|
|||||||
| Talk Sports Discuss everything that is sports-related, like MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA, MLS, NASCAR, NCAA sports and teams, trades, coaches, bad calls etc. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#21 (permalink) |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Scheduleslovakia
Posts: 9,849
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1,010x in 586 posts
|
Well, with the realignment into 4 divisions of 4 teams, the "easy" schedules that used to happen are pretty much a thing of the past. The current system the NFL is using means much less reliance on positional matchups (now just 2 instead of 4 or 5) and much more of an orderly rotation of opponents.
Teams fighting for a division title are now playing 14 of the 16 games against common opponents. Back in the 3 division days, this was either 10 or 12, So, things are improved in this regard.
__________________
. "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win." . |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 (permalink) |
|
Major Leagues
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 377
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0x in 0 posts
|
While changing the length of the regular season isn't exactly appealing, I find adding more playoff teams absolutely revolting. Does finishing at or below .500 really merit a playoff apperance? Shouldn't the regular season games mean something? That is why I enjoy college ball so much...lose 1 game and that is most likely (unless you are Miami, Nebraska, FSU or another of the overhyped juggernauts) the end of a team's championship hopes.
Does anyone have any legit reasons for expanding the playoff and regular season in this manner other than that the owners care more about revenue than competition?
__________________
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|