Packers better than any team Cards faced last post-season?

[nashman]

Your peaking? Well I guess if you consider your last 8 games (most not impressive) you beat Dallas (when they were playing like crap), squeaked on out over a .500 SF team, beat a pathetic Detroit team, Baltimore (quality win but you were at home and Ravens not playing that well), Bad Chicago team, terrible Seattle team, and us playing our backups. Doesn't seem to me you have had to play anyone in the last 8 weeks with much on the line the Steelers I guess but again you lost that one. So your lone quality win is Baltimore in the last 8 weeks. If you think your peaking wait until you get a full dose of a playoff caliber Card team that you have yet to face. You have a better record then us but we have shown against the Vikings we can play with a high caliber playoff team and spank them, you have not!

 

[82CardsGrad]

If your handle suggests that you enjoy logic, I think we'll get along.


My major weakness in analyzing teams previously is that I was unable to conduct the "eye test" outside of maybe a few national games. Too small of a sample size. Recently I bought the NFL Game Rewind package from NFL.com which gives access to every NFL game (pre, regular, post season) from the past two years in their entirety on demand. I think it's $14.99/month.

So I've actually been able to watch some Cardinals games from last year compared to this year. I'm interested in my findings. My impression is that they took an already up and down team and made them even more high risk, high reward on defense. DRC is progressing extremely well as a cover man, Wilson's still a rock deep in the secondary, but the play of your interior linebackers (Dansby and Hayes) has taken a step back from the playoff run last year, and they were a key to making that entire defense run. Allowing 5.5 yards/carry over the final 8 games this year is bad news for the Cardinals going into the playoffs.

On offense, things aren't too different. Wells adds another playmaker, but I don't get the impression Kurt is as sharp or as consistent as last year. It's shown on third downs.

The first half Green Bay Packers wouldn't have matched up with this team. The current version can and will play with any team in the NFL. Every negative that plagued the Packers early on in the season has been quelled, from offensive line protection issues to Rodgers holding on to the ball too long to penalties to special teams coverage break downs. We're peaking right now, and I couldn't be happier about it.

That's actually a pretty solid characterization of this team. However, what you can't know/predict is exactly what others have suggested here... that is, will the '08 Playoff Cards show up? If they do, I really don't care what Packers teams shows up... it won't matter.

 

[DanThePackerFan]

A few comments on your stats Dan. Surely you realize the reason the Pack has scored so many points this year is that +24 takeaway number? in general a possession in the NFL is worth about 4 points, so a +24 is worth about 96extra points. Take away is the single most conclusive stat in the NFL, generally speaking the team that turns it over the least wins.

In several of the Cards losses this year and last year they were very TO prone, like Carolina and Sf(second game) this year. When the Cards protect the ball they usually win.

I don't think that stat is luck for the Pack they force turnovers, but if they don't get them Sunday they probably won't win, because if the Cards don't turn it over, they usually win.

I don't see how anybody could suggest the 08 team was better than the 09 Cards unless they just don't see enough games. The only stat that was better last year was points scored 426to 375 this year, but they allowed 425 points last year to only 325 this year. Last year the Cards were only +1 in points scored to allowed, this year they're plus 50. And that's with the injuries to Boldin, Breaston and having Ben Patrick suspended the first 4 games of the season. It was also plus 76 before the last game where the Cards didn't care what the outcome was.

The Cards were -7 in takeaways this year that's why they scored less points but they still had way better defensive numbers. The run game is substantially better and the offense is MUCH more balanced. If they play catch with the QB DB's again GB will win, if they don't, I just don't see GB being able to stop the Cards from scoring and winning on the road will be very tough.

Definitely an interesting take. Part of the reason for the Cardinals' defensive improvement is a much easier schedule. Playing only four winning teams in 16 games isn't nearly as taxing as the eight you guys played last year.

The offense is certainly more balanced, I can't argue there. But for the first time in awhile, I can say that I don't fear any team running on the Packers. Even good running teams typically try for a quarter, and that's it.

I'm also confident in our ability to cause turnovers on defense, given the margin that we're even ahead of the #2 team in turnover differential this season.

 

[CardLogic]

My impression is that they took an already up and down team and made them even more high risk, high reward on defense. DRC is progressing extremely well as a cover man, Wilson's still a rock deep in the secondary, but the play of your interior linebackers (Dansby and Hayes) has taken a step back from the playoff run last year, and they were a key to making that entire defense run. Allowing 5.5 yards/carry over the final 8 games this year is bad news for the Cardinals going into the playoffs.

I disagree with your assessment of this years defense being more high risk than last years. Not that he doesn't like to throw an odd alignment or an unusual blitz at an opponent, but if anything DC Davis has reinforced maintaining discipline individual assignments and gap responsibilties. Making the D more stable overall.

What has been the problem with the Cardinals D over the final eight games is that both ILB's have been playing with significant injuries, Hayes has a back problem and Dansby has injuries to both shoulders. Prior to their being injured the performance of both was superior to last seasons, enabling the Cardinals to actually be among the league leaders vs. the run during the early part of the season.

It will be critical whether they both are able to contribute well, and at what level during the playoffs.

On offense, things aren't too different. Wells adds another playmaker, but I don't get the impression Kurt is as sharp or as consistent as last year. It's shown on third downs.

Agreed, Warner was better overall in '08, but I personally have devalued Warner several times previously, only to be proven wrong. He has got as much heart as any player I have ever witnessed. One of the best playoff QB's ever. Overall the offense has not been as sharp as last season, but it is more balanced. I have a hunch that Cardinals rushing attack is going to be instrumental to their playoff success this time around.

The first half Green Bay Packers wouldn't have matched up with this team. The current version can and will play with any team in the NFL. Every negative that plagued the Packers early on in the season has been quelled, from offensive line protection issues to Rodgers holding on to the ball too long to penalties to special teams coverage break downs. We're peaking right now, and I couldn't be happier about it.

The Packers are a good team, and imo, the Cardinals don't match up that well against them. But there just might be an ambush awaiting the Pack, much like happened to the Vikings earlier this season.

 

[DanThePackerFan]

Your peaking? Well I guess if you consider your last 8 games (most not impressive) you beat Dallas (when they were playing like crap), squeaked on out over a .500 SF team, beat a pathetic Detroit team, Baltimore (quality win but you were at home and Ravens not playing that well), Bad Chicago team, terrible Seattle team, and us playing our backups. Doesn't seem to me you have had to play anyone in the last 8 weeks with much on the line the Steelers I guess but again you lost that one. So your lone quality win is Baltimore in the last 8 weeks. If you think your peaking wait until you get a full dose of a playoff caliber Card team that you have yet to face. You have a better record then us but we have shown against the Vikings we can play with a high caliber playoff team and spank them, you have not!

I'm usually not a grammar hound, but this one bothers me.

As far as the content of the post, I'm sorry, but that's a poor attempt at rationalization. Those two quality wins match the amount of quality wins you guys have all season. And there hasn't been a time this year when Baltimore has been playing badly. They might be the most underrated team in the NFL. They played a brutal schedule and all 7 of their losses are against winning teams (9 of 16 against winning teams in total).

And Dallas? The same Dallas that was coming off a 4 game winning streak, had just defeated Philadelphia, and a few weeks later pitched back to back shutouts against divisional opponents? Nope. Not buying it.

You can rationalize any big win that way. Did you merely catch the Vikings at the beginning of their late season collapse? Or your only other quality win came "early in the season before teams were really hitting their stride"? No, I can't throw out those excuses, because they mean nothing. Teams play football games to win.

I'm getting increasingly frustrated listening to Wisenhunt complain about McCarthy's strategy on Sunday, and then hearing those sentiments echoed by Cardinal nation. It's not like he busted out the double reverse, the flea flicker and the fumblerooskie. We ran essentially the same base plays that Wisenhunt would see if he watched any game film on our team since midseason. Slants, stick routes, crossing routes. And we executed them with the same precision we have been.

The thing that interests me is how it almost seemed like the Cardinals (knowing of the liberal subbing that was to occur) played a flat and uninterested game. Up until noon, there was a possibility that your team could have been playing for a first round bye. You're telling me they could have just turned it on like THAT against the best defense in the NFC, and a team that's hotter than any going into the playoffs, but by halftime of the Vikings game decided to just pack it in and get run over? I guess it worked last year, but it sure is like playing with fire for Wisenhunt. I guess he knows the psyche of this locker room better than I do.

 

[CardLogic]

The offense is certainly more balanced, I can't argue there. But for the first time in awhile, I can say that I don't fear any team running on the Packers. Even good running teams typically try for a quarter, and that's it.

Thing is... the Cardinals only need to run for one quarter, with the lead in the 4th quarter, that is.

 

[nashman]

That's right he does know more about this team than you do, clearly. Sorry Baltimore is the only decent team you beat, the Cowboys suck! Philly will run them over this weekend Philly played vanilla and didn't give anything away. You will get to see the real Cardinals for the first time this weekend, go I hope your team is as over confident as its fans are this is going to be great!

 

[82CardsGrad]

I'm usually not a grammar hound, but this one bothers me.

As far as the content of the post, I'm sorry, but that's a poor attempt at rationalization. Those two quality wins match the amount of quality wins you guys have all season. And there hasn't been a time this year when Baltimore has been playing badly. They might be the most underrated team in the NFL. They played a brutal schedule and all 7 of their losses are against winning teams (9 of 16 against winning teams in total).

And Dallas? The same Dallas that was coming off a 4 game winning streak, had just defeated Philadelphia, and a few weeks later pitched back to back shutouts against divisional opponents? Nope. Not buying it.

You can rationalize any big win that way. Did you merely catch the Vikings at the beginning of their late season collapse? Or your only other quality win came "early in the season before teams were really hitting their stride"? No, I can't throw out those excuses, because they mean nothing. Teams play football games to win.

I'm getting increasingly frustrated listening to Wisenhunt complain about McCarthy's strategy on Sunday, and then hearing those sentiments echoed by Cardinal nation. It's not like he busted out the double reverse, the flea flicker and the fumblerooskie. We ran essentially the same base plays that Wisenhunt would see if he watched any game film on our team since midseason. Slants, stick routes, crossing routes. And we executed them with the same precision we have been.

The thing that interests me is how it almost seemed like the Cardinals (knowing of the liberal subbing that was to occur) played a flat and uninterested game. Up until noon, there was a possibility that your team could have been playing for a first round bye. You're telling me they could have just turned it on like THAT against the best defense in the NFC, and a team that's hotter than any going into the playoffs, but by halftime of the Vikings game decided to just pack it in and get run over? I guess it worked last year, but it sure is like playing with fire for Wisenhunt. I guess he knows the psyche of this locker room better than I do.

FWIW, I for one am not at all comfortable with this teams' unsteady psyche. It not only drives us fans nuts, but I can't help but think it is simply not a sustainable path toward success in the NFL.
That said, for reasons that remain unclear to me, Whiz is able to somehow rally this team when it truly matters, and when every other "expert" says the Cards will be overmatched... He's done this time and time again.
Like I said, I don't agree with it, I don't like it and my gut tells me that this will not create longterm sustained success. But as Cards fans, we can only run with the horse we have. And for better or worse, our horse has now produced back to back division titles. As Cards fans, we now have post season football - in OUR HOUSE - in two consecutive years! As a Packer fan you can't begin to imagine what that feels like for Cardinal fans. How we got there was certainly not a path many other historically successful teams have taken. It is what it is... We're here. January 10th. Playoff football in our home. And we know that if Whiz can muster the best out of this team once again, the Packers don't stand a chance.
You can develop as many statistically based models as your heart desires, but the truth remains clear and simple. If Whiz can rally the team as he did during the '08 post-season run, you're toast...

 

[Houdini]

What I'm curious to find out is if the 1st quarter of last week's game when the starters were in caused the Cardinals to lose a little confidence, or did it awaken a sleeping giant? The last 2 years the Cardinals to seem to play their best after they looked bad the week before.

 

[CardLogic]

The thing that interests me is how it almost seemed like the Cardinals (knowing of the liberal subbing that was to occur) played a flat and uninterested game. Up until noon, there was a possibility that your team could have been playing for a first round bye. You're telling me they could have just turned it on like THAT against the best defense in the NFC, and a team that's hotter than any going into the playoffs, but by halftime of the Vikings game decided to just pack it in and get run over? I guess it worked last year, but it sure is like playing with fire for Wisenhunt. I guess he knows the psyche of this locker room better than I do.

The Cardinals didn't show up last week, and it's fairly certain the outcome of the Vikings game really had nothing to do with it. I don't like it but; this Cardinals team becomes easily disinterested. It's obvious to me that last week they didn't care about playing, and I am just as sure that they felt that way, prior to the Vikes/Giants game, whether Whisenhunt cares to admit that or not.

This coming Sunday, they have an interest. Seriously, I think the Cardinals have a lot of "money" players on the team. When there is something on the line, they'll perform; when there's not, eh... It's not a characteristic that I endorse nor appreciate, but it is what it is.

 

[MrYeahBut]

I'm usually not a grammar hound, but this one bothers me.

your wrong in your analysis. your so sure your team will destroy the cards, but your wrong. your going back to cheeseville with you'r tail between your'e legs.

Just had to annoy a Pack fan

 

[PJ1]

I'm usually not a grammar hound, but this one bothers me.

As far as the content of the post, I'm sorry, but that's a poor attempt at rationalization. Those two quality wins match the amount of quality wins you guys have all season. And there hasn't been a time this year when Baltimore has been playing badly. They might be the most underrated team in the NFL. They played a brutal schedule and all 7 of their losses are against winning teams (9 of 16 against winning teams in total).

And Dallas? The same Dallas that was coming off a 4 game winning streak, had just defeated Philadelphia, and a few weeks later pitched back to back shutouts against divisional opponents? Nope. Not buying it.

You can rationalize any big win that way. Did you merely catch the Vikings at the beginning of their late season collapse? Or your only other quality win came "early in the season before teams were really hitting their stride"? No, I can't throw out those excuses, because they mean nothing. Teams play football games to win.

I'm getting increasingly frustrated listening to Wisenhunt complain about McCarthy's strategy on Sunday, and then hearing those sentiments echoed by Cardinal nation. It's not like he busted out the double reverse, the flea flicker and the fumblerooskie. We ran essentially the same base plays that Wisenhunt would see if he watched any game film on our team since midseason. Slants, stick routes, crossing routes. And we executed them with the same precision we have been.

The thing that interests me is how it almost seemed like the Cardinals (knowing of the liberal subbing that was to occur) played a flat and uninterested game. Up until noon, there was a possibility that your team could have been playing for a first round bye. You're telling me they could have just turned it on like THAT against the best defense in the NFC, and a team that's hotter than any going into the playoffs, but by halftime of the Vikings game decided to just pack it in and get run over? I guess it worked last year, but it sure is like playing with fire for Wisenhunt. I guess he knows the psyche of this locker room better than I do.

Now you are questioning our coach? Took us to the Super Bowl in his second year yet you with all of your wisdom know better than him. As far as being frustrated with Cardinal fans? Why are you here if we frustrate you? You believe you are going to win this weekend and Rogers is better than Warner and we had a weaker schedule etc etc. Not much accomplished going back and forth repeating the same thing over and over. We get it. You believe Green Bay is a better team and will win this Sunday.

 

[CardLogic]

"this is going to be great!"

You must be registered for see images

 

[DanThePackerFan]

your wrong in your analysis. your so sure your team will destroy the cards, but your wrong. your going back to cheeseville with you'r tail between your'e legs.

Just had to annoy a Pack fan

One of them was correct!

 

[MrYeahBut]

One of them was correct!

Even a blind Card fan finds an NFC Championship once in a while

 

[DanThePackerFan]

Now you are questioning our coach? Took us to the Super Bowl in his second year yet you with all of your wisdom know better than him. As far as being frustrated with Cardinal fans? Why are you here if we frustrate you? You believe you are going to win this weekend and Rogers is better than Warner and we had a weaker schedule etc etc. Not much accomplished going back and forth repeating the same thing over and over. We get it. You believe Green Bay is a better team and will win this Sunday.

I enjoy the back and forth when it concerns legitimate football knowledge. I'm here because I like to learn things about my opponents that I don't get from crunching numbers and reviewing game film myself. I like the perspective home fans can bring. My frustration stems entirely from this mindset of backing into a shell regarding this last week's game, and then trying to convince yourselves the Packers blew our wad in a week 17 contest that had no more real meaning to us than it did to you. There was 11 guys on the field for each team. With active roster sizes the way they are, that doesn't mean that you can field a team of 11 scrubs on every down. Heck, a top 2 WR in the entire NFL played all four quarters, for whatever reason. And your coach had no problem allowing them to get run over. Could it be an effective motivational tactic? Maybe. But has anyone even considered the possibility that it could backfire?

So yes, in that sense, I am questioning Wisenhunt. You forget another coach in this game made a deep playoff run in his second year, and was a Favre overtime INT away from a Super Bowl appearance. Wheels are turning up on Lombardi Avenue as much as they are down in Tempe.

For the record, I'm here to advance my football knowledge. Be it statistically, schematically, something regarding intangibles, the make up of a locker room, the impact of certain events (injuries, specific games) and how it relates to this matchup and both NFL franchises. That's all I want. I will argue my case, and I can promise you I won't be unprepared in doing so.

 

[Russ Smith]

Definitely an interesting take. Part of the reason for the Cardinals' defensive improvement is a much easier schedule. Playing only four winning teams in 16 games isn't nearly as taxing as the eight you guys played last year.

The offense is certainly more balanced, I can't argue there. But for the first time in awhile, I can say that I don't fear any team running on the Packers. Even good running teams typically try for a quarter, and that's it.

I'm also confident in our ability to cause turnovers on defense, given the margin that we're even ahead of the #2 team in turnover differential this season.

You're going to have to provide me a link that shows the Cards opponents winning % this year and last, I don't offhand know it but considering last year everyone said we had the easiest schedule of all the playoff teams I'd be surprised if this years schedule was "much easier". Yes we had the Rams and Seahawks twice, but SF was much better this year than last last year we swept our division this year only 4-2. We were also MUCH better on the road this year than last year I think we can agree it's tougher to win on the road?

I did some googling but all I get for schedule strength is when they take your opponents records for 08 and project that to 09 which is meaningless.

My point on takeaways is generally speaking there's an element of luck to it. The Pack have very good players on defense but honestly given that takeaway number it's surprising they only won 11 games. An example of luck is they forced only 12 fumbles all year which ties for 27th in the NFL(with the Cards) yet GB recovered 10 of those 12. The Vikings forced 23 fumbles, and recovered only 13, there's a lot of luck in such a thing.

GB is very good but honestly given that takeaway margin you'd have expected 12 or 13 wins.

 

[DanThePackerFan]

FWIW, I for one am not at all comfortable with this teams' unsteady psyche. It not only drives us fans nuts, but I can't help but think it is simply not a sustainable path toward success in the NFL.
That said, for reasons that remain unclear to me, Whiz is able to somehow rally this team when it truly matters, and when every other "expert" says the Cards will be overmatched... He's done this time and time again.
Like I said, I don't agree with it, I don't like it and my gut tells me that this will not create longterm sustained success. But as Cards fans, we can only run with the horse we have. And for better or worse, our horse has now produced back to back division titles. As Cards fans, we now have post season football - in OUR HOUSE - in two consecutive years! As a Packer fan you can't begin to imagine what that feels like for Cardinal fans. How we got there was certainly not a path many other historically successful teams have taken. It is what it is... We're here. January 10th. Playoff football in our home. And we know that if Whiz can muster the best out of this team once again, the Packers don't stand a chance.
You can develop as many statistically based models as your heart desires, but the truth remains clear and simple. If Whiz can rally the team as he did during the '08 post-season run, you're toast...

This is another thing I'd like to discuss, and it's something that didn't really irk me until it actually applied to my team. What are the feelings around here on tweaking the playoff seeding system to determining seeds AFTER the field of 6 has been decided? That is to say, if a division were to have a 13-3 team and a 12-4 team (similar to how things played out in the NFC North in 2001 between the Bears and Packers) both teams could have first round byes?

It would have actually made this last week's game meaningful, because a loss would force the Cards to return to Lambeau Field in the first round.

It would be a small change, but might quell some of the animosity regarding resting starters that has arisen due to the Colts' decision a few weeks back. I think it would be a good change for football. I also think if you're 13-0 and have locked up home field advantage, you've earned the right to do whatever the hell you want.

Thoughts?

 

[DanThePackerFan]

You're going to have to provide me a link that shows the Cards opponents winning % this year and last, I don't offhand know it but considering last year everyone said we had the easiest schedule of all the playoff teams I'd be surprised if this years schedule was "much easier". Yes we had the Rams and Seahawks twice, but SF was much better this year than last last year we swept our division this year only 4-2. We were also MUCH better on the road this year than last year I think we can agree it's tougher to win on the road?

I did some googling but all I get for schedule strength is when they take your opponents records for 08 and project that to 09 which is meaningless.

My point on takeaways is generally speaking there's an element of luck to it. The Pack have very good players on defense but honestly given that takeaway number it's surprising they only won 11 games. An example of luck is they forced only 12 fumbles all year which ties for 27th in the NFL(with the Cards) yet GB recovered 10 of those 12. The Vikings forced 23 fumbles, and recovered only 13, there's a lot of luck in such a thing.

GB is very good but honestly given that takeaway margin you'd have expected 12 or 13 wins.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/2_987_Quality_Standings.html

That's the one I used off hand to learn of how many winning teams the Cardinals have played and their record against them.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.co...ality_Standings_say_Colts_win_Super_Bowl.html

There is the 2008 version.

Cold, Hard Football Facts, Football Outsiders and Advanced NFL Stats have been my go-tos over the past few years for gathering relevant information about teams in the league. They add more context to statistics than raw numbers.

I can do a bit of work to determine the full strength of schedules, but it might take a little bit.

By the way, if anyone wants or needs links for anything I've talked about since registering, I have it all backed up. I wasn't allowed to post links on my account until 20 posts.

EDIT: And regarding the turnover margin with respect to wins... well, we were a Roethlisberger miracle away from 12. And you can bet we would like one of those shots at the Vikings back. How's this for a trickle effect? Tauscher's injury late last year had an eleven month rehab. We allowed 37 sacks in those first eight games and only 13 since his return. Would have been nice to have him for either of those Vikings games. You might be looking at the 2009 NFC North champions if that were the case. But alas, we'll never know.

 

[CardLogic]

To: Dan the PackerFan

It's Whisenhunt! Or is that an intentional slight on your part?

 

[CardLogic]

This is another thing I'd like to discuss, and it's something that didn't really irk me until it actually applied to my team. What are the feelings around here on tweaking the playoff seeding system to determining seeds AFTER the field of 6 has been decided? That is to say, if a division were to have a 13-3 team and a 12-4 team (similar to how things played out in the NFC North in 2001 between the Bears and Packers) both teams could have first round byes?

It would have actually made this last week's game meaningful, because a loss would force the Cards to return to Lambeau Field in the first round.

It would be a small change, but might quell some of the animosity regarding resting starters that has arisen due to the Colts' decision a few weeks back. I think it would be a good change for football. I also think if you're 13-0 and have locked up home field advantage, you've earned the right to do whatever the hell you want.

Thoughts?

Division rivalries are instumental to the make-up of the NFL. Win your division, you earn a home playoff game. That's how it should remain.

As for team mailing in late season games - it bugs me.

 

[82CardsGrad]

This is another thing I'd like to discuss, and it's something that didn't really irk me until it actually applied to my team. What are the feelings around here on tweaking the playoff seeding system to determining seeds AFTER the field of 6 has been decided? That is to say, if a division were to have a 13-3 team and a 12-4 team (similar to how things played out in the NFC North in 2001 between the Bears and Packers) both teams could have first round byes?

It would have actually made this last week's game meaningful, because a loss would force the Cards to return to Lambeau Field in the first round.

It would be a small change, but might quell some of the animosity regarding resting starters that has arisen due to the Colts' decision a few weeks back. I think it would be a good change for football. I also think if you're 13-0 and have locked up home field advantage, you've earned the right to do whatever the hell you want.

Thoughts?

I'm in favor of Division winners receiving a higher seed over a Wild Card team that might have a better record. That's just me...

 

[DanThePackerFan]

To: Dan the PackerFan

It's Whisenhunt! Or is that an intentional slight on your part?

Complete oversight on my part. And I'm anal about spelling. Duly noted.

 

[DanThePackerFan]

Interesting response thus far on the playoff seeding issue. For what it's worth, I've been to various NFC East team forums and discussed the same answer, and they're all in the OTHER direction. Even the champions.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Interesting response thus far on the playoff seeding issue. For what it's worth, I've been to various NFC East team forums and discussed the same answer, and they're all in the OTHER direction. Even the champions.

Not surprising really... think about it. How many times does a Wild Card team come out of the East vs the West? And I would guess that the East Wild Card possesses a better record than the West, or even the North Division Winners a large number of times...