NFC South: In The Land of the Blind, The 5-11 Team Hosts a Playoff Game

[dynomite]

Lots of chatter today after the Saints lost, leaving the NFC South standings as such:
ATL: 4-7
NO: 4-7
CAR: 3-7-1
TB: 2-9

I don't believe that 5-11 will get it done, but I think there's a chance 6-10 will, and 7-9 is basically a best case scenario.

What do people think? A fluke that doesn't bother you? Cause to scrap the Divisions and go to as balanced a schedule as possible? Or institute some kind of "2014 NFC South" rule, where you cannot make the playoffs if you do not finish with 8+ wins?

Edit: Here's a FoxSports article that breaks down the path to a 5-11 division winner: http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/path-to-chaos-how-five-wins-could-take-the-nfc-south-112414

Edit: Should have mentioned -- as is mentioned below -- that one sub-.500 team has made the playoffs: 2010 Seattle Seahawks, who went 7-9 and beat the defending Super Bowl champion 11-5 Saints in the first round.

 

[Number45forever]

This will be two in five years that a team with a less than .500 record hosts a playoff game.  In roughly the same time period, an 11-5 team (08 Pats) and numerous 10-6 teams have missed the playoffs.  It's a product of 4-team divisions, but it isn't right.  I'd be in favor of a rule saying a team must be at least 8-8 to make the playoffs.  If a 2014 NFC South scenario happens, you add an additional wild card team amongst the other three divisions in the conference and the best wild card team hosts a game in the wild card round.
 
6-10 is probably going to win this division.  And that sucks.

 

[DJnVa]

Saints play at Pittsburgh next week, so they could easily be 4-8. I'd say the schedules eases up after that, but they just lost 3 in a row at home, granted against decent or better teams, but still.
 
Falcons schedule is tough the next few weeks: Cardinals, Packers, Steelers, then Saints and Panthers. Looks like a little round robin at end of season will decide it.

 

[dcmissle]

It happened a few years ago, when New Orleans went to 7 and 9 Seattle and lost a playoff game.
 
Divisional rivalries add a lot; there is no reason for them to be scrapped.
 
However, there is no reason why the NFL could not go to a Conference seeding system that, at a minimum, would land the leader of the NFC South at the bottom of the playoff ladder.
 
Here is the essential problem:  you cannot have a rule that morphs from year to year.  This year, the NFC South is abysmal.  But I could envision a division that is very competitive and very good that lands the leader at no better than 8 and 8, and I would not want that team excluded from the playoffs.

 

[Spacemans Bong]

I'd just like to point out that if this happened in baseball, the national media would have a cow.

 

[m0ckduck]

It happened a few years ago, when New Orleans went to 7 and 9 Seattle and lost a playoff game.
 
Divisional rivalries add a lot; there is no reason for them to be scrapped.
 
However, there is no reason why the NFL could not go to a Conference seeding system that, at a minimum, would land the leader of the NFC South at the bottom of the playoff ladder.
 
Here is the essential problem:  you cannot have a rule that morphs from year to year.  This year, the NFC South is abysmal.  But I could envision a division that is very competitive and very good that lands the leader at no better than 8 and 8, and I would not want that team excluded from the playoffs.

This summarizes my feelings exactly.

Also, I don't see how you scrap the divisions and go with 'as balanced a system as possible'. Seems to me the vagaries of the unbalanced schedule would be at least as maddening as the current problem. Finally, it would never happen because it would be too weird for the average fan to look at the conference standings and say, 'woo-hoo, we're in 5th place!' People want to gauge their team's success in the context of smaller groupings.

Edit: I realize the current system is 'unbalanced' in the sense that teams from Crappy Division have the good fortune to play each other repeatedly... But this at least is an iniquity based on a stable and pseudo-geographic system that tends to even out over time (remember when the NFC West was a laughingstock?) An attempt to create a division-less schedule based on opponents strength the previous season seems like a recipe for madness.

 

[Super Nomario]

Here is the essential problem:  you cannot have a rule that morphs from year to year.  This year, the NFC South is abysmal.  But I could envision a division that is very competitive and very good that lands the leader at no better than 8 and 8, and I would not want that team excluded from the playoffs.

 
You get 10 games that aren't against your division opponents. It's pretty hard to construct a scenario where an 8-8 team is legitimately really good (or, at least, has played really well).
 
EDIT: You do get seasons where an 8-8 team making it is unavoidable - in 2004 only four NFC were above .500, so both Wild Cards were 8-8 teams

 

[dcmissle]

Yes.
 
And suppose that this year's AFC North were paired against the AFC and NFC West -- instead of the South as is the case.  In that event, you could see all of those teams trending toward .500 instead of where they seem to be trending now -- better than 10-6, maybe all of them.
 
I would not say in absolute terms than none of Cincy, Bal, Pitts or Cleve are playoff worthy.

 

[Super Nomario]

Yes.
 
And suppose that this year's AFC North were paired against the AFC and NFC West -- instead of the South as is the case.  In that event, you could see all of those teams trending toward .500 instead of where they seem to be trending now -- better than 10-6, maybe all of them.
 
I would not say in absolute terms than none of Cincy, Bal, Pitts or Cleve are playoff worthy.

I don't know; I think there's a fair chance the AFC North winner is the worst playoff team in the AFC. If they played tougher schedules rather than super-easy ones I wouldn't lament one of them being left out at 8-8. But I think you'd probably see at least one 9-7 team even if they played stiffer competition.

 

[dynomite]

Divisional rivalries add a lot; there is no reason for them to be scrapped...
I would not want that team excluded from the playoffs.

I tend to agree with your rivalries point.

As for the other, would you be in favor of a rule that said you had to win at least 8 games to make the playoffs?

Also, I don't see how you scrap the divisions and go with 'as balanced a system as possible'.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I'm not advocating any of these changes, just posing questions.

Interesting points.

Finally, it would never happen because it would be too weird for the average fan to look at the conference standings and say, 'woo-hoo, we're in 5th place!' People want to gauge their team's success in the context of smaller groupings.

I do not support going to a conference standings alignment, but isn't this how the NBA is structured? I mean, I guess divisions exist, but only in a vague sense.

 

[Stitch01]

Saints probably still win this most of the time I think given they have Atlanta and Carolina at home and the Panthers are really terrible.  7-9 gets it done almost for sure and 6-10 gets it done at least a strong minority of the time if the two wins are over Carolina at home (Carolina would have to win three of their other four) and Atlanta at home (Falcons would have to beat Cardinals, Packers, or Steelers as well as beating the Panthers) and they should win those games at home given that godawful teams don't win on the road much.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Posted this in the Week 12 game thread but more appropriate here. Here are schedules and odds as of early this morning:

NO: @PIT (+2.5); vs. CAR (-6.5); @CHI (+0.5); vs ATL (-4.5); @TB (-4)
ATL: vs. ARI (+2.5); @GB (+10.5): vs. PIT (-0.5); @NO (+4.5); vs. CAR (-4)
TB: vs. CIN (+3.5); @DET (+11.5); @CAR (+5.5); vs. GB (+9.5); vs. NO (+4)
CAR: @MIN (+3); @NO (+6.5); vs. TB (-5.5); vs. CLE (+0.5); @ATL (+4)

It is unlikely that any NFC South team will be favored in a game outside their division.

Other than the NFC South and the NFC North, these teams have won all of two games, one of which was TB over PIT in week four.

 

[amarshal2]

Tampa Bay is one game out of getting the #1 draft pick and two games out of hosting a playoff game. Exciting times!!!

 

[dbn]

The FO playoff odds thing has the following predicted median wins:
 
NO 6.8
ATL 6.2
CAR 5.1
TB 3.8

 

[dbn]

Posted this in the Week 12 game thread but more appropriate here. Here are schedules and odds as of early this morning:

NO: @PIT (+2.5); vs. CAR (-6.5); @CHI (+0.5); vs ATL (-4.5); @TB (-4)
ATL: vs. ARI (+2.5); @GB (+10.5): vs. PIT (-0.5); @NO (+4.5); vs. CAR (-4)
TB: vs. CIN (+3.5); @DET (+11.5); @CAR (+5.5); vs. GB (+9.5); vs. NO (+4)
CAR: @MIN (+3); @NO (+6.5); vs. TB (-5.5); vs. CLE (+0.5); @ATL (+4)

It is unlikely that any NFC South team will be favored in a game outside their division.

Other than the NFC South and the NFC North, these teams have won all of two games, one of which was TB over PIT in week four.

 
I could see NO maybe getting to 8-8, but I think the most likely record for the division winner is, in order from most to least likely: 7-9, 8-8, 6-10. 5-11 is possible, but I think unlikely. 

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

I posted this in the NFC ranking thread, but this seems like a good spot for it to.  Atlanta, the current division leader, is currently 4-0 in the division and 0-7 outside it.  They've got ARI, @GB, PIT left out of division, so they're likely to go 0-10 out of division.
 
However, if they do win their division games (@NO, CAR), they've got a good shot at hosting a playoff game anyways.  NO would have to go 3-1 in its other 4 games to beat them out.

 

[dynomite]

Now that the Falcons are down by 24 at halftime (both a good job and a good effort), in all likelihood after tonight these will be the standings:

Falcons (5-8): vs.Pit, @NO, vs.Car
Saints (5-8): @Chi, vs.Atl, @TB
Panthers (4-8-1): vs.TB, vs.Cle, @Atl
Bucs (2-11)

Good stuff.

In other words, a team with a .385 winning percentage will be in 1st place. To put that in perspective, over a full season that would be akin to an MLB team on pace to win their Division with 62 wins. The actual worst record in baseball in 2014 belonged to the 64-98 Arizona Diamondbacks. (And yes, I understand that the NFL and MLB are entirely different sports, and you can't compare one to the other, smaller sample size, etc. etc., caveat caveat)

Note:  I think the current NFL playoff system works well, so this doesn't really bother me. More of a running gag.

Anyway, who ya... "got," in relative terms only?

 

[Dan to Theo to Ben]

Atlanta is going to determine who wins the division based on how they do v. Car and NO. NO with the slight advantage since they have ATL at home. Chi and TB are winnable. If they beat ATL they're close to in; even if they lose to Chi, they can still get in if Clev beats Car and Pit beats Atl (both AFC black and blue teams will be favorites)

 

[Dan to Theo to Ben]

Also, worst case for the NFL seems to be Carolina at 6-9-1, playoff team should not have 10 losses, even this year.

 

[shawnrbu]

I don't mind a division champ qualifying for the playoffs, but would like to see the NFL tweak the seeding.  At minimum, add a rule that if a division champ has a .500 or worse record, then it needs to be dropped in the seeding.  I thought it was absurd in 2010 that the 7-9 Seahawks hosted the 11-5 Saints in the Wild Card Round.  After the Hawks pulled the big upset, it was ridiculous to me that the # 2 seed Bears got to host Seattle while the top seed Falcons had to play the red hot 10-6 Packers in the Divisional Round.

 

[singaporesoxfan]

To make this even more of a cluster I'm rooting for the Saints and Falcons to tie in week 16.

 

[axx]

Cross the Panthers off the list as Cam Newton was injured in a car accident.
 
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/12/09/5373373/accident-blocks-church-street.html#.VIc3Y9LF-Fx

 
Their next two games are Tampa Bay then the Manziels, certainly winnable even with Derek Anderson. The Panthers would have to beat Atlanta on the road at the end of the season too though. 7-8-1 gets it done.

 

[dbn]

There is a scenario where 6-9-1 gets it done.

 

[tims4wins]

If Chicago beats New Orleans at home tomorrow night then Carolina will control their own destiny. Unreal. They were 3-8-1 a week and a few hours ago.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

There's still a scenario where 6-10 gets it done:
 
--Carolina loses twice (5-10-1)
--New Orleans loses to Chicago, beats Atlanta, loses to TB (6-10)
--Atlanta loses to New Orelans, beats Carolina (6-10)
 
Atlanta would win that tiebreak over New Orleans on best divisional record.
 
To echo a comment I just made in the general NFC thread, Atlanta has a 5-9 record, would have the 7th overall pick in the NFL Draft if the season ended today, and controls its own playoff destiny with two weeks to go.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

We're now guaranteed a sub-.500 playoff team - either the 7-9 Falcons or the 7-8-1 Panthers will host a first-round playoff game. The Falcons actually looked pretty competent today, although they did get a huge break on the Jimmy Graham fumble which really should have been a touchdown. You'd think they'd be favored to beat the Panthers...and then they'd probably get the Cardinals, who they beat pretty comfortably three weeks ago in the Georgia Dome when Drew Stanton was still their quarterback. What a weird season.

 

[Phil Plantier]

I'm rooting for a tie next week so Carolina can enter the playoffs at 6-8-2.

 

[dynomite]

What an appropriate finish in the NFC South.

Also, aren't the Panthers 2-0 with Derek Anderson at QB and only 4-8-1 with Cam at QB?

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

I'm rooting for a tie next week so Carolina can enter the playoffs at 6-8-2.

 
I want the tie along with a NO win just so I can find out whether 6-8-2 is considered better than 7-9-0.  Because the 7-9 winning percentage is higher.

 

[DJnVa]

 
I want the tie along with a NO win just so I can find out whether 6-8-2 is considered better than 7-9-0.  Because the 7-9 winning percentage is higher.

 
No it's not.
 
With a tie, it's a half win and half loss. 6-8-2 works out to 7-9 for winning percentage. The 9-4-1 Bengals have a .679 winning percentage, which is 9.5/14
 

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

 
No it's not.
 
With a tie, it's a half win and half loss. 6-8-2 works out to 7-9 for winning percentage. The 9-4-1 Bengals have a .679 winning percentage, which is 9.5/14
 

 
Ya, you're right.  I'm dumb.  I would be curious if that would be the first time in NFL history a team won a tiebreaker despite having fewer wins.  Recent era I'm sure it would be, but ties used to be more common pre-OT so I suppose it could have happened before.

 

[Infield Infidel]

I do not support going to a conference standings alignment, but isn't this how the NBA is structured? I mean, I guess divisions exist, but only in a vague sense.

 
 
NBA has the three division winners and the top non-division winner seeded 1-4, so if a non-division winner has the #2 record, they can get the #2 seed. It's important because it screws with late season playoff scenarios, and upends the bracket. Before the change, there was a final regular season game when the Clippers and Memphis tried to lose on purpose so they could avoid 60-22 Mavs, who had the #2 record, but were seeded 4th. the 47-win Clips lost, got the 6 seed, played the 3-seed team 44-38 Nuggets -- the Clips won the series in 5 games (Since the NBA gives home-court advantage goes to the team with the better record, no matter the seed, Clippers had home-court advantage as well). Meanwhile, the Mavs were the 4 seed, beat the Grizzlies, and played the #1 Spurs in the second round, even though they had the two best records in the West. Clippers played the 2 seeded Suns, who had a worse record than the Mavs. 
 
The NBA quickly changed the format for the next season. 
 
If there weren't so many 11-4 teams playing next week, there would have been a similar situation with teams trying to get the #5 seed to play the NFC South champ instead of the #3 seed and playing an 11-5 or 12-4 #6 seed. Without a doubt this season the #5 seed will play a worse team than the #3 seed will play. 
 
I'd like to see for conference champs, .500 is the minimum to get in, but you have to be over .500 to host a playoff game. if you get in with and 8-8 record, and everyone has a better record, you get the 6th seed. If you are 9-7, or 8-7-1, ok, you can get the #4 seed. This year, there would just be a 3rd wild card like before the 8-division era. 

 

[Super Nomario]

Some odd stuff going on with the Saints:
- Owner Tom Benson's successor was going to be grand-daughter Rita Benson LeBlanc, but she is out now. Benson's wife Gayle is now the successor.
- They added Jeff Ireland to the front office after losing Ryan Pace and firing Rick Reiprish.