"NFL Football is Back!" 2011 Season Thread

[SlowwHand]

I'm not interested in an avatar bet. If the Cowboys lose, it will be a collective effort, not just a Romo thing.
Actually, it would probably do them more good to lose now.

[Al B. Sure!]

If I were Sloww, Al, I wouldn't even acknowledge your bet because of the manor that you asked it. Silly old building? Your nuts. There was no point to that other than to be insulting. Keep it to football.

Explain to me the significance of the Alamo except as a representation of slave-holding and American imperialism.


Whatever, Sloww is scared. Simple as that. It's a harmless avatar bet and he doesn't have enough confidence in his team to accept it. I'm trying to add some stakes to the game and make it more fun for both of us since it's our favorite teams in a final week game for the divisional lead. It's a great situation.

[Donegeal]

I would, Al, but I know that you wouldn't listen. You're just being an ass. Besides, it's not something to disscuss in an NFL thread (go ahead and start a thread in the general forum if you want, but I can tell you I'll ignore you there and won't respond). Talk football here.

Do I think the Giants will beat Dallas? I don't know. Hell, I don't even know where the game is being played. Honestly, the game is pretty insignificant. Whoever wins will still be either 1 and done or maybe 2 wins. Neither of them are going anywhere.

[Al B. Sure!]

I would, Al, but I know that you wouldn't listen. You're just being an ass. Besides, it's not something to disscuss in an NFL thread (go ahead and start a thread in the general forum if you want, but I can tell you I'll ignore you there and won't respond). Talk football here.

Do I think the Giants will beat Dallas? I don't know. Hell, I don't even know where the game is being played. Honestly, the game is pretty insignificant. Whoever wins will still be either 1 and done or maybe 2 wins. Neither of them are going anywhere.

That's what they said about the Giants in 2007.

[Donegeal]

Yeah... I admit I blew that one. I figured they'd loose in the first round; then foolishly picked against then the rest of the way in the playoffs. Needless to say, I've had better playoff pick'ems than '07.

[Al B. Sure!]

The Giants will either play Atlanta or Detroit in the first week of the playoffs. Atlanta's probably going to beat Tampa so it'll come down to Green Bay and Detroit. If Detroit loses, the Giants will play the Falcons.

Matt Ryan isn't the greatest in the playoffs and Matt Stafford has never been.

[Donegeal]

On NFL.com, there is an article about reseeding the playoffs based on record after the playoff teams are selected. The strongest argument for this was, of course, last year when the Saints had to go to Seatle despite having a better record. What Brian Billick (or whatever) was trying to do is to give more meaning to the week 17 games.

I strongly agree with this, with one exception: I know I will probably get steam rolled for this, but do away with conferences. Still have the 8 divisions, but no more NFC vs AFC in the Super Bowl. The league is so intergrated beween the two that the old National Football League vs the American Football League is long since done. Have the 8 division winners (yes, I know that we would still have a 7-9 team winning a division, but if you have 8 divisions you are going to have that possibility no matter what) then the next 4 best records as wild cards. Re-seed after this selection process is done and keep with the highest seed plays the lowest seed. This would lend to the possibility of a Bear/Packer Super Bowl or a Giant/Cowboy Super Bowl (or as in the case of the '90's, a 49er/Cowboy Super Bowl.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Meh. I do tend to like the traditions of the separate conferences.

[OzzyKP]

Heck no. Gotta have the conferences.

[Guynemer]

I'm with Donegal on this one. The conferences so indistinct as to be meaningless; they should go to a system like the NHL is doing next year.

[SlowwHand]

The separation as it is is fine, it's a question of balance in playoffs that needs to be addressed. I don't know how this year will turn out, but last year was somewhat of a farce.

[-Jrabbit]

I would prefer a system that maximizes the chances of the best two teams meeting in thee Super Bowl.

[SlowwHand]

Now that's a novel concept.

[Donegeal]

Wow. I figured I'd get absolutely bashed for even proposing such a thing. Since I didn't, I gunna push it...

Why is having conferences a good thing when the two best teams are from the same conference (I am not saying that is the case this season, mearly saying that it was the case in years past)?

What about the concept of re-seeding 1-12 (or 2 1-6's) once the playoff teams have been determined?

How would doing away with conferences (and re-seeding) effect the playoff picture this season?

Is there really any argument about keeping conferences and the entire seeding process the same other than 'that's how we've always done it'?

[Guynemer]

Nope.