bobobonators Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 41 minutes ago, Special K said: When the Bills went to four straight Super Bowls, they were in the worst division in football at the time.....they had a free 8 wins over the Colts, Pats, Jets, and Fins...I bet you weren’t complaining about weak divisions then. I was 5 so yeh I wasn’t complaining. This isn’t meant to complain about the Bills - it’s a topic about the NFL in general. 56 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said: Yea this is a if we lose tomorrow type post. Don’t lose to Zach Wilson, MAC Jones, or have 12 on the field and we wouldn’t have to play this out This is 100% a “it’s week 18 and the playoffs start next week” post. How many times do I have to say this is NOT about the Bills specifically. 1 Quote
beebe Posted January 7 Posted January 7 having six of your 17 games every year be against the same three teams is redundant and boring. i would be in favor of playing each divisional team once per year and alternate home/road. especially now that home field advantage is widely considered to be just a single point or 1.5 points in most cases. 1 Quote
ChronicAndKnuckles Posted January 7 Posted January 7 1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said: Bills couldn't beat Jets or Pats. Division rivals. If they lose tomorrow they deserve to be out I hate this logic. The Chiefs lost against the Raiders and Broncos. Eagles lost to the Jets and Cardinals. Do they not deserve to be in the playoffs? 2 1 Quote
JohnBonhamRocks Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Keep divisions. Maaaybe shake them up so they make more geographical sense but even that is a tough sell. Quote
LeGOATski Posted January 7 Posted January 7 1 hour ago, Rew said: Division rivalries are part of the emotion of the game and help with parity. The game would be less without them imo. As if there won't still be rivalries.... In fact, some of, if not the best rivalries have been outside divisions between great teams who constantly competed in prime time games or playoffs. Four-team divisions are dumb. If not just conferences, maybe just 2 divisions per conference. The NFL is too stuck in its traditions sometimes. 1 Quote
Rew Posted January 7 Posted January 7 4 minutes ago, LeGOATski said: As if there won't still be rivalries.... In fact, some of, if not the best rivalries have been outside divisions between great teams who constantly competed in prime time games or playoffs. Four-team divisions are dumb. If not just conferences, maybe just 2 divisions per conference. The NFL is too stuck in its traditions sometimes. Playing some teams twice a year is different. Look at NE and NYJ this year. They played us tougher than they played pretty much any other team. Us playing KC as much as we have has been scheduling quirk and competitivness in playoffs. You want larger divisions, fine. Playing teams twice a year home/away is overall good for the league. I know it's not perfect at times in weak divisions, but divisional games are different pretty much across the board. Quote
mannc Posted January 7 Posted January 7 2 hours ago, NoSaint said: I like divisions the current setup doesn’t upset me If you don’t make the playoffs under the current format, you didn’t deserve to and never would have won the Super Bowl anyway… Quote
4merper4mer Posted January 7 Posted January 7 The NFL should take a page from the NCAA and just put Alabama in the playoffs and make up some crap about why. 1 2 1 Quote
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 7 Posted January 7 I love it when someone starts an argument here and the very first sentence is just factually inaccurate. 3 Quote
Westside Madness Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Since you opted to 'clarify' and not 'edit your OP', everyone who reads is is going to immediately have a response similar to many that it is a blant false statement. If you want real discourse on the validity of divisions, you may want to actually go back and edit the OP. 1 Quote
nedboy7 Posted January 7 Posted January 7 How about 3 divisions with 26 teams making the playoffs. Quote
bobobonators Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 5 minutes ago, Westside Madness said: Since you opted to 'clarify' and not 'edit your OP', everyone who reads is is going to immediately have a response similar to many that it is a blant false statement. If you want real discourse on the validity of divisions, you may want to actually go back and edit the OP. Edited. Thanks. Quote
bobobonators Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 13 minutes ago, SageAgainstTheMachine said: I love it when someone starts an argument here and the very first sentence is just factually inaccurate. That was my fault. My 4yr old is a terror tonight and it’s hard to put a coherent thought on paper. 37 minutes ago, LeGOATski said: As if there won't still be rivalries.... In fact, some of, if not the best rivalries have been outside divisions between great teams who constantly competed in prime time games or playoffs. Four-team divisions are dumb. If not just conferences, maybe just 2 divisions per conference. The NFL is too stuck in its traditions sometimes. I agree with this. Look at Chiefs/Bills/Bengals last few years. And of course the rivalries will keep changing over time a bit. I see nothing wrong with that. Also, we would still play the pats/fins/jets every year. 1 Quote
djp14150 Posted January 7 Posted January 7 If they did such a format….it’s more likely going to be… 2 16 team conferences you play 12 or 13 of the 15 teams with a pre-set cycle of what 2/3 teams you don’t play over a 6/5 yr period then you play 4-5 games against NFC teams on a set rotation for 8 yrs. The 5th game could be a “ rivalry” game such as cross city/ state rivals and Super Bowl rematch’s, conf finals losers face each other. 1 Quote
djp14150 Posted January 7 Posted January 7 You could go with a rotating 8 team division. you play H-H against each for 14 games with 2 byes Round 1 division winner gets a bye. Then 2-7, 3-6,4-5 play each other in round 2 of playoffs round 2 is top team and 3 survivors round 3 is quarterfinals in a bracket where 2 division teams won’t meet again until Super Bowl round 4 semifinals round 5 Super Bowl Quote
billsfan_34 Posted January 7 Posted January 7 3 hours ago, MJS said: Every year, haha? It almost never happens that a team with a losing record makes the playoffs. It is rare. Last one I remember was Seattle at 7-9 1 hour ago, LeGOATski said: As if there won't still be rivalries.... In fact, some of, if not the best rivalries have been outside divisions between great teams who constantly competed in prime time games or playoffs. Four-team divisions are dumb. If not just conferences, maybe just 2 divisions per conference. The NFL is too stuck in its traditions sometimes. I.e. Chiefs Bills… Quote
LeGOATski Posted January 7 Posted January 7 1 hour ago, Rew said: Playing some teams twice a year is different. Look at NE and NYJ this year. They played us tougher than they played pretty much any other team. Us playing KC as much as we have has been scheduling quirk and competitivness in playoffs. You want larger divisions, fine. Playing teams twice a year home/away is overall good for the league. I know it's not perfect at times in weak divisions, but divisional games are different pretty much across the board. With only conferences, you'd have great teams facing each other every year. You'd have average teams facing each other every year. Bad teams facing each other every year. You'd have rivalries popping up everywhere along with more parity amongst the conference. The league could easily still pit teams against each other. They could base some of the schedule on geography for travel reasons and create yearly rivalries that way. Lamenting the extinction of divisional games would be pointless when rivalries continue to pop up anyway. 1 Quote
LeGOATski Posted January 7 Posted January 7 1 hour ago, bobobonators said: I agree with this. Look at Chiefs/Bills/Bengals last few years. And of course the rivalries will keep changing over time a bit. I see nothing wrong with that. Also, we would still play the pats/fins/jets every year. The most profitable rivalries for the league are the big games between great teams, like Bills vs Chiefs or Pats vs Colts back in the day, or 49ers vs Cowboys before that. No one cares or watches the likes of Pats vs Jets or Panthers vs Falcons... Scheduling big games between great teams is not hard now, but with only conferences it would be even easier and more often, as well as ensuring the teams are ceded correctly per their record. 1 Quote
bobobonators Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 37 minutes ago, LeGOATski said: The most profitable rivalries for the league are the big games between great teams, like Bills vs Chiefs or Pats vs Colts back in the day, or 49ers vs Cowboys before that. No one cares or watches the likes of Pats vs Jets or Panthers vs Falcons... Scheduling big games between great teams is not hard now, but with only conferences it would be even easier and more often, as well as ensuring the teams are ceded correctly per their record. My thoughts exactly buddy. Quote
chongli Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Last year, 12-5 Dallas had to travel to 8-9 Tampa Bay in the Wild Card. This year, most likely Philadelphia at 12-5 will have to go to a probable 9-8 Tampa Bay. Something is wrong with this picture. Edited January 7 by chongli 1 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.