Is it a bad thing to get a 1st round bye?

[SPTO]

If i'm a player or coach of a team I WANT A BYE!

The reason some teams lose after a bye is because of how they prepare heading into the playoffs. The Cowboys shut down their offense and defensive edge in the last couple or so weeks of the year but you really can't blame that on them. They played a great game. NYG was just too much on that day.

Indy has a propensity to rest their starters and play lackadaisical heading into the playoffs which ultimately takes the edge away from them. I think that if Harrison didn't fumble that ball they might've come away winning that game.

[JBH3]

Quote: Originally Posted by edubbz708

Colts played the Chiefs on Wildcard weekend last year. If I remember right...

I couldn't remember who but thanks for clarifying.

[CMH]

Everything has it's advantages and disadvantages.

Advantage is you get a week off to rest any injuries, get your mind right, all that.

Disadvantage is a possibility of too much rest.

Playing in the Wild Card has it's advantages and disadvantages too. But I'd take the week off if I had it. The Patriots and Packers didn't seem to suffer from it.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by JBH3

Didn't the Colts have a bye last year and win the Superbowl? For three years the Eagles had Byes and won the divisional but lost the NFC championship. I don't think it matters. It's just that the Cowboys suck, and the Chargers have some kryptonite for the Colts.

The Colts came into Baltimore and tore the 13-3 Ravens a new one. I also felt the year the Ravens won it all they were helped by the momentum of being a wild card team. I was thinking about this recently also. I think it may be better to be a wild card IF you can come out pretty injury free. It's that risk that makes you want the bye but I don't know.

[Cardot]

Recently that seems to be the trend. But historically, having the bye seems pretty useful.

The current playoff format has been in effect since 1990. In those years, 13 of the 17 Super Bowl winners had a first round bye:

Seed - Superbowl Wins/ Superbowl Appearances
1. - 8/17
2. - 5/10
3. - 1/2 (Indy '06)
4. - 2/4 (Bal '00, Denv '97)
5. - 0/0
6. - 1/1 (Pitt '05)

[Steelerfan2k1]

No way. You are being influenced by the recency bias here, since two teams with a bye lost this weekend. Look at the stats. The teams that have a bye win in the divisional playoffs by a huge margin. I want to say that they win 75% of the time (look at the stat from yesterday - Dallas is the first #1 seed to lose in the NFC Divisional Playoffs since they started the format in 1990).

A week off at the end of the season + not having to play one of the wild card teams in order to get to the divisional playoffs is a huge advantage. Sure - a lower seed will win now and then, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

[wwharton]

I'm influenced by how much I know about some of the teams that have done it recently... including your favorite team. It just seems that the difference in talent between the best NFL team and the worse in the playoffs is getting smaller and smaller. You'd like to think that WC teams don't do as well simply b/c they're not as good, but these days that doesn't seem to be the case so much anymore.

I'm not sold on the thought but I it does seem like there's something to it.

[dust247]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cardot

Recently that seems to be the trend. But historically, having the bye seems pretty useful. The current playoff format has been in effect since 1990. In those years, 13 of the 17 Super Bowl winners had a first round bye: Seed - Superbowl Wins/ Superbowl Appearances 1. - 8/17 2. - 5/10 3. - 1/2 (Indy '06) 4. - 2/4 (Bal '00, Denv '97) 5. - 0/0 6. - 1/1 (Pitt '05)

So with that said, it's not a bad thing to have a bye week. It's a bad thing to be the number 5 seed.