Remember Eagle Fan

[BCEagle]

Can we talk about this next year...ya know when you are actually have a game to play.

Fair enough. Suffice to say that it's not the most pressing issue in the league.

 

[BCEagle]

No worries. I happen to think you are a good poster and repesent your team and points well.

Peace.

 

[Skratchy_Seal]

I think your point of having the team with a better record host the playoff game is a valid one. At the same time, I don't understand why there is much issue with a PLAYOFF system.

I see the media and some on the Internet that want certain aspects of the playoffs to change because of the Cardinals and Chargers this season. The thing is...they each won at least one game in the playoffs(with the Cardinals winning three as of now)...and it should negate any push for a change.

Just leave the system the way it is. It works, and most of the time, the better team wins anyway.

OR

There is a system that can make EVERYBODY happy. We can average out several computer rankings and voter polls to determine who plays in the Super Bowl. It's the perfect system. Then we'd see Giants vs Titans.

 

[Sandan]

I disagree about the better record controlling things.

You record is so very defendant on your division, scheduling [like playing 3 games in 11 days], injuries, weather etc that your regular season record isn't always a good measuring stick.

By this is I mean unlike baseball [which I know almost nothing about], there are very few games, hence your record doesn't give the same kind of predictions that it would if we played 100 games rather than the current season.

The why the current system is a much better idea, it sets you some well defined targets. Simply put Job 1 is win your division, then worry about season record as it will help your seeding.

My point is that in the NFL there is way to much chance of other factors affecting your record [in statistics this is called aliasing iirc] to use it as the major determining factor. If you doubt that statement, then you have to ask how the Cardinals managed to beat the Falcons, Panthers and Eagles.

This is why, there simply aren't enough games for statistical predictions, thats why NFL teams come out of nowhere and start winning ... Like the Cardinals, its all in the math

 

[BCEagle]

The league and Goodell want the change, but the owners do not. The league proposed it at last year's owners' meeting, and the owners rejected it. I predict that the NFL is going to win this eventually, especially in light of the Colts/Chargers fiasco and to a lesser degree the Falcons/Cards.

Here is the link. I am glad that the league sees things the way that I do.

 

[Osbern61]

The league and Goodell want the change, but the owners do not. The league proposed it at last year's owners' meeting, and the owners rejected it. I predict that the NFL is going to win this eventually, especially in light of the Colts/Chargers fiasco and to a lesser degree the Falcons/Cards.

Not sure why the Colts/Chargers situation would be called a fiasco, other than by Colt fans who saw there team unable to knock off an 8-8 team.

 

[Sandan]

What Falcons/Cards fiasco ?

 

[BCEagle]

O/T, but Eagles Defensive Coordinator Jim Johnson has been diagnosed with malignant melanoma. It was discovered after the NFCCG. News reports say it is treatable, but his doctor said that it has spread to his spine and other parts of his body. This is not good.

Just wanted to mention it, since he was a coach with the Cardinals from '86-'93.

 

[Angel]

good lord. what a freaking loser. waaaaaaaa!!!!!! they closed their roof!!!!! waaaaaaaa!!!!!

is Lurie serious with those comments?

Imagine what he'd say if we turned off the AC.......

.......in August

 

[Sandan]

Sorry to hear that

 

[BCEagle]

I understand that this weekend's game is on everyone's mind right now (go Cards!), but if any of you want to express your support for JJ after the Superbowl, please feel free to register at this site and add to this thread:

http://boards.philadelphiaeagles.com/index.php?showtopic=534030&st=140&start=140

 

[RedViper]

What Falcons/Cards fiasco ?

So ridiculous. This is a BCS approach to the NFL. To call a game a fiasco because it doesn't match up with the east coast bias, sportswriter view of hieracrchy is friggin ludicrous and pitiful. Only idiots would think this way. Seriously. Lets just start using a computer and allowing some idiot pundits to decide the matchups in the NFL and go to a bowl system. We'll make sure the unpopular teams never get further than some version of the Gatorbowl.

 

[BCEagle]

So ridiculous. This is a BCS approach to the NFL. To call a game a fiasco because it doesn't match up with the east coast bias, sportswriter view of hieracrchy is friggin ludicrous and pitiful. Only idiots would think this way. Seriously. Lets just start using a computer and allowing some idiot pundits to decide the matchups in the NFL and go to a bowl system. We'll make sure the unpopular teams never get further than some version of the Gatorbowl.

Actually, it is more like the NBA .... who is the first professional organization to make the change, and it has been well-received. It is only a matter of time before the other professional sports organizations make the change -- especially, the NFL, which already supports the change. Get used to it -- it is the future of the NFL.

The only nod that I might give to winning a division is that it should be the automatic tiebreaker against teams with identical records. In other words, the Cardinals, Bucs, Bears, and Cowboys all went 9-7. The Cardinals should be seeded ahead of all of these teams on account that they are a division winner. Seeding for this year would have been:

AFC

1. Titans
2. Steelers
3. Colts
4. Dolphins
5. Ravens
6. Patriots


NFC

1. Giants
2. Panthers
3. Falcons
4. Vikings
5. Eagles
6. Cardinals

 

[Duckjake]

Originally Posted by BCEagle:
I don't know. No champion has ever lost to a team by 40 points during the regular season. Ever. In the 85 years of the league, that has never, never happened. That was a pretty large and foul-smelling egg, there.

On the other hand I don't know of any team that lost 35-14 and then 47-7 that proceeded to run off 4 straight wins, 3 in post season, scoring almost 130 points and reversing two regular season losses either.

BTW: The Giants were hammered at home 41-17 by the Vikings in '07. Being a home game for NY that's just as bad imo.

I agree with Nidan on this. Too few games to go on record alone. Even if you matched each team in a conference once + 1 from the other conference the records would still be affected by who played who at home.

The real large and foul smelling egg was the one the Eagles defense laid with the lead in the 4th quarter when, with the NFC Championship and the Super Bowl on the line, they couldn't stop Arizona from driving 72 yards in 14 plays for the winning TD .

 

[BCEagle]

On the other hand I don't know of any team that lost 35-14 and then 47-7 that proceeded to run off 4 straight wins, 3 in post season, scoring almost 130 points and reversing two regular season losses either.

BTW: The Giants were hammered at home 41-17 by the Vikings in '07. Being a home game for NY that's just as bad imo.

I agree with Nidan on this. Too few games to go on record alone. Even if you matched each team in a conference once + 1 from the other conference the records would still be affected by who played who at home.

The real large and foul smelling egg was the one the Eagles defense laid with the lead in the 4th quarter when, with the NFC Championship and the Super Bowl on the line, they couldn't stop Arizona from driving 72 yards in 14 plays for the winning TD .

Well, as already mentioned, record is already very much a part of seeding in the NFL. Seeds 1 and 2 are virtually assured of being the top two teams in the conference. Seeds 5 and 6 are the top teams who haven't won a division. Even seeds 3 and 4 are determined, in part, by record. And, of course, division winners are determined by record, too.

The NFL gave a small nod to divisional winners because they wanted home playoff games in every region of the country -- not because they believed that these teams "earned" the right to host a playoff game. Unfortunately, this practice has resulted in more meaningless regular season games, especially since the league realigned in 2002. Also, you create a situation where the two best teams in the conference might have to meet in the divisional playoffs rather than the conference championship. I think that the league wants to avoid that, too.

Whatever the case, this change is likely to happen in the next year or two.

 

[justAndy]

Hm...
I've heard some of this same stuff regarding the NBA - where one conference will have 9 teams with winning records vying for 8 playoff spots, while the OTHER conference - the one the PHILADELPHIA team is in - will have only 6 winning records out of 8 playoff spots.

 

[BCEagle]

Hm...
I've heard some of this same stuff regarding the NBA - where one conference will have 9 teams with winning records vying for 8 playoff spots, while the OTHER conference - the one the PHILADELPHIA team is in - will have only 6 winning records out of 8 playoff spots.

Try to get Philadelphia out of your head for the moment. I am a Boston man, and, other than the Eagles, all of my teams are in Boston -- including the Eastern Conference dwelling, 17-time NBA Champions, the ♣Boston Celtics♣.

The NBA already made this change, not because one conference is better than the other, but because the Dallas Mavericks and San Antonio Spurs -- the two best teams in the NBA -- could not face each other in the conference finals, since they are both in the same division. The idea was to allow a path for the top two teams to meet in the finals.

 

[Duckjake]

Well, as already mentioned, record is already very much a part of seeding in the NFL. Seeds 1 and 2 are virtually assured of being the top two teams in the conference. Seeds 5 and 6 are the top teams who haven't won a division. Even seeds 3 and 4 are determined, in part, by record. And, of course, division winners are determined by record, too.

The NFL gave a small nod to divisional winners because they wanted home playoff games in every region of the country -- not because they believed that these teams "earned" the right to host a playoff game. Unfortunately, this practice has resulted in more meaningless regular season games, especially since the league realigned in 2002. Also, you create a situation where the two best teams in the conference might have to meet in the divisional playoffs rather than the conference championship. I think that the league wants to avoid that, too.

Whatever the case, this change is likely to happen in the next year or two.

But again what determines the two best teams in the conference? A record that can be tainted by scheduling quirks. A 12-4 team may not be as good as a 9-7 team in a tougher division or with a tougher non-division schedule. In the NBA or MLB the size of the schedule allows for a better determination of which teams are the best.

You are also overlooking in your comparisons to the NBA that their playoffs are multi-game series where both teams get games at home.

I also don't believe your statement that the NFL gave division winners a home game to spread the wealth. They did that to maintain emphasis on winning a division over gaining a wild card berth. The goal is to maintain fan interest in as many areas as possible for as long as possible. That is what division races and parity are designed to do.

 

[HookemCards]

If that game is played at Lucas Oil Stadium, where the Colts don't have to travel across two-thirds of the country and play on short rest, I think that the Colts win that game. Of course, they would then have hosted the Steelers the following week, since they beat them in Week 10. Do the Steelers beat them and still advance to the AFCCG? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps the outcome in the AFC is very different if the better team during the regular season is given homefield advantage.

There is really nothing magical or special about winning a division beyond being better than three other teams. Wild card winners, on the other hand, have to be better than 10 other teams to get in. I cannot think of a legitimate reason to give division winners that kind of advantage.

BTW, it is possible in the current system even for a Wildcard team to host a conference championship. If the 5th and 6th seeds win out, the 5th seed wildcard team would host the 6th seed wild card team in the championship.

And how do you determine the better team? Please tell me that the Cardinals go 0-5 against NYJ, Wash, Carolina, Phila, and NE if they are played somewhere in the Pacific time zone. Traveling from West to East is much harder than East to West for games. Why is that West coast teams were, what 0-18 on the East coast this year? Is it because West coast teams suck and East coast teams are better? Maybe, but 3 EC teams couldn't knock out a sorry WC team to earn the right to go to SB 43. Keep it the way it is. Most of the time the better team goes to the SB.

 

[BCEagle]

And how do you determine the better team? Please tell me that the Cardinals go 0-5 against NYJ, Wash, Carolina, Phila, and NE if they are played somewhere in the Pacific time zone. Traveling from West to East is much harder than East to West for games. Why is that West coast teams were, what 0-18 on the East coast this year? Is it because West coast teams suck and East coast teams are better? Maybe, but 3 EC teams couldn't knock out a sorry WC team to earn the right to go to SB 43. Keep it the way it is. Most of the time the better team goes to the SB.

Well, the playoffs determine who is the better team. But regular season performance should determine seeding in the playoffs ... for the reasons that I've specified already. And performance usually means winning percentage.

As an aside, NFC South and NFC East teams went a combined 12-4 in the Pacific and Mountain time zones this year.

 

[BCEagle]

But again what determines the two best teams in the conference? A record that can be tainted by scheduling quirks. A 12-4 team may not be as good as a 9-7 team in a tougher division or with a tougher non-division schedule. In the NBA or MLB the size of the schedule allows for a better determination of which teams are the best.

You are also overlooking in your comparisons to the NBA that their playoffs are multi-game series where both teams get games at home.

I also don't believe your statement that the NFL gave division winners a home game to spread the wealth. They did that to maintain emphasis on winning a division over gaining a wild card berth. The goal is to maintain fan interest in as many areas as possible for as long as possible. That is what division races and parity are designed to do.

Why do you suppose that the NFL wants to adopt playoff seeding by record then?

BTW, the Saturday afternoon game between the Falcons and Cardinals, got a 14.3 overnight rating , and down 7.7 from last year’s Saturday afternoon WC rating. I seem to recall that the Cardinals had trouble selling out, too. How did the league benefit from having a division winner hosting a playoff game again?

 

[BCEagle]

The NFL Playoffs Need Change Too
The Cardinals are the latest Super Bowl Cinderella. But just because it's a nice fairy tale doesn't mean they deserve to be there.

Mark Starr
Newsweek Web Exclusive
At last. The Arizona Cardinals, perennial bottom-feeders, are headed to the Super Bowl to play the mighty Pittsburgh Steelers. Arizona is a Cinderella team to the nth power, having spent 61 years in three different cities since their last title, in 1947 as the Chicago Cardinals. In that time, the Cardinals have been perhaps the worst franchise in all of American sports.

Arizona somehow accomplished this fairy-tale turnabout with a couple of former stars regarded as long past their expiration date in quarterback Kurt Warner and running back Edgerrin James; an all-planet receiver in Larry Fitzgerald, who happens to be the son of a sportswriter; a defense that apparently forgot just how bad it was; and a coach, Ken Whisenhunt, once the heir-apparent in Pittsburgh who, after being passed over for the Steelers' top job two years ago, wound up with a dubious consolation prize: head coach of the Cardinals. How can you not root for this team?

Here's one reason: After becoming the first team to clinch a playoff spot by winning a weak NFC West with three weeks left to go in the season, the Cardinals didn't exactly exert themselves the rest of the way. The low point was when the defense surrendered 514 yards in a 47-7 loss to the New England Patriots. The game meant nothing to the Cards. But it was a must-win for the Pats, fighting for a post-season spot, and had huge implications for the Jets, the Dolphins and the Ravens. Now I'm not saying Whisenhunt told his team to lie down. But regardless of what he told his players, they tanked the game, going down 31-0 by halftime and ultimately surrendering 514 yards in a 47-7 rout. Cardinals players and coaches have subsequently pointed to that game as an embarrassment, but also as the one that convinced them how much more work they had to do and, thus, set them on the right course. Still, for those of us who like to believe character plays some part in these games, it has remained a turnoff.

The whole thing has convinced me that it is past time for the NFL to change its playoff structure. This season too many of the playoff teams had nothing at stake in the final game of the season (or in Arizona's case even earlier). So, for example, Indianapolis Colts fans got to see quarterback Jim Sorgi lead his team to victory over division rival as well as the AFC's top team, Tennessee, a game in which the Titans passed for 42 yards and the leading rushers were Quinton Ganther and Lance Ball. (Bonus points to any reader who can tell me which running back plays for which team.)

There is obvious merit in division winners reaching the playoffs. But there is no obvious merit in giving a division winner a higher seed than a team with a better record. And while some meaningless, late-season games involving playoff-bound teams are inevitable, a new mix with prospective division winners and wild-card teams competing for seeding rights would reduce that number. The most conspicuous beneficiary of the current system has been Arizona, which wound up with the fourth seed despite having the worst record, 9-7, of all six NFC playoff teams. As a result of that and a couple of upsets, the Cardinals lucked into playing two of three playoff games at home, where the team was 6-2 during the regular season.

It's far too much of a gift, especially when the Cardinals had reached the playoffs by winning the worst division in the league—they went 6-0 in the NFC Worst. Had Arizona been fighting for a seed based on its record, the team might have shown up against the Patriots. And had the Cardinals still lost, they would have taken their rightful place as a sixth seed in the playoffs. As such, Arizona would have opened the playoffs in Atlanta instead of hosting Atlanta. And if they had still managed to beat the Falcons, they would have gone on to face the Giants in the Meadowlands. Finally, had this still yielded Arizona vs. Philadelphia for the NFC Championship, it would have been amid the snow, deep freeze and verbal abuse in Philly. Beat three teams, in hostile environments on the road, and the Cardinals would have truly earned that trip to Tampa and Super Bowl XLIII.

URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/180992

 

[HookemCards]

Well, the playoffs determine who is the better team. But regular season performance should determine seeding in the playoffs ... for the reasons that I've specified already. And performance usually means winning percentage.

As an aside, NFC South and NFC East teams went a combined 12-4 in the Pacific and Mountain time zones this year.

Exactly. Its much easier for an Eastern time zone team to go West and play late game (12-4), than it is for Western time zone team to go East and play early game (2-20??). Do you really think the Cards finish 9-7 without the 4 early East coast games? Add in the weather factor and the East coast teams have a huge advantage over the West Coast teams. Hell the only advantage the Cards have now has been negated by the closed roof.

No way should record solely determine playoff seeding.

 

[HookemCards]

The NFL Playoffs Need Change Too
The Cardinals are the latest Super Bowl Cinderella. But just because it's a nice fairy tale doesn't mean they deserve to be there.

Mark Starr
Newsweek Web Exclusive
At last. The Arizona Cardinals, perennial bottom-feeders, are headed to the Super Bowl to play the mighty Pittsburgh Steelers. Arizona is a Cinderella team to the nth power, having spent 61 years in three different cities since their last title, in 1947 as the Chicago Cardinals. In that time, the Cardinals have been perhaps the worst franchise in all of American sports.

Arizona somehow accomplished this fairy-tale turnabout with a couple of former stars regarded as long past their expiration date in quarterback Kurt Warner and running back Edgerrin James; an all-planet receiver in Larry Fitzgerald, who happens to be the son of a sportswriter; a defense that apparently forgot just how bad it was; and a coach, Ken Whisenhunt, once the heir-apparent in Pittsburgh who, after being passed over for the Steelers' top job two years ago, wound up with a dubious consolation prize: head coach of the Cardinals. How can you not root for this team?

Here's one reason: After becoming the first team to clinch a playoff spot by winning a weak NFC West with three weeks left to go in the season, the Cardinals didn't exactly exert themselves the rest of the way. The low point was when the defense surrendered 514 yards in a 47-7 loss to the New England Patriots. The game meant nothing to the Cards. But it was a must-win for the Pats, fighting for a post-season spot, and had huge implications for the Jets, the Dolphins and the Ravens. Now I'm not saying Whisenhunt told his team to lie down. But regardless of what he told his players, they tanked the game, going down 31-0 by halftime and ultimately surrendering 514 yards in a 47-7 rout. Cardinals players and coaches have subsequently pointed to that game as an embarrassment, but also as the one that convinced them how much more work they had to do and, thus, set them on the right course. Still, for those of us who like to believe character plays some part in these games, it has remained a turnoff.

The whole thing has convinced me that it is past time for the NFL to change its playoff structure. This season too many of the playoff teams had nothing at stake in the final game of the season (or in Arizona's case even earlier). So, for example, Indianapolis Colts fans got to see quarterback Jim Sorgi lead his team to victory over division rival as well as the AFC's top team, Tennessee, a game in which the Titans passed for 42 yards and the leading rushers were Quinton Ganther and Lance Ball. (Bonus points to any reader who can tell me which running back plays for which team.)

There is obvious merit in division winners reaching the playoffs. But there is no obvious merit in giving a division winner a higher seed than a team with a better record. And while some meaningless, late-season games involving playoff-bound teams are inevitable, a new mix with prospective division winners and wild-card teams competing for seeding rights would reduce that number. The most conspicuous beneficiary of the current system has been Arizona, which wound up with the fourth seed despite having the worst record, 9-7, of all six NFC playoff teams. As a result of that and a couple of upsets, the Cardinals lucked into playing two of three playoff games at home, where the team was 6-2 during the regular season.

It's far too much of a gift, especially when the Cardinals had reached the playoffs by winning the worst division in the league—they went 6-0 in the NFC Worst. Had Arizona been fighting for a seed based on its record, the team might have shown up against the Patriots. And had the Cardinals still lost, they would have taken their rightful place as a sixth seed in the playoffs. As such, Arizona would have opened the playoffs in Atlanta instead of hosting Atlanta. And if they had still managed to beat the Falcons, they would have gone on to face the Giants in the Meadowlands. Finally, had this still yielded Arizona vs. Philadelphia for the NFC Championship, it would have been amid the snow, deep freeze and verbal abuse in Philly. Beat three teams, in hostile environments on the road, and the Cardinals would have truly earned that trip to Tampa and Super Bowl XLIII.

URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/180992

Written by a Pat's fan.....what a shocker. Just another example of East coasters sense of entitlement (They shouldn't be allowed to be in my SB unless they win in the snow with battery throwing fans). What a crock.

 

[Sandan]

BC, I see you totally avoided answering my point.

Do you understand the fundamental difference between the NBA [and MLB] and football. There are so few games in the NFL that the regular season record DOES NOT provide a reliable statistical measure.

When I say this I am not stating an opinion. While I can't do the math stats majors can, you can calculate the accuracy based on number of events. There are not enough events to make this accurate with the NFL unlike other sports. This is a fact not an opinion.

What part of this math don't you understand ?

The only reason this came up this year is the pathetic, usually bottom feeding Cardinals are winning. Therefore we must change the system to get bit money/markets teams to feature more prominabtly.