Did they ever change the wild card home field rule?

[BBills88]

13 hours ago, Buffalo03 said:

Unfortunately no, in order to get a home wild card game in the playoffs you have to win your division. Even if that means one division winner is 8-8 and we go 11-5. It's really stupid but that's how it works

This should be changed and it should be record & strength of  schedule based.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

1 hour ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

I agree.  Also playing your division teams 2 times a year does the same thing.

 

 

see above.  The only way I agree with that is to get rid of the divisions all together.

 

You could actually play everyone in your conference one time for 15 game total, plus one team from other conference or like college  has it, 16th game is against your "rival"

 

If they went to an 18 game schedule wouldn't be too bad then as 15 games in conference, plus 3 games assistant opposite conference.  Within 5 years you'd play all the teams in opposite conference.

 

Or maybe better yet, if it ain't broke don't fix it!

 

Obviously many here including myself are counting our chickens before they are even close to hatched, this year may hurt us, but can see in another years could help you too. 

[row_33]

3 hours ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

 

true.....  however,  a team with a record of 10-6  has to visit a Div winner with a record of 7-9.

 

there is the rub

 

 

that's "after-the-fact" thinking, which doesn't work in the real world

 

the teams play by the rules set up beforehand and sometimes a team can win a division with a lousy record

 

often they gladly coast into that easy spot, resting up and not wasting a single drop of sweat that wasn't required.

 

the Patriots have eased back the last few seasons on games already won or not worth the struggle

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2019 by row_33

[ColoradoBills]

4 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

You could actually play everyone in your conference one time for 15 game total, plus one team from other conference or like college  has it, 16th game is against your "rival"

 

If they went to an 18 game schedule wouldn't be too bad then as 15 games in conference, plus 3 games assistant opposite conference.  Within 5 years you'd play all the teams in opposite conference.

 

Or maybe better yet, if it ain't broke don't fix it!

 

Obviously many here including myself are counting our chickens before they are even close to hatched, this year may hurt us, but can see in another years could help you too. 

 

I tend to believe the bolded.

I'm also not giving up on winning the division.

I'm truly in "one game at a time" mode.

[Buffalo03]

3 hours ago, MJS said:

I agree with it. If you get in with a wild card you should have no special treatment. Want a home game? Win your division.

 

Keeps teams playing hard at the end of the season even once they have clinched a playoff spot.

That's easier said than done though. If a team goes 12-4 but is in a division with a team that goes 14-2, why should that team get to lose out on a home playoff game to an 8-8 team that shouldn't be there and got lucky enough to win a really crappy division? They should make it to where if you win your division, you get a wild card but the home game is decided by record

3 hours ago, r00tabaga said:

You win your division you SHOULD be hosting a playoff game. 

A 7-9 division winner shouldn't be in the playoffs much less hosting a playoff game. I will never understand this sort of view point 

Edited October 7, 2019 by Buffalo03

[row_33]

19 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

 

A 7-9 division winner shouldn't be in the playoffs much less hosting a playoff game. I will never understand this sort of view point 

 

the rules are set up before the season starts and the division winner is the division winner

 

(like the Electoral College determines the President, not the Popular Vote...)

 

happens in all sports..... it does seem unfair after the fact sometimes.

 

 

[Buffalo03]

8 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

the rules are set up before the season starts and the division winner is the division winner

 

(like the Electoral College determines the President, not the Popular Vote...)

 

happens in all sports..... it does seem unfair after the fact sometimes.

 

 

I get that's how it works but that doesn't mean it's right

[eball]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Pats were 3-5 on the road last year.    The only easy win was their 19 point win in Buffalo.

 

Because the Bills typically play their worst against them we tend to overhype the regular season Pats.........but they are vulnerable........especially in a year where they get a lot of injuries. 

 

Their schedule has been favorable and they should have lost in Buffalo...........but I still expect them to lose a few games at least.

 

If the Bills don't figure out how to score more points they will end up losing more of these style of games that they've been winning(the Pats game was already an example of one they could have easily won).

 

When it always comes down to a bounce or a call or two you eventually take some unexpected L's.    Keeping the score close.......inadvertently(this case) or by design(Jauron Ball) works both ways.   

 

As you point out, the closeness of their games thus far is inadvertent rather than by design...but we knew it would take time for this offense to gel.  They have showed very good signs in how well they have moved the ball, but a number of mistakes have prevented them from putting more points on the board.  I think it's reasonable to expect that to improve, particularly as they now come up against some teams who haven't done a great job of stopping people (Miami twice, Washington).  I also think they'll use the bye week to analyze trends and add to the unpredictability of the offense.

 

The Bills are 4-1 despite having a negative turnover ratio.  Does that mean they've been lucky and that luck is bound to turn?  Or does it mean they've actually been unlucky and have gutted out Ws despite the adversity?  I tend to favor the latter.

 

Compare and contrast the Bills' 4-1 start in 2011.  I remember threads about their record being "unsustainable" because they were winning with turnovers and big plays.  Those Bills lacked talent and depth across the board (particularly on defense), teams began to figure out Fitz, and things went south quickly.  This team feels nothing like that.

 

This year's team is more talented, deeper, and better coached.  I think we also need to remember that this isn't a squad that was knocking on the door last year and just needed that extra push -- they have gone from an afterthought to suddenly being recognized as a competitive force.  They are learning to win with a raw QB who can only now say he has started a full season's worth of games.

 

I'm guessing that when they return from the bye we'll see the Bills start to routinely put up around 24 pts/game, which should be more than enough with that defense.

[r00tabaga]

17 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

I get that's how it works but that doesn't mean it's right

It's been like that for 100 years and you wanna change it now cuz NE is in our division? Ok......

[MJS]

36 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

That's easier said than done though. If a team goes 12-4 but is in a division with a team that goes 14-2, why should that team get to lose out on a home playoff game to an 8-8 team that shouldn't be there and got lucky enough to win a really crappy division? They should make it to where if you win your division, you get a wild card but the home game is decided by record

A 7-9 division winner shouldn't be in the playoffs much less hosting a playoff game. I will never understand this sort of view point 

Because they didn't win their division. They got in with a wild card.

[reddogblitz]

It's fine as it is. Just win your division.  We are very much still in the division race.  Don't sell  ourselves short.  

 

One thing is certain.  If they were to change this rule the next year we would win the division at 8-8 and have to play on the road. 

[Charles Romes]

The worst record team to host a conference championship was the 2008 Arizona Cardinals at 9-7 who were division champs.   They hosted the 9-6-1 Eagles who were a wild card.   This was the year the Cassel led pats went 11-5 but missed the playoffs.  

[ganesh]

15 hours ago, Buffalo03 said:

Unfortunately no, in order to get a home wild card game in the playoffs you have to win your division. Even if that means one division winner is 8-8 and we go 11-5. It's really stupid but that's how it works

There is a lot of value to win your division irrespective of the record.  Division games are always very HARD.

[Buffalo03]

2 hours ago, r00tabaga said:

It's been like that for 100 years and you wanna change it now cuz NE is in our division? Ok......

I don't wanna change it because NE is in our division that's so far from the truth and I didn't think it became that way until they did the realignment and it makes no sense

Edited October 7, 2019 by Buffalo03

[Buffalo03]

2 hours ago, MJS said:

Because they didn't win their division. They got in with a wild card.

Not a valid reason but ok. 

[wagon127]

2 hours ago, MJS said:

Because they didn't win their division. They got in with a wild card.

I get, that's how the rule works, it doesn't mean its fair.

 

A winning record should be more respected, than a team that won a division title with a losing record.

[MJS]

1 hour ago, Buffalo03 said:

Not a valid reason but ok. 

It's the rule, so it's obviously valid. If you disagree that's your right. But I agree with the current structure.

1 hour ago, wagon127 said:

I get, that's how the rule works, it doesn't mean its fair.

 

A winning record should be more respected, than a team that won a division title with a losing record.

Teams getting in with a losing record is incredibly rare. Most of the time that's not how it is. That's why I don't want the playoffs to be expanded because that will make it happen much more often.

 

Using the outliers to make an argument is silly, in my opinion.

 

If you can't win your division, getting a wild card is your saving grace and you should be happy to get the chance, regardless of what field you play on.

[dous21]

18 hours ago, whatdrought said:

I think the bigger change that should be thought through is allowing the top 6 overall records to get into the playoffs, thus eliminating lemon division winners getting into the playoffs.

 

they should remove divisions all together, it's the dumbest concept in the NFL

 

extend the season to 18 games. you play every team in your conference + 1 NFC team 

 

[wagon127]

5 minutes ago, MJS said:

It's the rule, so it's obviously valid. If you disagree that's your right. But I agree with the current structure.

Teams getting in with a losing record is incredibly rare. Most of the time that's not how it is. That's why I don't want the playoffs to be expanded because that will make it happen much more often.

 

Using the outliers to make an argument is silly, in my opinion.

 

If you can't win your division, getting a wild card is your saving grace and you should be happy to get the chance, regardless of what field you play on.

But that's the example you were responding to used. I think the outliers should have an exception to the rule. If you have 8 or less wins, a division win get you in the playoffs but not a home game. Anybody wining the division with 9 or more wins, is guaranteed a home game. 

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, wagon127 said:

But that's the example you were responding to used. I think the outliers should have an exception to the rule. If you have 8 or less wins, a division win get you in the playoffs but not a home game. Anybody wining the division with 9 or more wins, is guaranteed a home game. 

I just don't see the need since that almost never happens. I think a losing team has only made the playoffs 5 times ever. Not sure about 8-8, but that's rare too.

 

I think it's important to keep divisional games important. Winning the division should always be the first goal and getting rewarded with a home game for doing so makes sense to me. Taking away that incentive dilutes the importance of divisional games, in my opinion. Wild Card teams should have to scratch and claw their way.

 

But I don't have a strong opinion about it. I wouldn't care that much if they changed it, as long as they don't expand the playoffs. THAT I do have a strong opinion about.