Seahawks make history.

[jtex316]

It's also a reward for the team owner - if their team wins their division, they are guaranteed one more home game (ticket sales, concessions, etc...)

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

IMO "the guy" doesn't realize,it goes against one of the reasons for the current format,So you don't get "Well these teams have only played each other once in the past 10 years"....2 divisions means 16 out of the 18 game schedule goes to division games,that only leaves two "non divisional games"  and you go back to a long wait between playing every team in the league...

Fixed typo,made it tad bit more readable....for me atleast

Well actually 15 out of the 18 games.  But I agree with your point. 

[Pappy13]

^ I like it the way it is. What's wrong with Seattle hosting a game?

Because they don't deserve it more than some other teams.

They won their division.  It's pretty cut and dry.  

Winning your division isn't more important than wins and losses.  You only play 6 games within your division.  You play 10 outside your division.  You should have to play well both within your division and outside your division to earn hosting a playoff game, that's fair across the board.

If they're so bad, like everyone says, they'll lose anyway.

I don't really care about the game itself, I don't think home field advantage is a big factor in the outcome of the game.  However it IS a big deal to the city.  Hosting a playoff game is huge for a number of factors.  It brings in a ton of revenue to businesses and such in the area.  It brings media coverage to the city.  It allows the fans to come to their own stadium to watch their team play as opposed to having to travel.  I think the team that has earned it more deserves it more. Granted that this doesn't happen every year and most years it probably wouldn't change things much, but for years like this one, I think it makes sense.

[Dave Gray]

Winning your division isn't more important than wins and losses.

I disagree.  That's why you have divisions.  (This is an extreme case, but under normal circumstances:) I'd rather win the division at 10-6, than get a wildcard spot at 11-5.

Also, having divisions (and giving incentive to winning them) is what makes a game against the Jets more important than a game against the Titans.  All wins are not created equal.  It makes for more interesting matchups throughout the season.

Does it suck that a crappy team is making the playoffs and hosting a game?  Maybe.  I actually think it's kinda cool to see such an underdog, but I could understand why you'd think that.  But it's probably not going to happen again in your lifetime.  It's not worth making changes until you see an upsetting trend. 

I for one, hope the Seahawks shake things up a little bit in the playoffs.

[Pappy13]

I disagree.  That's why you have divisions.  (This is an extreme case, but under normal circumstances:) I'd rather win the division at 10-6, than get a wildcard spot at 11-5.

Well it's not really about which you would prefer because if the 2 teams played in the same division you'd certainly rather be 11-5 than 10-6.  We are talking about 2 teams playing in different divisions, if they are in the same division than my suggestion doesn't matter in the slightest, whomever has the better record is going to win the division, be in the playoffs and have a better chance at hosting a game than the other team who isn't even guaranteed a playoff spot.

Also, having divisions (and giving incentive to winning them) is what makes a game against the Jets more important than a game against the Titans.  All wins are not created equal.  It makes for more interesting matchups throughout the season.

But, I'm not taking that away in the slightest.  Win your division and you're in the playoffs.  Isn't that quite a bit of incentive?  Do you really need to host a playoff game to maintain that incentive?  I don't believe so.

Does it suck that a crappy team is making the playoffs and hosting a game?  Maybe.

Drop the first part of your question, we are only talking about hosting the game.  Winning the divsion would still get you into the playoffs.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

^^^ Pappy, 

Here is the difference.  (I might have some personal bias in picking the game)

Pats - Jets MNF.  Going into that game it was perceived that the winner would be the number one seed; loser would be the #5 seed.  It was big fucking game. 

If we adopt your system the game would have been no more significant than Pats-Steelers or Jets-Steelers. 

[Pappy13]

Pats - Jets MNF.  Going into that game it was perceived that the winner would be the number one seed; loser would be the #5 seed.  It was big fucking game. 

If we adopt your system the game would have been no more significant than Pats-Steelers or Jets-Steelers. 

Not really.  It's a big game because #1 seed gets a bye and #5 seed doesn't, but #3 seed doesn't get a bye either.

In my system it would be the difference between #1 seed and #3 seed, but the #1 seed still gets a bye and the #3 seed doesn't.  It's STILL a big fucking game.

All I'm really suggesting changing is the wild card games.  That's it.  Nothing else is changed.  The top 2 division winners are still gonna be the #1 and #2 seeds and get the byes, but the rest of the seeds are determined by record rather than arbitrarily assigning division winners as a higher seed than a wild card.

By the way, in the current system, once the Jets lost, they realistically could do no better than get the 5th seed, what incentive is there for them to keep playing hard?  They could basically coast down the stretch because there was little chance someone would catch them and at worst they would be the 6th seed and would still have to go on the road in their first game. The same could have been potentially true for say Kansas City.  Suppose they had already wrapped up the division in week 16 no matter what, but could not become one of the top 2 seeds.  Effectively there's no reason for them to even try that last game, since they are locked into the #3 or #4 seed and will host a game, the only difference being which team they host.   My system would make the final games of the year matter more to wild card teams and division winners looking to still have a shot at hosting a playoff game.  It's more important to win your last game rather than simply back into the playoffs knowing you have already clinched hosting a playoff spot.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Pappy,

Question about your system, end of the season records....

Patriots 15-1
Dolphins 14-2
Colts 12-4
Titans 11-5
Steelers 11-5
KC 11-5

Nobody else is better than 10-5.

Who gets the number 2 seed and bye Dolphins or Colts?

[Pappy13]

Who gets the number 2 seed and bye Dolphins or Colts?

Colts.  It's not a straight seeding from 1 to 6 like I said originally.  Top 2 division winners are #1 and #2, they get byes and host a 2nd round game, just like today.  The next 4 are seeded according to record, so the Dolphins would be the #3 seed and host a wild-card game.  That's the only change I'm suggesting.

[bsmooth]

I disagree.  That's why you have divisions.  (This is an extreme case, but under normal circumstances:) I'd rather win the division at 10-6, than get a wildcard spot at 11-5.

Also, having divisions (and giving incentive to winning them) is what makes a game against the Jets more important than a game against the Titans.  All wins are not created equal.  It makes for more interesting matchups throughout the season.

Does it suck that a crappy team is making the playoffs and hosting a game?  Maybe.  I actually think it's kinda cool to see such an underdog, but I could understand why you'd think that.  But it's probably not going to happen again in your lifetime.  It's not worth making changes until you see an upsetting trend. 

I for one, hope the Seahawks shake things up a little bit in the playoffs.

You should not be rewarded with a home playoff game because you managed to eek out a division title with a losing record.
The NFC West should be dissolved and the teams moved into the other divisions so they would actually have to have a winning record to win the division.
The AFC West is getting to that stage too.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I think the Seahawks justified their playoff spot today. 

[Spider-Dan]

Yeah, Seattle's win dumps a bucket of ice water on the whole playoff realignment talk.   They beat the defending champions.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Yeah, Seattle's win dumps a bucket of ice water on the whole playoff realignment talk.   

In 2008 the whole playoff realignment talk because the 12-4 Colts were traveling to the 8-8 Chargers and a 9-7 division was going pretty strong until Chargers won and the division champs became the conference champs. 

[Dave Gray]

The Seattle win didn't even surprise me, honestly.  I thought the 10 point+ spread was pretty crazy.

[MikeO]

The Seattle win didn't even surprise me, honestly.  I thought the 10 point+ spread was pretty crazy.

Considering the Saints have NEVER won a road playoff game in franchise history, I wasn't shocked either. A little surprised...yes. Shocked, no! They are the Aint's!! And forever will be!