Ursa Majoris Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I was wondering who would be the first one to go there. This has nothing to with the Steelers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 ....and I'm not surprised at all that you were the first one to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I was wondering who would be the first one to go there. This has nothing to with the Steelers. They are just the example this year. It has happened to many teams, many times since the current format was introduced. By the way, the Steelers were the first team to win 3 road games on their way to a Super Bowl win....one came against this team with a horseshoe on their helmet. If the Steelers were in the AFC West in place of the Broncos, what odds do you give them to win that division ? (Lets see how honest you are here) I really have no idea. I haven't been all that impressed with the Steelers this year. I think the AFC West is a better division than people are giving them credit for. (They didn't get two games against the Browns). When they played KC, they only won by 4 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 By the way, it isn't as if this hasn't been discussed before. The league has discussed it, but, it has never been voted in. There are many still discussing it: https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chro...yoff+re-seeding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 you wouldn't be rewarded an advantage over a team who was more deserving. What does "more deserving" mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Polian is on the competition committee. He talks about it on his radio show every year around this time. They have discussed this scenario many times. When they went to four divisions, this was a big debate. And it comes up every year when a wild card has a better record than a division winner. I still think that a home playoff game is a great reward for winning your division. If you're not good enough to win your division, you gotta play on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) You can't play an even schedule in the NFL. The teams in your division all play the same schedule outside of two games. I feel if you beat out the other teams in your division who are all playing similar schedules you should get the homefield. If you ended up with a wild card, you couldn't beat out the teams that played basically the same schedule you did. This. And I don't understand how it's a bad thing to have to go on the road and face an "underserving" team who lucked into a home game. They still have a arguably an easier matchup than do the higher-seeded Texans at home.... Should we then say that Houston is getting shafted? Of course not, it's the luck of the draw, and there's no objective way to say that a division winner faced an "easier" schedule, or in Menudo's scenario that a wildcard team actually faced a "tougher" schedule. So you might really be rewarding or discounting a more deserving team under that format. The only down-side to the current method is that a team has to face a weaker team at home.... Okay, well doesn't that balance out pretty well the fact that they get to face a team that was barely deserving of making the playoffs? Edited January 2, 2012 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Just because something works well doesn't mean it can't be made better. Willingness to change and improve is what makes the NFL great. I will not argue the point. As I said I recognize the inequity. There is a solid argument that sport is about setting a baseline equity and then allowing the best to prevail, as much as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 What does "more deserving" mean? I guess it could mean different things to different people. To me, an 11-5 Saints team is more deserving of an advantage than a 7-9 Seahawks team. However, you believe me to be a liar, so, I wouldn't want to drag you down to my tall tales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I guess it could mean different things to different people. To me, an 11-5 Saints team is more deserving of an advantage than a 7-9 Seahawks team. However, you believe me to be a liar, so, I wouldn't want to drag you down to my tall tales. I would have agreed with you . . . if the 7-9 Seahawks team hadn't knocked said Saints team out of the playoffs. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 ....and I'm not surprised at all that you were the first one to do that. It is difficult to escape the thought that your sole concern is that the Steelers will have to go on the road instead of having a home game. If the Steelers had won their division going 9-7 or 8-8 or whatever, I seriously doubt you'd be campaigning hard for this particular cause celebre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 It is also inequitable that teams from week divisions can get in over teams with much better records from the other conference, or at least potentially so. If we are to ignore divisions are we to ignore conferences? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 This. And I don't understand how it's a bad thing to have to go on the road and face an "underserving" team who lucked into a home game. They still have a arguably an easier matchup than do the higher-seeded Texans at home.... Should we then say that Houston is getting shafted? Of course not, it's the luck of the draw, and there's no objective way to say that a division winner faced an "easier" schedule, or in Menudo's scenario that a wildcard team actually faced a "tougher" schedule. So you might really be rewarding or discounting a more deserving team under that format. The only down-side to the current method is that a team has to face a weaker team at home.... Okay, well doesn't that balance out pretty well the fact that they get to face a team that was barely deserving of making the playoffs? Now doubt you make a strong argument on the other side. I just still believe the "reward" of home-field advantage should go to the team with the better record. Yes, there are cases where a team's record might have been easier. However, I see those scenarios happening yes than the ones we see now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 I would have agreed with you . . . if the 7-9 Seahawks team hadn't knocked said Saints team out of the playoffs. . . With the assistance of an undeserved advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 With the assistance of an undeserved advantage. But if they were "clearly" superior, they would have won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heydave76 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I also feel the AFC North traded games this year with the two weakest divisions in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 It is difficult to escape the thought that your sole concern is that the Steelers will have to go on the road instead of having a home game. If the Steelers had won their division going 9-7 or 8-8 or whatever, I seriously doubt you'd be campaigning hard for this particular cause celebre. O.k. Then I guess your opinion of me is that I'm not someone who can see past my favorite team and be objective. You should really take a look at my posts over the last several years. I'm not quite the irrational, blind homer that many seem to think. I have spoken about this to many, several times before. I may have even brought it up on here, but, I can't remember. However, the point is, I stated that it wasn't about the Steelers, but, what I thought would be better for the league. You read that, and decided to laugh at me, because, in your opinion, I was obviously lying. If the Steelers lose at Denver, they don't deserve to even be in the discussion for the Super Bowl. I wouldn't be surprised if the Steelers did lose, as they, like most in the AFC this year, have been extremely inconsistent. Unfortunately, I think there chances of losing are increased, because a team is getting an advantage that I don't feel they deserve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I guess it could mean different things to different people. To me, an 11-5 Saints team is more deserving of an advantage than a 7-9 Seahawks team. However, you believe me to be a liar, so, I wouldn't want to drag you down to my tall tales. I don't think you're a liar. I do think you only care about this right now because it's your team. You say the division winner would still get in but a "bad" division winner would be seeded 5 or 6, right? So, if you concede that AND you base your argument on some kind of definition of "deserving", how do you square the possibility of a 7-9 Seahawks division winner getting in over an 8-8 or 9-7 team in another division? In other words, if your "undeserving" argument is to stand, then the playoffs should strictly go by record, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) So, you think the 7-9 Seahawks were more worthy of the reward of homefield advantage last year than the 11-4 Saints ?Do you think the 8-8 Broncos are more worthy of the reward of homefield advantage last year than the 12-4 Steelers ? Sorry, I just don't see it. This honestly has nothing to do with the Steelers, though most won't believe that. I've felt that the system has been screwed up for some time. I know most don't like change, so, this won't be a popular opinion, but, I strongly believe that a re-seeding would reward the teams that deserve it most. A division title would still be the tie-breaker if the records were even, in my scenario. consider the monkey wrench thrown So what about the 10-6 Buccaneers and Giants of 2010 Edited January 2, 2012 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 I also feel the AFC North traded games this year with the two weakest divisions in the NFL. An argument can be made. However, I would argue that the NFC East was at least as bad as the NFC West. It is a good point though, and one I have thought about. Essentially, neither system is perfect, but, I just believe a re-seeding would do a better job. It is just my opinion, and I do see the points of those on the other side of the fence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 If the Steelers lose at Denver, they don't deserve to even be in the discussion for the Super Bowl. They won't be - they'll be out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 I don't think you're a liar. I do think you only care about this right now because it's your team. You say the division winner would still get in but a "bad" division winner would be seeded 5 or 6, right? So, if you concede that AND you base your argument on some kind of definition of "deserving", how do you square the possibility of a 7-9 Seahawks division winner getting in over an 8-8 or 9-7 team in another division? In other words, if your "undeserving" argument is to stand, then the playoffs should strictly go by record, right? An argument can be made for what you are proposing. However, I do like the division battle, and would like to see it continue. However, to answer your question of who is "deserving" of a higher seed, I do feel that the team with the better record should be seeded higher. Would it be perfect ? Absolutely not, but, I think it would be better than what we are seeing today. Of course the Steelers situation is why I brought it up today, but, I have spoken about my desire for this system for years. Like I said, it would still be flawed, but, so, is the current situation, in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) They won't be - they'll be out. Yes, this is very true. Damn it, you knew what I meant. I expect the Steelers to win on the road. No disrespect to Denver, but, I would rather play at Denver than Cincy or Houston at home. That isn't to say the Steelers couldn't lose to the Broncos, but, my argument really isn't about the Steelers having to play at Denver. Edited January 2, 2012 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 consider the monkey wrench thrownSo what about the 10-6 Buccaneers and Giants of 2010 No situation is perfect, I just think my proposal is less flawed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Yes, this is very true. Damn it, you knew what I meant. I expect the Steelers to win on the road. No disrespect to Denver, but, I would rather play at Denver than Cincy or Houston at home. That isn't to say the Steelers couldn't lose to the Broncos, but, my argument really isn't about the Steelers having to play at Denver. I'd rather play Houston. They are really sucking right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.