Nanker Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 I for one think the NLF is out to lunch regarding the framework they've institutionalized regarding inter-conference play. The system they've fostered has blurred the distinction between the conferences at the expense of traditional rivalries within the conferences. We seem to play New Orleans, Arizona and St. Louis more than we play San Diego, KC and Indy. And, no I didn't look it up. I'm too tired. Somebody else can do the research. It just seems that way to me. Every year we get four NFC teams for certain - and we'll get to play them again in four more years, but that's not much less than we're guaranteed to play other team in the conference - other than those in our division. If they want each division within a conference to play another complete division in the other conference each year - then eliminate two of the four preseason games and extend the regular season to 18 games. Otherwise, let's just play two of those jackers a year so we can play two more from our own conference each year. e.g., Year 1. AFCE plays NFCE (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCC (4 Games), AFCS (4 Games). Year 2. AFCE plays NFCC (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCC (4 Games), AFCW (4 Games). Year 3. AFCE plays NFCS (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCW (4 Games), AFCS (4 Games). Anybody feel a real rivalry with KC, Oakland or Denver? How about Cleveland, Indy and Pittsburgh? Screw the scheduling based on final standings from the previous year. Parity = Oatmeal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CFLstyle Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 yeah and also we've played the Bengals a lot over the past 5 years and the Teaxns, in the last 5 years I believe we've played each of them 4 times. 4 times in 5 years is a lot for a non division team even if the teams are still in the AFC. Yet we've played the Broncos and Chiefs like twice in the past 5 years. None of this is based on research I havn't looked it up or anything, just trying to remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 I for one think the NLF is out to lunch regarding the framework they've institutionalized regarding inter-conference play. The system they've fostered has blurred the distinction between the conferences at the expense of traditional rivalries within the conferences. We seem to play New Orleans, Arizona and St. Louis more than we play San Diego, KC and Indy. And, no I didn't look it up. I'm too tired. Somebody else can do the research. It just seems that way to me. Every year we get four NFC teams for certain - and we'll get to play them again in four more years, but that's not much less than we're guaranteed to play other team in the conference - other than those in our division. If they want each division within a conference to play another complete division in the other conference each year - then eliminate two of the four preseason games and extend the regular season to 18 games. Otherwise, let's just play two of those jackers a year so we can play two more from our own conference each year. e.g., Year 1. AFCE plays NFCE (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCC (4 Games), AFCS (4 Games). Year 2. AFCE plays NFCC (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCC (4 Games), AFCW (4 Games). Year 3. AFCE plays NFCS (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCW (4 Games), AFCS (4 Games). Anybody feel a real rivalry with KC, Oakland or Denver? How about Cleveland, Indy and Pittsburgh? Screw the scheduling based on final standings from the previous year. Parity = Oatmeal 861187[/snapback] We'll play any given NFC team 1 time maximum in every 4 years. We'll play and given AFC team (outside of our division) at mimimum of 1 time every 3 years. The remaining 2 games on the schedule are determined by division finish. i dont think determining 2 games out of 16 (12.5%) based on the previous year is too much. I think the system works pretty good. Every team in your division has 14 common opponents. Therefore everyone in a given division should have a very similar SOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 e.g., Year 1. AFCE plays NFCE (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCC (4 Games), AFCS (4 Games).Year 2. AFCE plays NFCC (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCC (4 Games), AFCW (4 Games). Year 3. AFCE plays NFCS (4 Games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 Games), AFCW (4 Games), AFCS (4 Games). That's pretty much how things work now, only instead of playing an additional interconference division, teams play one team from each of the two other divisions within the conference. In 2006, for example: AFCE plays NFCN (4 games), H&A AFCE rivals (6 games), AFCS (4 Games), corresponding AFCN team (1 game), corresponding AFCW team (1 game). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 Right. But what I'm getting at - and it's a picky little thing of mine , that we seem to definitely play ALL the opposition in the NFC every 4 years (now) - it used to be 3 prior to the new realignment. Whereas we MIGHT not play an old rival team from the AFL once in ten years - because of the SOS scheduling brought about by "Parity" Pete Rozelle. I'm not exactly hot about it, but it gets me cranky... at times. Personally, I'd rather play only in the Conference and two games out of Conference each year - unless they expanded to an 18 game schedule. Yeah, we'd only play the Cowgirls once every 4-8 years. What a tragedy that would be. I'd rather like to see us have a chance to kick SD's ass every year - or every other year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Right. But what I'm getting at - and it's a picky little thing of mine , that we seem to definitely play ALL the opposition in the NFC every 4 years (now) - it used to be 3 prior to the new realignment. Whereas we MIGHT not play an old rival team from the AFL once in ten years - because of the SOS scheduling brought about by "Parity" Pete Rozelle. I'm not sure what you're saying. Currently, any given AFC team faces every other AFC team at least once every three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 I'm not sure what you're saying. Currently, any given AFC team faces every other AFC team at least once every three years. 861283[/snapback] Yes. Except the Strength of Schedule could have us missing AFC opponents for years - whereas we're guaranteed to play the Cowgirls every four years. Maybe I'm off and should have done the research before I posted, but I know we'll be playing the Jints within another two years. It might be three years before we play KC again. Nes pas? We used to play those dopes every year. The league should have every conference team playing at least every two years. I'm probably just a conference bigot. Lord they've sure got them in the NFC East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Right. But what I'm getting at - and it's a picky little thing of mine , that we seem to definitely play ALL the opposition in the NFC every 4 years (now) - it used to be 3 prior to the new realignment. Whereas we MIGHT not play an old rival team from the AFL once in ten years - because of the SOS scheduling brought about by "Parity" Pete Rozelle. I'm not exactly hot about it, but it gets me cranky... at times. Personally, I'd rather play only in the Conference and two games out of Conference each year - unless they expanded to an 18 game schedule. Yeah, we'd only play the Cowgirls once every 4-8 years. What a tragedy that would be. I'd rather like to see us have a chance to kick SD's ass every year - or every other year. 861281[/snapback] but also in that old alignment it was flawed so we barely faced seattle (they had only been at buffalo once before the new system and that was 20 years into its existence in 96) and not too much against tampa over the years either (only 8 times total, and IIRC never in buffalo) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Yes. Except the Strength of Schedule could have us missing AFC opponents for years - whereas we're guaranteed to play the Cowgirls every four years. Maybe I'm off and should have done the research before I posted, but I know we'll be playing the Jints within another two years. It might be three years before we play KC again. Nes pas? We used to play those dopes every year. The league should have every conference team playing at least every two years. I'm probably just a conference bigot. Lord they've sure got them in the NFC East. 861286[/snapback] I still don't think you fully grasp what people are trying to tell you... We'll play the Cowboys once and only once during the regular season every fourth year. We'll play the Chiefs, Bronco, Chargers, etc., AT LEAST once every third year, with the possibility of playing them in between if they finish in the same slot in their division as us... It's impossible for the scheduling system to have us miss AFC opponents for years, unless you mean only two years, in which case I would say you're gradually exaggerating the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Yes. Except the Strength of Schedule could have us missing AFC opponents for years... No, it couldn't. Every AFC team plays every other AFC team once EVERY THREE YEARS. Here's how it works: 2002: AFC East plays AFC West 2003: AFC East plays AFC South 2004: AFC East plays AFC North 2005: AFC East plays AFC West Thus, in any given three year span, an AFC team will have played its own division opponents six times each and every other AFC team at least once (or more in the case of some teams, depending on how the standings shake out). An AFC team will play every NFC team ONCE every FOUR years, without fail. Maybe I'm off and should have done the research before I posted... Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Yes. Except the Strength of Schedule could have us missing AFC opponents for years - whereas we're guaranteed to play the Cowgirls every four years. Maybe I'm off and should have done the research before I posted, but I know we'll be playing the Jints within another two years. It might be three years before we play KC again. Nes pas? We used to play those dopes every year. The league should have every conference team playing at least every two years. I'm probably just a conference bigot. Lord they've sure got them in the NFC East. 861286[/snapback] The Jumbotron listed 4 teams we're playing next year. The only 2 I remember are the Cowboys and the Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 The Jumbotron listed 4 teams we're playing next year. The only 2 I remember are the Cowboys and the Giants. 861402[/snapback] Now why would THAT be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 but also in that old alignment it was flawed so we barely faced seattle (they had only been at buffalo once before the new system and that was 20 years into its existence in 96) and not too much against tampa over the years either (only 8 times total, and IIRC never in buffalo) 861315[/snapback] You are absolutely correct. That’s the scenario my Scotch fogged mind had an argument with. We went years without playing some AFC teams at home based on SOS, and would always be treated to four non-conference divisional opponents – regardless of SOS. I still don't think you fully grasp what people are trying to tell you... We'll play the Cowboys once and only once during the regular season every fourth year. We'll play the Chiefs, Bronco, Chargers, etc., AT LEAST once every third year, with the possibility of playing them in between if they finish in the same slot in their division as us... It's impossible for the scheduling system to have us miss AFC opponents for years, unless you mean only two years, in which case I would say you're gradually exaggerating the problem. 861331[/snapback] You also are correct. But my original couching had two premises – 1, SOS determines the pairings within the conference for the last two games filling in a 16 game season; 2, An 18 game season would allow us to play inter conference opponents twice every three years – guaranteed, ergo a better opportunity to establish a Home & Away scenario (like jzmak said above, “we barely faced Seattle…” The new arrangement is better, but I still think flawed. Am I exaggerating the problem – no doubt. Could the League do better to strengthen the differentiation between the conferences – absolutely. I’d much prefer playing two full AFC divisions each year and have the fill-in games be from the NFC based on SOS. But the better proposition, in my view is to ramp up to an 18 game season. No, it couldn't. Every AFC team plays every other AFC team once EVERY THREE YEARS. Here's how it works: 2002: AFC East plays AFC West 2003: AFC East plays AFC South 2004: AFC East plays AFC North 2005: AFC East plays AFC West Thus, in any given three year span, an AFC team will have played its own division opponents six times each and every other AFC team at least once (or more in the case of some teams, depending on how the standings shake out). An AFC team will play every NFC team ONCE every FOUR years, without fail. Yeah. 861346[/snapback] Yeah, I get it. Not the first time I’ve posted sans-research, and it won’t be the last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Now why would THAT be? 861405[/snapback] I was too excited seeing that we're playing Dallas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 I was too excited seeing that we're playing Dallas? 861407[/snapback] Which heart throb is it this time Harriet - TO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Which heart throb is it this time Harriet - TO? 861418[/snapback] come on, she is still in love with Drew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 come on, she is still in love with Drew 861422[/snapback] You're right. Here, let me buy YOU a beer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Screw the scheduling based on final standings from the previous year. Parity = Oatmeal 861187[/snapback] If Oatmeal good for you and if Oatmeal = parity, then Parity good for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 10, 2006 Author Share Posted December 10, 2006 I just heard Boomer on ESPN say that Steve McNair - the-12-year-AFC-starting-QB-Steve McNair is TODAY making his FIRST EVER start at Arrowhead stadium. Twelve YEARS and he's played the AFC rival Chiefs only ONCE before! Facts/Research/Yep I looked it up! The ONLY other time he played KC it was in Houston or the back hills of Tennessee. WTF. Maybe he's been injured and lost his once every three years chance to play them. My bad. I don't know where to look that up though. Of course at least they got to play New Orleans and Arizona a bunch in those 12 years no doubt. I'm sure the ratings for those games really fueled fan interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 I just heard Boomer on ESPN say that Steve McNair - the-12-year-AFC-starting-QB-Steve McNair is TODAY making his FIRST EVER start at Arrowhead stadium. Twelve YEARS and he's played the AFC rival Chiefs only ONCE before! Facts/Research/Yep I looked it up! The ONLY other time he played KC it was in Houston or the back hills of Tennessee. WTF. Maybe he's been injured and lost his once every three years chance to play them. My bad. I don't know where to look that up though. Of course at least they got to play New Orleans and Arizona a bunch in those 12 years no doubt. I'm sure the ratings for those games really fueled fan interest. 861481[/snapback] Still not quite sure what your arguement is. The balanced schedule has only been in place since 2002, when the texans joined the league. With it, he's guaranteed to play KC much more often than he's guaranteed to play NO or Arizona. McNair played KC in tenny in 2004. He played KC in tenny in 2000. He has hurt when tenny played KC in 1999. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts