jjc@houxa.UUCP (J.CARBONARO) (12/30/85)
<>The following steps are used to break division ties in the NFL: <> <> 1. Head-to-head competition record among the clubs. <> 2. Record in all division games. <> 3. Record in all conference games. <> 4. Record in games against common opponents. <> 5. Best net point average in division games. <> 6. Best net point average in conference games. <> 7. Strength of schedule <> 8. Best net touchdowns in all games. <> 9. Coin Toss < <I always thought that number 7 should be number 1. If the object is to <get the best team into the playoffs, this is the best way to do it. I <believe that, statistically (under reasonable assumptions), the winner <in head-to-head competition between two teams with the same record and <the same opponents is more often the worse team than the better one. <(This is because a single event, A beating B, offsets two events: X beating <A and B beating X, in reaching the same final record.) Now I am not <advocating that number 1 should be turned around -- just that it should <be downgraded in importance. < <Of the others, 5, 6, and 8 tend to favor high scoring teams (14-3 is a more <decisive victory than 42-28); they also have the undesirable side effect of <encouraging teams to pile on points. Number 4 is probably the best of the <rest. So I would probably reorder these in the order: 7, 4, 2, 3, 1, 5, 6, <8, 9. (9 is clearly a last resort.) I realize there will often be legitimate arguments concerning tie-breakers, but I personally believe you HAVE to go with head-to-head first. CERTAINLY this is obvious in divisional tie-breakers - if A beats B twice, B doesn't have a leg to stand on. In wild-card or home-field tie-breakers, where there is often only ONE head-to-head game, put yourself in the shoes of Team A. Here's the bottom line - if you beat team B, but B is granted the tie-breaker, you could NEVER accept it. I WILL admit that there ARE other factors - and SIGNIFICANT ones at that. For example, the 3rd place team in the AFC East, the Patriots, will get an easier schedule next year than the 1st place team, Miami (UNLESS this year's good teams become lousy and the lousy ones become good). The Pats are ALREADY a comparable team to the Dolphins, and the strength-of-schedule difference next year may be all they need to eke out the division championship. So, don't get me wrong, I DO see your point. But if those 2 teams have identical records next year, but the Pats win both games, I simply can't justify giving the title to Miami on the basis of tougher opponents. Oh well, by the way, has anyone noticed whether USA TODAY has published the "schedules" for next year. Date and home-field are not yet known, but I remember the last day of the regular season last year, they were able to tell us everyone's opponents this year. That's because, unlike the college draft, actual won-lost record and playoff outcomes are irrelevant. It's simply "3rd place team in East plays 2nd place team in Central", etc. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Joe Carbonaro
lll@mtuxo.UUCP (l.illuzzi) (12/31/85)
Placing toughness of schedule ahead of head-to-head
competition in tie breaking procedures would not only
undermind the integrity of the divisional structures, but
also put less importance on the classic divisional rivalries
that make football exciting season after season for us fans.
Could you image what would happen to the game of football if
a Denver vs Tampa Bay game was as important as a Denver vs
Raiders game in the mind of the fans.
Games like Giants vs Dallas, Miami vs Jets (had to throw
that in), Raiders vs Denver, etc. are what football is all
about. To place less emphasis on divisional games would
clearly be a step in the wrong direction.
Lou I
(#1 JET fan, still)
Seasons Greetingstml@druhi.UUCP (Tim Larison) (12/31/85)
Even though I am a fan of the first 11-5 team not to make the playoffs
(the Broncos), I still think that the current tie breaking system is
the fairest. If the strength of schedule was used as a prime tie-breaker,
then the decision as to who would make the playoffs could come down
to a game between two non-contenders.
For example, say Denver and New England were tied going into the last week.
Say Denver had beaten Tampa Bay but had not played Atlanta, and that New
England had beaten Atlanta but had not played Tampa Bay. Say also that
Tampa Bay and Atlanta play the last week of the season. If Tampa
Bay wins, the strength of Denver's schedule is stronger and the
Broncos make the playoffs. If Atlanta wins, New England schedule
is stronger so the Patriots make the playoffs. This would create
even greater injustices than the current system.
The current system puts a premium on beating contending teams in the same
division and conference. The Broncos this year paid dearly for losing to
the Raiders twice and AFC East winner Miami. Though the other wildcards,
New England and the Jets, both lost to the Raiders, they beat out the
Broncos in the tie-breakers because both split with the winning team
in their own division - Miami.
Denver's best chance to make the playoffs was to beat the Raiders in
either of their two games (both overtime losses). This, not an unfair
tie-breaker, was the reason they missed the playoffs.
Waiting 'til next year,
Tim Larison ihnp4!druhi!tml franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (01/03/86)
In article <1194@mtuxo.UUCP> lll@mtuxo.UUCP (l.illuzzi) writes: > > Placing toughness of schedule ahead of head-to-head > competition in tie breaking procedures would not only > undermind the integrity of the divisional structures, but > also put less importance on the classic divisional rivalries > that make football exciting season after season for us fans. > > Could you image what would happen to the game of football if > a Denver vs Tampa Bay game was as important as a Denver vs > Raiders game in the mind of the fans. Well, but it really wouldn't be as important. If the Broncos and the Raiders are competing for the division, the games between them are twice as important as any game with an outside team. Note that baseball gives no special weight to games between the teams in determining divisional winners (they play a playoff game, which football doesn't have time for), yet the games between the contenders are still the big games. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108