Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
Normally I'd say to leave the qualification seeding as they've always been (4 division champs + 3 WC)... and once you've got your field, simply seed them according to record. Keeps the division really meaningful. Division winner could also be part of the tie-breaker.
But yours is an interesting take. It doesn't make being a division winner meaningless due to tie-breakers... But I suppose the issue would be that theoretically a division winner could miss the playoffs outright. The '08 Chargers and the '10 Seahawks we mentioned both would've missed the playoffs even with under the current 7-team field. And maybe that's what they deserved.
It becomes a matter of meritocracy vs. marketing, and marketing would never omit an entire division's audience from the playoffs.
|
I agree with you, and I didn't fully describe it well enough b/c I would keep each of the division winners making the playoffs along w/ the top 3 other teams then seed by record w/ division winner being the #1 or #2 tie breaker. So if a division winner has 10 wins and the 3 WC winners have 12, 11, and 10 wins then division winner would be seeded higher than the #3 WC but below the other 2 WC teams.
Ultimately the best and fairest product would be to have the teams with the top 7 records make the playoffs, but as you pointed out that will never happen.
06-18-2022, 01:39 PM
Threaded Mode