Welcome to week 17 of the 2010 NFL season where, when all is said and done, it is probable the NFC West will send to the playoffs a team with a record below .500. That team would be the Seattle Seahawks. A victory Sunday night at Qwest Field over the visiting St. Louis Rams would result in both teams posting identical 7-9 records with the tiebreaker going to the victorious Seahawks. A sub-average team getting a ticket to the big dance (a.k.a. the playoffs) is an unfortunate anomaly that will always be possible as long as we have divisions consisting of only four teams. I am a strong supporter of the current divisional structure. The notion I find far more troubling is rewarding mediocrity with the right to host a playoff game and thus be afforded an advantage on the road to Super Bowl XLV.
This Sunday night’s game will prove the perfect stage to highlight the problem as I see it. For those who are newer to the NFL, Seattle’s Qwest Field is famous for being one of the most difficult venues in sports for opposing teams to win in (mostly due to the pesky 12th man – i.e., the crowd noise). The Seahawks home advantage is on par with Pittsburgh’s Heinz Field, Green Bay’s Lambeau Field, New Orleans’ Superdome and Kansas City’s Arrowhead Stadium (in the winter). These are places with markedly significant homefield advantages. If any of those teams were to win their division with sub .500 records they would have a similarly marked advantage, all while hosting a team with a vastly superior record.
The whole point of having a first round bye for the top two seeds in their respective divisions, and home games for the remaining division winners, is to reward excellence. I have heard people suggest that the inherent inequity of teams not playing identical schedules is the reason the current system should not be tampered with. I do not understand the logic of this argument at all. What one has to do with the other is completely lost on me. What is apparent is that a Seahawks’ victory will result in them hosting the best wild-card team from their division, which at this point would be the New Orleans Saints.
New Orleans would be required to go into the not-so-kind confines of Qwest Field, submit their ears to the deafening reality of the 12th man, and put themselves at a decided disadvantage in their attempt to repeat as winners of the Lombardi trophy. Lame! The wild-card round of the playoffs frequently consists of games that seem unbalanced. The difference here is that NEVER before have we required a team to go on the road in the playoffs and play a team with a losing record. This situation should be permitted this one time and when the rules committee meets in February a rule change should be forthcoming.
Look at it this way, the Seahawks would likely be underdogs by more than two touchdowns if they were to play in the New Orleans Superdome while they would likely be four point underdogs at Qwest Field. How does one account for the 10-point differential? It is all about the venues. The teams would not be any different, but the location of the game makes all the difference. A more acoustically sophisticated venue and vociferous fan base should not be beneficial to such a team. The Seahawks have not beaten anybody of note since their week six, post-bye week victory over the Chicago Bears.
Given that I live in Los Angeles I could offer a self-serving solution: have such games played in a neutral city. If that were to be the case the Saints margin of victory would likely be determined by whether or not the venue were a dome or outdoors. If said game were played in a dome, the Saints would be approximately 11-point favorites. If it were outside that margin would drop to eight or nine points. Bottom line: the New Orleans Saints should not have to be the guest of ANY team that cannot win half its games! For me the issue is less about the venue’s potential to affect the outcome of the game and more a matter of the inherent unfairness of good teams being required to play vastly inferior teams in a play-off game, on the road.
As a huge Rams fan, I hope that this piece becomes moot with a Bradford-led win, but I totally agree otherwise. Surely there is a way to change it. Also, in a couple of years, could an expansion see the standard 8×4 divisional structure change? A team in LA and Toronto? Mexico City? Why take teams out of Minnesota and take them to LA? Surely we could just one of the biggest cities in the world a team.
Wouldnt a simple solution be to change the seeding? A divison title still gets you in to the playoffs but if one of the wild card teams has a better record they get a better seed and as a result gets to play with homefield advantage in the wild-card round.
My idea would be for each division to get a representative. Seeds would be determined according to the following factors. Teams must make .500 should this not be the case the highest ranking Wildcard winner gets home field so that mediocrity is not rewarded. Should this team get rewarded with home field the following compensation is provided to the mediocrity team (since I do not know how gate is split) the proceeds of this game are split 50 – 50 and should the away team win than the respective first round draft pics are swapped as compensation for having to travel to this game provided that said team does not reach the NFC / AFC championship game (if I remember things correctly it could be as high as a 5 place swap). To get something something big would need to be given up. Probably unrealistic but maybe enough to see sanity prevail but I don’t think the draft pick compensation would fly though.
Interesting piece, but I have to disagree. Surely it makes for a more interesting game if it’s played in Seattle? I would much rather have a close playoff game than a saints comfortable win in the Superdome.
Maybe that’s unfair on the Saints, but it’s a one-off and makes for an interesting post season.
The Saints didn’t win their division, so I don’t see why the league should pander to them.
I highly disagree on all counts! lol
First, a neutral venue is unfair to the organization and the city it resides in. For example, in KC the Jackson County taxpayers constantly pay for stadium upgrades, upkeep, etc. To host a Chiefs playoff game in L.A. would not be fair to those local business owners nor to the die hard fans who have literally paid their dues and have gone through years of agony watching their beloved team get killed year after year. Now that the Chiefs have finally rebuilt themselves and have made their way to the playoffs, where many fans (taxpayers and 50+ year season ticket holders alike) may not be able to travel half way across the country to L.A.
Second, you mentioned rewarding excellence. Why should a division title champion concede to a team that snuck in more wins past other lesser conference teams? I do understand your point, but I see a double edged sword here. We all know that different divisions have different skillsets. For example, the Falcons know how to play the Saints better than most. The Texans and the Jaguars know how to play the Colts better than most.
Under your proposed scenario, let’s say that next year the Steelers swept everyone in their division (6-0), go nearly undefeated at home, AND win the AFC North Division title. All their losses were 6 points or less because their division was paired with the AFC East, who collectively had the best record overall. (Patriots 13,3; Jets 12-4; Fins 9-7; Bills 8-8).
During the first round of the playoffs, they end up playing the Texans.
Let’s also assume that the Texans did not win the division and lost most of the time to their divisional rivals. Also the AFC South was lucky enough to be paired against the AFC West who collectively won only 12 games (Chargers 5-11; Chiefs 4-12; Raiders/Broncos 2-14).
Here, the Texans were able to muster 1 more win than the Steelers, even though their wins were hand-me’s b/c Jags and Titans both have rookie QB’s that lead the NFL in interceptions thrown.
Wouldn’t it be a travesty to have the Steelers have to travel to Texas Stadium, even though they are the undoubtedly the far superior team? On the flip side toward your argument, it would also be a travesty for the Jets (12-4) to have to travel to San Diego (5-11). The tiebreaker that wins the argument for me are TITLE GAMES. They are just that – bragging rights that should deserve some kind of reward for excellence. As long as there is a bigger reward for the highest seedings (which there is) I think the current rule sets are the fairest of them all.
@Ben – Yes! Couldn’t have said it better even with my novel posted above.
@auspar – I thought of a similar scenario regarding a rule change for division winners with less than a .500 record. However, I still believe that overall a division title still should mean something. Division champions should be handed some kind of advantage over a team that did not accomplish the same feat against their own division rivals. Otherwise, why even keep track of division records or even have divisions for that matter???
Regarding the rest of your propositions…..ya lost me. I don’t agree with splitting proceeds. That sounds like an Americanized 21st century mentality where there are no losers, only those that win 2nd place. You either win and receive all the benefits that go with it, or you go home a loser. Sad but ultimately and honestly true!
I’d just like to re-point out to everyone that this year my Chiefs = Winner. It’s nice to see those to words in the same phrase again!
I agree with most of what you have said jeff, but at the end of the day we have what we have.
The way the league is set up seems to have worked so far, just look at the ratings and popularity.
I think that cream always rises and the good teams will always come out on top.
The 12th man does help lesser teams; however at the end of the day, or game, the team to win the biggest prize, the superbowl, should be able to overcome good and bad teams no matter where or when thay are played.
I live in Reno, NV, and no way would Vegas handicappers move a point spread 10 points because of home field advantage. The Saints would probably be 12 point favorites in New Orleans, and 4 1/2 point favorites in Seattle. That said, whether you have a 14 – 2 record or a 6 – 10 record, winning your division should always come with the benefits of getting into the playoffs, and home field advantage if said playoffs have wild card rounds. The wild cards are in place specifically to give very good teams an opportunity to win a championship, even if they were unable to win their own division. They shouldn’t be given additional benefits, like home field advantage, to reach that goal. If the NFL is going to become reactionary, and stray away from their principles by changing their rules, they might as well do away with divisions. Divisions wouldn’t mean that much with the types of rules Jeff is suggesting.
I totally disagree, a team Bellow 500 should not be part of the playoffs by any means division winners or not, i do not Care. To play the NFL Playoffs should be a reward to excellence!
I would have to disagree Jeff. To do what you are suggesting would completely diminish the concept of having divisions. Think of the slippery slope that creates… if divisions become meaningless that means that division rivalries also become meaningless in the process because what would they be fighting for? To be at the top of something that at the end of the day doesn’t mean anything? One of the great intregues of the NFL, football, even sports in general, is the great rivalries. If you diminish that… than you diminish the sport overall.
Thinking about changing rules that have served the league well is a knee jerk reaction. If the Seahawks win this weekend, this would be the first (and will probably be the only) time that something like this has happened in the 32 years of the modern era of NFL football (sixteen game schedule). Minor tweeks to the game every offseason is fine, but to mess with the fabric of what has always made this game great would do more harm to the NFL than it does good.
Great Post but as I got toasted the end it seemed to me that you wrote this solely to state that the saints are put into an unfair situation.
Let then travel to st louis or Seattle. If the saints are as good as everyone says they are then it shouldn’t be a issue. Heck that saints player would have a new team logo to piss on
Simple way to solve the issue, place the falcons back in the NFC west
I think Steven makes a good point although I think he may still be toasted… :) The Seahawks used to be in the AFC West before they were moved to a different division that better matched where they were at as an organization.
I consider wins more of an overall stat that should only be used to accent those who have actually won their divisions. If you didn’t accomplish the goal assigned to you (winning your division), then you should not be ushered to the front of a line b/c of technicalities.
Here’s a perception comparison that may help people understand this POV:
Overall wins at the end of the season being more important than winning your division at hand.
– could be compared as –
Overall YDS/PF is more important than winning the game at hand.
As my Chief’s former coach once said, “HELLO, you play to win the game!”
Hi everyone, look, at the end of the day, there is always going to be the potential for this to happen, maybe not every season, because of the way the NFL does their scheduling. Compare the NFC South from last year to this year. Only one team, the Saints, won more than ten regular season games last year and were the only representative in the playoffs from that division. This season, three of four teams won ten or more games, supplying two playoff contenders. I can recall the NFC East having three representative in the playoffs one year back in the nineties. There may be up to a dozen reasons why the NFC South had such a dramatic turnaround from last year to this year: the draft, free agency, coaching, schedule, injuries are just the most obvious examples.
I’ve been thinking, if the NFL does go to an 18 game regular season, you would still have division rivals play twice each season as they currently do (home/away). That leaves 12 games right? Using the NFC as the example, how many other teams in the Conference are there? 12 (3 divisions x 4 teams). So every year you would play against every other team in your conference on a alternating home and away basis, which would guarantee a consistent schedule from one year to the next, and I believe, give a better prospect of an exciting Super Bowl matchup because only then should teams from opposing conferences meet up. What do you think??
…sounds like fate to me! That sounds like a great idea. *w/o sarcasm*
Then we can split the league into one side called the AFL, and then keep the other side called the NFL… *stressing sarcasm*
Your idea has a lot of semblance to how the league used to be in the 60’s. Personally, I’m all for formalities except that your idea lessens the chance that teams (league-wide) would ever get to play each other over a 5 year stretch.
Dam, I sound like such a nay-sayer. I’m done posting on this topic for the benefit of the forum…lol I do think everyone has some great ideas though. Happy New Year!
The home field advantage in Wild Card week is a joke that is shown up this year given that every home team in Wild Card week has an inferior record to the away team (Green Bay holds a head to head tie breaker against Philadelphia). It is time they looked at this, particularly now with only 4 teams in each division, you only have 6 divisional matches each year anyway.
*Deep Sigh* Okay Jeff, I do see your point. And to tell you the truth, I respect your opinion a lot more than some other peoples, simply because you have proven yourself in the past to be impartial in the interest of journalistic integrity; not to suggest that other sports writers are not, just that…. well. I’ll get to that in a second. But also Jeff I know that you don’t really have “one team” that you are a die hard fan of either. Therefore my regular two arguments for this matter which are 1. The person making said argument wouldn’t be making it if it were his/her team in the situation, and 2. Sports analysts would be changing their tune if we were talking about say, the NFC East or the AFC South (which by the way hasn’t been all that great this year either) those arguments are kinda moot on you. So I’m not gonna go into them, even though – and I know people get pissed that we Seahawks fans keep bringing it up, but its true – the NFL as a whole has an extreme east coast bias. Actually its beyond bias, it like a man crush (can’t use the word I’d normally use to describe it.
Anyway, trying to keep this from being a novel, I’ll just state my opinion. First of all, in the interest of full disclosure, I am a die hard Seahawks fan. Second….. I know….I’m a Seahawks fan….. its kind of embarrassing alright! But I’m still proud dangit! Third, I maintain that its only because this is the Seahawks that everyone is freaking out about it. Now Jeff, your article is well written, and I think that you are far from being a Seahawk hater. On the other hand, do you think this many people would be agreeing with you if this were the Patriots going into the playoffs at 7-9? Survey says: NO! They’d be saying “well that’s the rules!” Its just like with that Calvin Johnson “no” catch. “That’s the rule!” people scream, and yes its a stupid rule, but they made the right call. Now I think that rule should actually be changed. Should the playoff rules be changed? Eh, I wouldn’t be opposed to it, but I do think that it has worked thus far, and its never going to be a perfect system. This year is an anomaly yes, and I’m certainly not going to defend the Seahawks as being contenders. I will say they have more talent than people give them credit for, but are they going to the Super Bowl? Heck no, but look at it this way, we’re gonna be a 7-9 team with a 25-28 pick in the draft next year, and we need young talent DESPERATELY! I’m almost kinda mad that we didn’t lose to the Rams. Well maybe not, but still. What I’m saying is that this system has been in place for years now, and thus far it has worked pretty good. Its not perfect, but it works. If they wanna change it I’m not going to raise a ruckus, but my point is that it is the fact that it is the Seahawks in this position that people are all butt hurt about the situation. Plain and simple. Because no fan takes more crap from other fans in this league than Seahawks fans….. okay maybe Detroit Lions fans, but you get my point.
The Seahawks shocked me this weekend with their win over the defending champs. This will definitely render this argument and the need for a rule change moot, now.