NFL Could Change How It Seeds Playoff Teams Starting in 2011.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Again, there's no need to touch/fix something that isn't broke.

Win YOUR Division - Host a playoff game.

If teams don't like it or have a problem with it, handle your business and win YOUR Division then if you don't want to go on the road.

It's. That. Simple.

[muggins]

Yep, this would be creating new special rules when there is no reason to, just like the new OT rule.

[slickdtc]

It's just baby-ing the whiners, in my opinion. Just like the playoff OT rule. "Waaahh, we didn't get a chance to play offense! I'm taking my ball and going home!"

It's not like midway through the season they told everyone, "Oh yeah, if you win your division, you get to host a playoff game." This is the rule and it has been the rule. You know what you need to do coming in to the season, if you can't do it, why do you deserve any handouts? And it's only the location of a game, too. Really not that big of a deal.

I can't wait for the NFC West 7-9/8-8 team to hose one of these "superior" wild card teams, anyway. Just like the Cardinals of '08 did to the Falcons. Oh wait, it must be because they hosted the game! Not because, you know, they actually beat them in the actual game of football.

Give me a break.

[rangerrick012]

Quote: Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan

Again, there's no need to touch/fix something that isn't broke. Win YOUR Division - Host a playoff game. If teams don't like it or have a problem with it, handle your business and win YOUR Division then if you don't want to go on the road. It's. That. Simple.

So winning a horrible division should be rewarded while finishing 2nd in a division w/ 3 good teams means nothing. OK.

[snepp]

Quote: Originally Posted by rangerrick012

So winning a horrible division should be rewarded while finishing 2nd in a division w/ 3 good teams means nothing. OK.

That's right, apparently being the superior team somehow means that you didn't "handle your business."

[Chip Douglass]

Quote: Originally Posted by HesTheCoach

The Steelers and Giants were the only two teams to ever do that, though. In other words, every SB winner besides those two teams had at least one home game in the playoffs. I think it makes a huge difference.

Yeah, I think I'd rather have 2 home games instead of 3 away games and 3 playoff games in total instead of 4.

[goh]

Quote: Originally Posted by slickdtc

The Super Bowl bound Cardinals were what, 8-8 or 9-7 and hosted an 11-5 Atlanta Falcons team, and beat them. They then went on the road against Carolina, beat them. They then hosted the Eagles in the NFC Championship and beat them.

Those playoffs that year are exactly the problem. BOTH the Falcons and Eagles had a better record but the Cardinals got the home games. Huge difference between playing in a dome in Arizona and out in the cold/snow in Philly. Meanwhile in the AFC 7 teams had winning records but two of them were out (11-5 Pats and 9-7 Jets) so a team that didn't even have a winning record (8-8 Chargers) could be in AND have a home game on top of it. But I guess not even having a winning record is taking care of bussiness.

Though the best example was the hypothetical 16-0 team having a 14-2 team 2nd in the division and then the 14-2 team having to play at a 6-10 division winner.

[rangerrick012]

If the Seahawks win next week then they at 7-9 will host a playoff game. Taking care of business!