|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
But they got rewarded for a losing season, whereas teams with winning records got shafted. Its not right.
but, they did so by besting the teams in their own division. it creates rivalries, intrigue and keeps things interesting. some years, it'll have inequities.
then again, do you think other teams thought it was fair the AFC North had such an easy schedule that allowed 3 teams to make the playoffs last year? and yes, it was an easy schedule (pull up the list of starting QBs the Browns faced if you don't believe that).
there is no perfect system. the one we have is pretty darn good though.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14 |
Quote:
Quote:
But they got rewarded for a losing season, whereas teams with winning records got shafted. Its not right.
but, they did so by besting the teams in their own division. it creates rivalries, intrigue and keeps things interesting. some years, it'll have inequities.
then again, do you think other teams thought it was fair the AFC North had such an easy schedule that allowed 3 teams to make the playoffs last year? and yes, it was an easy schedule (pull up the list of starting QBs the Browns faced if you don't believe that).
there is no perfect system. the one we have is pretty darn good though.
Point taken, but losing teams dont deserve a shot at the Superbowl imho.
Philadelphia Eagles diehard who also likes the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
But they got rewarded for a losing season, whereas teams with winning records got shafted. Its not right.
Going into the season, everybody knows what the rules are to make the playoffs... the fact that sometimes it works out in a way that some people feel is unfair is pretty much irrelevant. If division winners aren't going to be guaranteed a playoff spot, then get rid of the divisions.... the Browns can play every team in the AFC once and play 1 NFC team based on previous years finish, that is your 16 games.. if you want to be fair, that's the only way to do it. What's not fair is saying the Browns get to play the Steelers twice, the Ravens twice, the Bengals twice.. while the Broncos get to play the Raiders twice, the Chiefs twice, the Chargers twice and the best record gets in the playoffs...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14 |
Its a 7-9 team though going in over teams that have 10 wins each. The seahawks winning a division at 7-9 should be vilified, not celebrated. Its a flawed system, no matter what they try doing. I would love it, if the scrapped the divisions. Think about it; The Dallas Cowboys in the NFC EAST, The St Louis Rams in the NFC WEST, The Indianapolis Colts in the AFC SOUTH, The Miami Dolphins in the AFC EAST??? It goes on and on. I'm all for no divisions.
Philadelphia Eagles diehard who also likes the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
yeah, let's kill that needless Bears v. Packers rivalry. overblown anyway.
and that Giants and Dallas rivalry. who cares.
obviously the Pitt v. Cleveland rivalry
et cetera
not to mention, how do you balance the schedule? just because one time there was a huge discrepancy and it was unfair does not mean that it is right to change the whole system.
if you kill the rivalries, then you will kill alot of fan interest. it won't happen.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
not to mention, how do you balance the schedule?
If "fairness" is your ultimate objective, then there is really only one way to do it and maintain a 16 game schedule, play everybody in your conference once (alternating years at home), then one team from the other conference drawn out of a hat (alternating years at home)... that way every teams schedule is exactly the same for 15 games and the other game is random because if you do it based on last years record, then good teams will always have a tougher schedule, and that's not fair.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
yes, exactly. and that will kill the NFL.
even outside the division rivalry standpoint:
let's say you pick at random the first year, then rotate through the NFC teams after that to ensure you don't always get the same team. that means you get the Cowboys coming to Cleveland once every 32 years. and that is only if you maintain the h/a each time.
if this had been the standard and we drew Dallas in Dallas this year, the last time the Cowboys would have had the Browns in Dallas, Brian Sipe would have been our QB.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882 |
Quote:
The Miami Dolphins in the AFC EAST???
Well, to be fair, Miami is very EAST compared to the rest of the country. 
But I understand what you're trying to say. 
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Punchsmack/punch.gif) “...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882 |
I didn't write this but I think it illustrates the nervousness of having tons of losing teams as the 7 seed if the expansion of the playoffs went to 14:
Since the implementation of the new division system in 2002, the teams that would have gotten the #7 seed have ended with the following records:
1 = 11-5
4 = 10-6
11 = 9-7
4 = 8-8.
There's never been a team with a losing record getting the #7 and on average the #7 spot posts a slightly better than 9-7 record.
So.....still sour on adding one team to each conference now (#1 seed gettng the only bye week)?
“...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14 |
You can still have rivals with no divisions. But make some more obvious rivals. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Tampa and Miami, Dallas and San Fran, more geographical and historical but still maintaining your normal schedule if you had divisions. No need to play one out of conference opponent once in 16 years. Just replace it with a different team. Philadelphia has a great rivalry with the Cowboys and Giants, but the Redskins rivalry is pretty dull. You switch that out with the Steelers for two games a year, it would be a lot better. Its going to be flawed anyway you look at it, but rewarding a losing season is just wrong.
Philadelphia Eagles diehard who also likes the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,167
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,167 |
No more kickoffs, no more divisions, NBA teams have a tougher time getting into the playoffs, no more hitting QBs.... why bother watching?
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 14 |
Why bother watching a 7-9,6-10 playoff team? Rewarding a team for losing isn't what sports is about. If you go and have half of the league making the playoffs, this is what is going to happen. Good teams would want to take it easy early on resting players and things like that, knowing that no matter what, they are more then likely to be in the playoffs. I agree with you though on the kickoff rule, That's just stupid.
Philadelphia Eagles diehard who also likes the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
They just posted that NO team with a losing record would have gotten into the playoffs as a 7th seed. Not sure why that sounds bad.
Divisions create excitement for the fans. Conference play based seeded would cause me personally to not really care about a bunch of games that I normally watch.
Look at the AFC north this year. Baltimore has not locked it up yet and needs to badly, In a conference only type set up they are in and its boring.
I still feel expanding to a 7th seed would be a good thing because I remember us getting locked out at 10-6. I think the next year someone else got locked out at 11-5.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,167
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,167 |
Quote:
Why bother watching a 7-9,6-10 playoff team?
That has happened how many times since the merger? I'd venture a guess that you can count the occurrences on a single hand without using all of your fingers.
Expanded playoffs and no kickoffs are a joke, as is the notion of getting rid of divisions.
The NFL is turning into that organization that just regularly changes things for the sake of changing things - it's like Goodell feels he has to make dramatic changes to justify his existence or something.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
The NFL is turning into that organization that just regularly changes things for the sake of changing things - it's like Goodell feels he has to make dramatic changes to justify his existence or something.
I believe the "safety of the game" is less about protection of players and more about protection of the vaults.
Regarding expanded playoffs, see comment about the vaults.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,167
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,167 |
Quote:
Quote:
The NFL is turning into that organization that just regularly changes things for the sake of changing things - it's like Goodell feels he has to make dramatic changes to justify his existence or something.
I believe the "safety of the game" is less about protection of players and more about protection of the vaults.
Regarding expanded playoffs, see comment about the vaults.
I agree that the safety of the game issue is all a sham to protect their vaults... that's what happens when you get sued for supposedly not doing enough to protect the people that fully knew what they were getting themselves into ("uh, so you mean to tell me that bashing my head into another guy's head... is bad??!! OMG").
Expanded playoffs.... I see this as simply another track being pursued by Goodell to increase the length of the season. He *really* wants those extra two weeks, and my guess is that the owners have directed him to make it happen one way or another. By putting forth such a terrible idea as this, the notion of two more regular season games seems less distasteful, and upon being revisited will likely receive a warmer greeting than it did the first time around.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Post Season Could Expand to 14 or
16 Teams
|
|
