MJS Posted January 29 Posted January 29 19 minutes ago, Peevo said: The reason for change is because one team (Pats and now Chiefs) have monopolized the system to a point where it is non-competitive. It is a fact monopolies are bad for economies. That is a fact, right? They suppress competition. How can we (the league) create more equitable results? Break up the monopoly. (AT&T in the 80's, Standard Oil). This is not a new idea. Oh, wow. This is the worst argument yet. And it makes no sense. What have the Chiefs monopolized? Having Pat Mahomes? He is a single person. He can't be divided among the teams. They clearly DON'T have an unfair advantage because they lost games this year. They were the 3rd seed in the playoffs. And the Bills beat them once and took them to the very end in the playoffs as well, taking them to overtime a couple of years ago. 1 Quote
Mr. WEO Posted January 29 Posted January 29 40 minutes ago, Peevo said: But why is change so bad? I'm genuinely asking. Until all the teams play each other we will never really achieve competitive balance in the schedule. SO they should all agree to change everything every few years? Mahomes and the Chiefs wouldn't dominate in the NFC....because their QBs aren't as good? This makes no sense at all. What sports league does this? None, simply because it lacks any logical reason to do so. Quote
LeGOATski Posted January 29 Posted January 29 At least make it so winning your division doesn't put you in the top 4 seed. Oh, you won your crappy division? Cool. Here's your division title banner. You're still the 7 seed. Quote
Warcodered Posted January 29 Posted January 29 24 minutes ago, Peevo said: Correct. This creates a system more in line with relegation/promotion. Teams have more to play for than just division titles and early playoff exits. It's a more "open" system than the closed system they currently have. That's really all I'm getting at. Well all the Divisions would still be equal technically in that the winner gets a Playoff spot still and it's the same Playoff system best record best seed, the balance comes from the weaker teams getting moved into weaker divisions and then playing each other and the better teams playing each other as well. Quote
Peevo Posted January 29 Author Posted January 29 Just now, Mr. WEO said: SO they should all agree to change everything every few years? Mahomes and the Chiefs wouldn't dominate in the NFC....because their QBs aren't as good? This makes no sense at all. What sports league does this? None, simply because it lacks any logical reason to do so. Plenty of leagues do. It's called promotion and relegation. All I'm saying is, this isn't as much a problem in the other big 3 leagues because of the amount of games. Every team plays every other team at least twice. No one care argue competitive imbalance. Everyone gets a fair shake at every team. Until all the teams play each other, you can't objectively say any NFL team is truly the "best". That's all I'm getting at. Quote
BRH Posted January 29 Posted January 29 50 minutes ago, Peevo said: But why is change so bad? I'm genuinely asking. Until all the teams play each other we will never really achieve competitive balance in the schedule. Are you advocating a 31-game schedule? Quote
Peevo Posted January 29 Author Posted January 29 Just now, BRH said: Are you advocating a 31-game schedule? Yes, in a perfect world. I addressed this in above post. No playoffs. Who ever is in 1st place at the end wins. Simple. Fair. Again, I know this will never happen. Owners like money too much. Quote
Draconator Posted January 29 Posted January 29 Peevo = Deebo Don't you have a game to prepare for? 1 Quote
90sBills Posted January 29 Posted January 29 12 minutes ago, LeGOATski said: My wife coaches middle school volleyball and, I kid you not, got an email like that from a parent. Her daughter, who's just learning volleyball and is relegated to the bench, deserves as much playing time as the best players .... No surprise, she got a big fat NO from my wife and subsequently pulled her daughter off the team. Salute to your wife. She did society a great service. That’s the only answer to such a request. Just like the reactions to this thread. Quote
Peevo Posted January 29 Author Posted January 29 Just now, Draconator said: Peevo = Deebo Don't you have a game to prepare for? I'm just some guy that used to work on Buffalo radio stations. Quote
1ManRaid Posted January 29 Posted January 29 Complaining about strong opponents is a quintessential "get good" moment. Top teams already get pitted against each other in the current scheduling algorithm, that's about as fair as it can get. Quote
Peevo Posted January 29 Author Posted January 29 1 minute ago, 1ManRaid said: Complaining about strong opponents is a quintessential "get good" moment. Top teams already get pitted against each other in the current scheduling algorithm, that's about as fair as it can get. That's only 2 games out of 17 though. No one can seriously argue the Patriots run from 2001 - 2019 was competitive in the AFC East. No one could argue that. How many times did the Dolphins/Jets/Bills make the playoffs in that stretch? The Patriots consumed so much advantage from a weak division they cake walked to a home playoff game and a week off almost every single year. You can't tell me that isn't an unfair advantage. We are all so scared of promotion and relegation, yet the Bills were de facto relegated out of the league due to merely existing the AFC East for 2 decades. 1 Quote
Matt_In_NH Posted January 29 Posted January 29 1 hour ago, Peevo said: The AFC domination transferred from Brady to Mahomes in the span of a season. Now the conference is Mahomes' to dominate until he retires. We just accept this as a reality. No, you beat them. The proposed options would make the NFL worse than it is today for a bunch of reasons. It also would show how people just want daddy to tweak the rules so they have a better chance to win which I object to. Quote
MPL Posted January 29 Posted January 29 Maybe if some of you guys had better aim with those snowballs we wouldn't have to be having this conversation right now. 2 Quote
Mr. WEO Posted January 29 Posted January 29 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Peevo said: Plenty of leagues do. It's called promotion and relegation. All I'm saying is, this isn't as much a problem in the other big 3 leagues because of the amount of games. Every team plays every other team at least twice. No one care argue competitive imbalance. Everyone gets a fair shake at every team. Until all the teams play each other, you can't objectively say any NFL team is truly the "best". That's all I'm getting at. "Who is truly the best" is settled in the playoffs/championship in every league--not by who beat whom in the regular season. That's, per game, meaningless. Relegation is something else entirely---relegated teams play in a lesser league, not in the 'other conference" in the same league. It's quite the opposite of what you are imagining... MAybe the NFL should make all teams share their draft boards? Like, you know, so they don't draft Mitch Trubisky over Mahomes, for instance? Edited January 29 by Mr. WEO Quote
BRH Posted January 29 Posted January 29 1 hour ago, LeGOATski said: My wife coaches middle school volleyball and, I kid you not, got an email like that from a parent. Her daughter, who's just learning volleyball and is relegated to the bench, deserves as much playing time as the best players .... No surprise, she got a big fat NO from my wife and subsequently pulled her daughter off the team. And then when they ask "how is my kid supposed to get better if she never plays" and you suggest that they put in extra time outside of practice developing skills and getting stronger/faster, they get offended. I'm so happy to be done with that scene. Parents are a piece of work. Quote
peterpan Posted January 29 Posted January 29 Isn’t the OP just saying “let’s get rid of two conferences “??? im not opposed. Keep the divisions or realign into new 4 or 8 team divisions. They the playoffs would be seeded by record, where the Bills could meet the chiefs in the SB. I personally would much prefer the NFL roll back some of the rule changes, whereby QB wouldn’t be as important a position as it is Quote
zow2 Posted January 29 Posted January 29 2 hours ago, RkFast said: And in ten years when the NFC is "dominant" again? This. It's all cyclical. Since a lot of the AFC have their QBs, the new batch of rookie QBs are starting to head over to the NFC. Carolina screwed up as it appears C.J. Stroud should be in the NFC not Bryce Young but oh well, what are you gonna do. Caleb and Drake Maye are likely headed to the NFC. Quote
Southern_Bills Posted January 29 Posted January 29 Or we could expect our players to not drop balls, miss FGs, and things of this nature in critical moments. Then all this wouldn't be an issue. But yeah, let's realign the whole league for our shortcomings. Quote
The Red King Posted January 29 Posted January 29 The current scheduling system is a formula. Every team in a division plays the others twice each, play (the same) AFC division and same NFC division. That's 14 out of 17 games. Then they play a team from each of the remaining AFC conferences that finished in the same spot aa them. Then one game against a team from the NFC that finished in the same slot. That means the AFC West teams play the same 14 games, and the other three are stacked *against* the higher-ranked teams. KC has to come here next season because we both finished in 1st. Five of KC's seventeen games, almost a third of the season, will be against teams that finished in first place in their divisions. Meanwhile, five of the Chargers' games will be against last-place finishers. KC has a harder road to the Super Bowl going through the AFC. They beat Buffalo and Baltimore on the road. Let me ask this. In the '90s do you think any Bills fan called for realignment after Buffalo won the AFC for four concecutive years? 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.