Seahawks prove that there’s a need for the NFL to re-seed
Throughout the NFL season, I’ve participated in the Washington Post’s NFL panel, “The League.” This week, I was asked for my take on the Seahawks and whether or not they’re the worst team in NFL history to make the playoffs.
Are the 2010-11 version of the Seattle Seahawks the worst playoff team in NFL history? Yes, considering they’re the only team to make the playoffs with a losing record. But that’s not the NFL’s biggest problem when it comes to its current playoff structure.
The Seahawks won’t be the only host team with a worse record than their opponent this weekend. Look at the schedule: The 10-6 Colts are hosting the 11-5 Jets, the 10-6 Chiefs are hosting the 12-4 Ravens and yes, the 7-9 Seahawks are hosting the 11-5 Saints.
I have no problem with the four division winners making the playoffs. “>Do I think it’s elephant dung that the 10-win Giants and Bucs didn’t make the playoffs and the 7-9 Seahawks did? Absolutely. This is the first time since 1991 that a pair of 10-6 teams will miss the playoffs, all while a 7-9 team gets in. That’s not fair but sorry, that’s just the luck of the draw.
But for the love of football man, can we get Roger Goodell to re-seed the playoffs after the regular season?
Seattle has proved that just because a team wins its lousy division doesn’t mean it earned the right to host a playoff game. The NFL wants to reward the four teams that win their division, which is fine – I’m on board with that. But it’s ridiculous that a team like the Ravens (a legit Super Bowl contender) will be on the road this weekend when the Seahawks play at home.
Follow the Scores Report editors on Twitter @clevelandteams and @bullzeyedotcom.
Posted in: NFL
Tags: 2011 NFL Playoffs, Anthony Stalter, NFL Playoff Preview, Seattle Seahawks
I think what’s being missed in all the talk about how unusual situations like this are is that going to 8 divisions makes them far more likely. There was, what, one year in the history of the NFL before this decade where a division winner went to the playoffs over a team with a better record?
Well it’s happened twice now in the nine years of the 8 division league, with one team actually winning a division at 7-9.
I really don’t see why we can’t just seed the entire conference 1-6, and if a division winner gets left out then so be it. The divisions would still matter because divisional games would still make up 6 of the 16 games on the schedule. Playing in a weak division would still be an advantage, playing in a strong division would still battle test teams. It just wouldn’t guarantee a playoff spot to finish 1st in the division.
I think the NFL has to redefine what the regular season is all about. If they want the regular season to determine the best six teams in each conference, then the teams with the best six records (barring tiebreakers, obviously) should make the playoffs regardless of what division they’re in.
As I stated above, I’m fine with the division winnings making the playoffs. But I can see your point and as a football fan I certainly wouldn’t be opposed to seeing the teams with the top six records get in.
If having a better record guarantees you’re a better team then your ideas make sense. If it doesn’t, then I don’t see a need to render the divisions meaningless, except as a tiebreaker. And I don’t think it does. Record is too dependent on the division you play in and the other divisions you have on your schedule. The only way to guarantee the best 6 teams for each conference make the postseason is to have them play every team in the conference. Otherwise there is always a chance that your record could be padded while other teams may finish a game or two behind you with a more difficult schedule.
Bottom line is, there is no perfect system but I think the division winners should be rewarded. What’s next..you guys are going to want to realign the divisions every year based on record to try and even out the schedules? Everybody wants parity but when they get it, they complain.
I agree with you T-Bone and again, I’m fine with the division winners making it in – just as I wrote in the article.
But have the regular season and postseason mean two different things. The regular season determines who makes the postseason. The postseason determines who plays in the Super Bowl. Once the six teams are decided, re-seed everyone so that the teams with the best records get the better seeds.
You’re right – records don’t say everything. But I highly doubt that any 7-9 team will ever be better than a 10-6 team, so re-seed that bitch.
SEA was 7-9 in a crappy division. What does that say?
It says the Seahawks are terrible but I can’t fault them for playing in a crappy division.
But why should the Jets at 11-5 get a home playoff game over a division winner like the Colts or the Chiefs at 10-6? Reward a home game for finishing 2nd? C’mon guys…
The Jets only finished second because they play in the same division as the Patriots. They would have won the AFC South (the Colts’ division), the AFC West, the NFC East and the NFC West. So really, what does that say about the divisions?
I’m sure your next argument will be about them playing the Bills or Dolphins, but every division has crap teams. I’ll go back to my point above: no 7-9 team will ever be better than a 10-6 team. I don’t care how you spin it. So why not “award” the 10-6 team with a higher seeding when the playoffs come?
Division winners? Fine. Division winners who went 7-9 and get to host a playoff game? Not fine.
I think the Seahawks suck, just like everyone else. But they won their division and deserve to be in, and I’ll give them a home game to boot. If you go into Seattle and lose, maybe you didn’t deserve to be there in the first place?
I don’t think the Jets at 11-5 and 2nd in their division deserve a home playoff game over division winner Indy, however you might convince me that they deserve one over KC who wasn’t even the best team in their division at 2-4, 2nd place Oakland was at 6-0.
There are pros and cons to both sides, but I think a knee-jerk reaction to an anomaly doesn’t make the situation better.
So much for your theory — 41-36. The Seahawks had a 14 point lead for a good while on an 11-5 team. I should know: I was there.