The Playoff Format

**TheRealist** · 12-19-2011, 02:46 PM

Under John Harbaugh the Ravens should have had home games. Some of you are bound to go, "You are right. This team lost games that they should not have in prior years." Others of you are bound to groan, "We simply were not good enough to win our division and get those home games." In actuality I am not using the "we should have won more games" argument to justify my position. Looking at the Ravens records each year under Harbaugh, I found two years in which we deserved a first playoff game at home. The playoff format with its valuing of divisional winners has prevented us from getting a home playoff game and benefitting Baltimore and Maryland's economy.

In 2008 the Ravens finished 11-5 and met the 11-5 Miami Dolphins in Landshark or whatever name they were calling it back then. One might say, "Well the Dolphins won their division." I say that the Ravens defeated the Dolphins during the regular season. The first tiebreaker that goes into effects are the result of head to head matchups. For example, if we are fortunate enough to tie with Pittsburgh at the end of the year, we win the division.

Now in 2009 we finished 9-7 and justifiably went to face the 10-6 New England Patriots. In 2010 though we finished 12-4 and had to go to Arrowhead to face the 10-6 Chiefs. Two more wins did not equate to us getting a playoff game. We were not even the biggest miscarriage of justice. The 7-9 Seahawks got to host the 11-5 Saints and ended up defeating the Saints.

Unfortunately what I feel is going to happen is that either we or the Steelers are not going to get a deserved first playoff game this year in 2011. More than likely both teams are going to have better records than Houston and whoever wins the west. In the case of finishing equally to Houston, we have the tiebreaker or Houstonwhile they got one over the Steelers. Again a city is going to be groaning.

The logical thing to do is to simply seed the playoff teams based off of wins. Take out the fact that teams won a division. No two divisions are alike, which means that winning them carries different degrees of being special. Besides, wins should determine who hosts the playoff games, not who won a division. I know that some are going to start bringing up how the Super Bowl should be played at the best team's venue and how teams like 2010 Seattle should not go in, but those are different topics for another day. In the mean time I hope that the league changes the playoff format.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 12-19-2011, 03:19 PM

I hear what you are saying, but this sounds like a lot of sour grapes coming after that loss last night.

Win the division...something we haven't done in 4 years...and only twice in our history, and we don't have to worry about this crap.

**HoustonRaven** · 12-19-2011, 03:23 PM

Best record in the divisions deserves a reward of the playoffs.

I like it the way it is.

**Ravenswintitle** · 12-19-2011, 03:24 PM

Every team knows the rules before the start of the season. Win your division

**alien bird** · 12-19-2011, 03:26 PM

Didn't we just go around the block on this last week? :DeadHorse:

**Corey** · 12-19-2011, 03:40 PM

I agree but I have always disliked the seeding system in the NFL. Its not just a problem for me because it keeps screwing over the Ravens.

The reward for winning your division is an automatic playoff berth. See the 7-9 Seahawks getting in over the 10-6 Bucs last season.

Once all the playoff spots are decided, the seeding should be decided based on the records of all the teams.

I just don't think a team that plays in a division that is bad enough to have a 7-9 record win it deserves a home playoff game more than a team that plays in a tough division and a 10-6 or 11-5 record wont win it, ie. the NFC south last year.

**MarkS** · 12-19-2011, 03:45 PM

This gets argued about every post-season. I see the point that winning your division should matter, but for my money, making the post-season with something like a 9-7 record (when you likely wouldn't have even gotten in the playoffs if you'd played in a stronger division) is reward enough. You shouldn't automatically get a home game as well. Re-seed the playoffs based on best records.

**madmikey** · 12-19-2011, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Corey

I agree but I have always disliked the seeding system in the NFL. Its not just a problem for me because it keeps screwing over the Ravens.

The reward for winning your division is an automatic playoff berth. See the 7-9 Seahawks getting in over the 10-6 Bucs last season.

Once all the playoff spots are decided, the seeding should be decided based on the records of all the teams.

I just don't think a team that plays in a division that is bad enough to have a 7-9 record win it deserves a home playoff game more than a team that plays in a tough division and a 10-6 or 11-5 record wont win it, ie. the NFC south last year.

Well it hasn't screwed the Ravens yet. If the Steelers lose, the Ravens are laughing and I don't think anyone here will complain about the Steelers being screwed:)

It's not a perfect system, but it is what it is. And there are teams who have gone in as WCs and won it all (like the Packers last year; the Steelers have also done it).

The system doesn't really need fixing - the Ravens just need to play better and everything will be fine.

**kinix22** · 12-19-2011, 04:09 PM

You diminish the importance of the division entirely by seeding the playoffs based on record alone and the NFL, with its $27billion television contracts, will not stand for allowing any one game to not seem like it is more important to watch than seeing your first child born.

**Haloti92** · 12-19-2011, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by kinix22

You diminish the importance of the division entirely by seeding the playoffs based on record alone and the NFL, with its $27billion television contracts, will not stand for allowing any one game to not seem like it is more important to watch than seeing your first child born.

Not entirely (as a division winner could still make the playoffs over a team with a better record), but enough. You are spot on about the money and the desire for important divisional rivalry games. I don't think anything should be changed, nor will it be changed any time soon.

**cbaywolf** · 12-19-2011, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by kinix22

You diminish the importance of the division entirely by seeding the playoffs based on record alone and the NFL, with its $27billion television contracts, will not stand for allowing any one game to not seem like it is more important to watch than seeing your first child born.

Except that you're NOT diminishing the importance of the division ENTIRELY. You're allowing a shitty 7-9 team to be in the playoffs, even though they have a shitty record (and don't really deserve to be)- That's the reward for winning the division. It's not like they would be left out totally. Their fans should be happy to even be given a chance in the playoffs after a season like that.

While i do think it sounds like a cop-out after us losing homefield last night, i have always thought better records should be seeded higher.

**HoustonRaven** · 12-19-2011, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by cbaywolf

Except that you're NOT diminishing the importance of the division ENTIRELY. You're allowing a shitty 7-9 team to be in the playoffs, even though they have a shitty record (and don't really deserve to be)

It happened once. So by your argument, we create a system that diminishes the impact of divisional rivals because the Seahawks luck-boxed their way into the playoffs one year?