NFL - Are You Ready For Some Football?! - Off Season

[MRT144]

A solution would ensure arguably "fair" outcomes in all seasons. It is my contention that your proposal would ultimately produce just as many anomalous results as the present system.

Not saying I couldn't live with it; just don't see it as an improvement.

I say: a champion should be able to win on the road. Some have even done so. Wild cards have made the SB like 9 times.

Hence the name

[Al B. Sure!]

So you're really OK with screwing the #2 seed - making them play an extra game - just so the Giants can get in?
And your excuse to do it is something that had nothing to do with keeping the Giants out of the playoffs?

O. M. G...

Huh? I meant the better record wildcard team would take the 7-9 division leader's spot.

What is so hard to understand about this? The #3 seed would then get a home game.

#1 and #2 on bye.

#6 (Giants) at #3
#5 at #4

Second round is as usual with the lowest-seeded remaining team at #1 and the other remaining team at #2.

What is so hard to understand about this?


No change to the playoff format or division structure.... just a corollary to the rules that would state that if a division leader has a sub-.500 record, that team will not make the playoffs and will have its spot taken by a 3rd wildcard team with a better record.

I can't make it any clearer. I see that I need to really express things Barney style around here

[-Jrabbit]

Oh, OK. So you're in favor of actually TAKING AWAY a playoff game from a divisional winner.

That makes SO much more sense!

And for the record, Alby, you never stated that the 7-9 team should be eliminated; you said another wildcard team should be added. Here's your post:

Well we saw this year how quickly the league changed the playoff OT rule after last season's NFC Championship game. Maybe this year, they'll make a small but important addition to the playoff structure by granting a third wildcard spot to the next highest-seeded team if a division winner has a sub-.500 record. Just a simple rule that wouldn't necessitate any overhaul of the playoff/division system; just a contingency for the rare sub-.500 division winner.

"Add a third wildcard team" is not the same as "kick the 7-9 team out of the playoffs." Perhaps you wouldn't be so "misunderstood" around here if you would actually "say what you mean."

So if that happened this year:
1. Team and fans in Seattle would be in revolt.
2. Team and fans in Tampa Bay would be in revolt.
3. Giants fans would be happy. But I guess that's all that matters.

Fortunately, there is absolutely ZERO chance of this happening. The NFL is not as monumentally stupid as this idea.

My advice:
Since you seem to live in a fantasy world anyway, just pretend that the NFC West winner went 8-8 or 9-7. You'll sleep better.

[-Jrabbit]

I have to wonder:

If the Giants were in as the #5 seed and scheduled to play the 7-9 Seahawks in the wildcard round, would Alby still be pushing for this rule change?

I say no.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nate Silver argues that the Seahawks are not just the worst playoff team ever, but one of the worst teams in the NFL this year (contrary to their playoff 7-9 record)

Don't know if I agree. The division has been slightly stronger this year than previous. I wouldn't be shocked if the defending champ Saints lost.

[Ben Kenobi]

If the Giants were in as the #5 seed and scheduled to play the 7-9 Seahawks in the wildcard round, would Alby still be pushing for this rule change?

Heh, I think it's a silly change. It's benefitted weak divisions like the NFC East before. Who's to say the Giants deserved to go over the Bucs?

All the Giants had to do was beat the Eagles. That didn't happen.

[Ben Kenobi]

The Chargers this season is the perfect example of the importance of Special Teams and why I think Devin Hester should get a Hall of Fame nod based solely on his ST play.

Funny thing.

Kaeding rang a kick off the inside of the post. That kick goes in, the Chargers defeat both Indy and the Patroits and would have a home game in the playoffs.

They also managed to post terrible stats despite having Scifres, Kaeding and Sproles, who isn't a bad KR. They have the worst coverage team in the history of the NFL.

I wouldn't say that the Special teams meant that they were guaranteed to finish out of the playoffs. They were still one of the better playoff teams even with the horrible special teams. Great offense, great defense.

What killed them was horrible special teams, bad turnover ratio and poor red zone performance. Correct any one of these and they go to the playoffs easily. All three were just enough to keep them out.

Might have helped to have Tomlinson who posted another 1000 yard season, no? I think he's pretty darned good at this whole 'ball security' and 'scoring touchdowns', thing eh?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Don't know if I agree. The division has been slightly stronger this year than previous. I wouldn't be shocked if the defending champ Saints lost.

Of course you would argue against statistics (look at their point differential and yardage) and facts.

[rah]

Out of all the games being played this weekend, NO losing would be the only outcome that would shock me.
For the other three games the spread is 3 or less. For that one it's currently 10.5, so the Vegas experts disagree with Ben. No surprise there.

[Al B. Sure!]

Well remember the whole discussion about how does Marvin Lewis have so much job security?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5988635

Lewis agreed to an unspecified contract extension on Tuesday that will make him the longest-tenured coach in club history. Owner Mike Brown agreed to changes in the coaching staff and the roster as part of a deal that left both sides comfortable.

Lewis wanted to stay, but only if there were changes in how the team operates. The team initially offered an extension last season, when the Bengals were on their way to winning the AFC North title.

The coach and owner met on Monday and talked about what Lewis needed to stay. They had more discussions on Tuesday morning and reached an agreement in the afternoon.

Not only do they keep him and give him an extension, it all seems to have been on Lewis' terms!

What does he have on Mike Brown?

[-Jrabbit]

More shocking not-firing-the-coach news...

Titans owner Bud Adams announced Wednesday that the team will move forward without Vince Young on the roster.

Adams has picked coach Jeff Fisher over Young, which was not only advised by numerous Titans officials but will save the owner a pretty penny. The Titans will reportedly "either release or trade" Young this offseason. Young was due $12.75 million in 2011, and his lack of leadership skills made him unworthy of the investment, regardless of on-field performance.

The Titans will go back to the drawing board at quarterback. Kerry Collins is a free agent.
Source: Jim Wyatt on Twitter

[Al B. Sure!]

Wow. That is shocking. By all accounts Bud Adams loved Vince Young and was the biggest Young fan. Remember, Bud Adams owned the team back when they were in Houston and he surely imagined Young as the third in a very successful run of Oilers/Titans QB's with Warren Moon through to Steve McNair and onto Young (I'm ignoring the brief tenure of Chris Chandler, obviously )

With Young and almost surely McNabb, there's going to be a good QB FA pool this offseason. Kolb, as well. And it wouldn't be surprising to see Orton go in Denver, either, despite his successes. David Garrard, too, doesn't have the best security.

[-Jrabbit]

My take:

Led by a rapidly aging McNabb and a very inconsistent VYoung, I don't find the FA QB class very inspiring at all. After that, it's guys like Troy Smith, Alex Smith, etc. Young has been a huge disappointment, especially in the leadership dept. Don't think I'd want him as my field general. Just sayin'.

The real prize is Orton, who will likely be traded, as there are plenty of teams in need and Denver will foolishly commit to Tebow.

I'm pretty certain Garrard will remain in his current gig.

Kolb is interesting because he's still under contract, and IIRC at a pretty high price after an extension.

[Al B. Sure!]

Vince Young is 30-17 as an NFL starter. Granted, he had Chris Johnson for a very few of those games (though only 12-6 with Johnson, believe it or not), but at the same time, until Kenny Britt emerged, Young had among the worst receiving corps in the league. Young's receivers have been guys like Justin Gage, Roydell Williams, and Bobby Wade so it hasn't been all sunshine and flowers on the field for Young yet he's still 30-17 as a starter.

Maybe it's not him and it's hard to believe Young's, for the most part, pedestrian stats, have been the reason for the Titans winning games but I think Young really solidified his reputation as a guy who can win games back when Kerry Collins was really sucking it up and the mid-season switch to Young nearly put the Titans into the playoffs. They say he's no leader but the Titans have performed better with him at the helm, regardless, and that's ultimately what a leader will do; win games.

I'd like to see Vince Young healthy and with better receivers before I write him off.

You're right about Garrard. All reports are he is safe. I know that in the first few weeks Del Rio was talking about possibly turning to one of the McCown brothers but he got hurt in his first game and then Garrard showed up. Garrard has also been on the hot-seat seemingly every offseason but the Jags stick with him.

Kolb has $12.26 Million guaranteed, by the way. That is hefty but we've seen the big paydays guys like Matt Cassel got. Kolb is at least as promising as Cassel was coming out of New England.

[-Jrabbit]

I acknowledge VY's skillz. But IMHO he does not have the dedication that earns respect and support of the team. I could be wrong. :shrug: That said, I'm sure someone will give him a good payday to be the presumed starter. Plenty of needy teams -- Arizona, San Francisco, Minnesota, plus a number of others.

Coaching and QB changes will be amusing/interesting this offseason.