire every season. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing can be argued, but I wouldn't change it back to the potentially boring mode.
-
It makes sense in the surface but then someone will argue, "that team doesn't play anyone, let's let the computers decide"
It makes sense in the surface but then someone will argue, "that team doesn't play anyone, let's let the computers decide"
No, that would screw Ohio State. Won't happen.
Oh, sorry. Wrong venue. LOL!
-
Surely a team from one conference will make the playoffs with a worse record than a team from the other that did not make the playoffs. Guess we should get rid of conferences.
EOT.
Surely a team from one conference will make the playoffs with a worse record than a team from the other that did not make the playoffs. Guess we should get rid of conferences.
EOT.
I did keep the current conferences intact....and in my listing above I only did this history within conferences.
Hoorta below makes a point about division realignment possibly happening when LA gets a team or team....(or....perhaps not.....the teams said to be moving: Rams/Raiders/Chargers are already in the Western Division. Going to LA would not affect that arrangement)
-
Gipper, your system would work. As somebody said before it works pretty well in EU sports.
Only it would make a lot more games meanigless and December would become a boring month for many fans.
So, I would not "vote" for it.
Gipper, your system would work. As somebody said before it works pretty well in EU sports.
Only it would make a lot more games meanigless and December would become a boring month for many fans.
So, I would not "vote" for it.
Why do you think that it would make a lot of December games meaningless?...any more than they are now.?
One point about my "system" is that yes, I am having the bad teams playing the bad teams....but coming out of that means that some of those team will actually have good records....won't they?
And how does it work in European sports? No conferences/divisions? Just one big free for all?
-
I like the division set up as is.
Division winners should go into the playoffs, regardless of record.
Whether they should get home-field over a WC with a better record is the question...
I'm in a rut too, I don't like changing out of a division format. The NFL is obviously unique, as the 16 game schedule makes every game mean something. 3/8 of the schedule is in the division and heightens the importance. To me, games against Tennessee, Jacksonville, Miami for example just don't have any appeal, probably never will.
NBA, NHL, MLB have so many games that it does make some sense to eliminate divisions.
Nothing is ever going to be perfect- not even your suggestion Gip. I'm with Tour- if you have a losing record- you can never host a playoff game. Then again what happens if two division winners have losing records, and have to play each other in the playoffs?
I'm all for realigning the divisions- or conferences. That's certain to happen anyway assuming the market meisters have their way and relocate a team (or two) to La-La land. Kick the Ravens over to the AFC East- where they belong and add Indy or Buffalo. KC and Oakland have nothing in common geographically- other than a long standing fan hatred. Ditto the Cowboys and Redskins- blame Jerry Jones for that one.
LOL you could create a "Central division" with the Rams, Chiefs, Colts, and Cowboys. Jerrah might be old enough to remember the 'Pokes used to have a rivalry with the Chiefs.
Young 'Uns don't remember that the Browns and Giants used to have a long standing rivalry- that's so far in the past, I can't see it anymore.
I'm all for realigning the divisions- or conferences. That's certain to happen anyway assuming the market meisters have their way and relocate a team (or two) to La-La land. Kick the Ravens over to the AFC East- where they belong and add Indy or Buffalo. KC and Oakland have nothing in common geographically- other than a long standing fan hatred. Ditto the Cowboys and Redskins- blame Jerry Jones for that one.
LOL you could create a "Central division" with the Rams, Chiefs, Colts, and Cowboys. Jerrah might be old enough to remember the 'Pokes used to have a rivalry with the Chiefs.
Young 'Uns don't remember that the Browns and Giants used to have a long standing rivalry- that's so far in the past, I can't see it anymore.
It would be great if the Ratbirds were ousted out of the AFC North, but I bet the powers-that-be would site the Steelers/Ratbirds rivalry as a keeper, like Wash/Dallas.
The point of divisions is to reward a team for finishing on top. That shouldn't be mesed with- we Browns fans remember an 8-8 team winning the Central in 1985, only to blow a huge lead in Miami in the playoffs. Sorry Gipper, that's my opinion. Change for the sake of change is dumb IMHO. I also think the Broncos lost out on a playoff birth in the 80s and went 11-5; aberrations happen from time to time.
-
I'm all for realigning the divisions- or conferences. That's certain to happen anyway assuming the market meisters have their way and relocate a team (or two) to La-La land. Kick the Ravens over to the AFC East- where they belong and add Indy or Buffalo. KC and Oakland have nothing in common geographically- other than a long standing fan hatred. Ditto the Cowboys and Redskins- blame Jerry Jones for that one.
LOL you could create a "Central division" with the Rams, Chiefs, Colts, and Cowboys. Jerrah might be old enough to remember the 'Pokes used to have a rivalry with the Chiefs.
Young 'Uns don't remember that the Browns and Giants used to have a long standing rivalry- that's so far in the past, I can't see it anymore.
It would be great if the Ratbirds were ousted out of the AFC North, but I bet the powers-that-be would site the Steelers/Ratbirds rivalry as a keeper, like Wash/Dallas.
The point of divisions is to reward a team for finishing on top. That shouldn't be mesed with- we Browns fans remember an 8-8 team winning the Central in 1985, only to blow a huge lead in Miami in the playoffs. Sorry Gipper, that's my opinion. Change for the sake of change is dumb IMHO. I also think the Broncos lost out on a playoff birth in the 80s and went 11-5; aberrations happen from time to time.
It would be great if the Ratbirds were ousted out of the AFC North, but I bet the powers-that-be would site the Steelers/Ratbirds rivalry as a keeper, like Wash/Dallas.
The point of divisions is to reward a team for finishing on top. That shouldn't be mesed with- we Browns fans remember an 8-8 team winning the Central in 1985, only to blow a huge lead in Miami in the playoffs. Sorry Gipper, that's my opinion. Change for the sake of change is dumb IMHO. I also think the Broncos lost out on a playoff birth in the 80s and went 11-5; aberrations happen from time to time.
I listed all the teams with lesser records getting in over teams with better records above.
But, yes, as a general rule I prefer this divisional setup.
But...the trend is for this to happen just about every year.....so it is not so much of an aberration any more...and if the trend continues....and teams with bad records continue to get in the playoffs over teams with better records....the NFL may do something about it.
Like I said, my proposal was just for shits and giggles......but NFL owners that put their money into teams and coaches and players who see their team getting squadoosh in terms of playoff appearances when they go 10-6 or 11-5 where 7-9 or 8-8 teams are making it on a regular basis....THEY are the ones that might want to rock the boat and change the system.
Imagine what the cry would be when a team from NYC stays home with a 10-6 record and a team from the flyover territory makes it at 7-9. The media there will go crazy. (if it happened the other way around....not so much)
-
I know you kept the current conferences. I'm just wondering why since we could have this exact same issue. If you're going to scrap divisions, you might as well scrap the whole thing.
-
I know you kept the current conferences. I'm just wondering why since we could have this exact same issue. If you're going to scrap divisions, you might as well scrap the whole thing.
I know you kept the current conferences. I'm just wondering why since we could have this exact same issue. If you're going to scrap divisions, you might as well scrap the whole thing.
Because you have to have some method of who plays in the Super Bowl.....though, perhaps you are right....lets look at that:
We could just have a 12 team, 1-12 seeded playoff.
Honestly, that would not be so bad. It is what the NCAA FCS, D-II and D-III do it.
How could this have perhaps worked last year:
Top 4 teams would get byes....so
Pats 12-4
Cowboys 12-4
Packers 12-4
Seahawks 12-4
Broncos 12-4
would vie for who gets the byes....some tie breaker system not based on Div/Conf record would have to be devised.
For argument sakes, lets put Denver as the loser of that discussion
Thus: Broncos plus 3 of these 4:
Steelers 11-5
Colts 11-5
Lions 11-5
Cardinals 11-5
would get home field for the first game against these:
Bengals 10-5-1
Ravens 10-6
Eagles 10-6.
And here is a random seed/game matchup:
#1 Pats/#2 Seahawks/#3 Packers/#4 Cowboys get byes
#5 Broncos vs.#12 Eagles
#6 Colts vs. #11 Ravens
#7 Steelers vs. #10 Bengals
#8 Lions vs. #9 Cardinals
And play it off that way...higher seed vs. lower seed on through.
Of course the questions remain: how to schedule properly. How to determine tie breakers for seeding and to determine who gets in?
From last year's results...All teams with double digit wins would make it above. Eagles get in.....Panthers with losing record is out.
No one with an equal record as another team would have been shut out.
I don't think we want to rely on "polling" or a Committee to determine seeding and inclusion the way the NCAA does it. That is the good thing about the current system....there are objective tie breakers.
And we don't want to go by "points" by any means. Could you imagine the fights/hard feelings that would happen if NFL teams tried to run up the score.
But, Yes....this could work interestingly if that scheduling/seeding issue could be addressed.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login