Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wait, what???: Patriots are NOT the 2nd seed in the AFC.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wait, what???: Patriots are NOT the 2nd seed in the AFC.

    By the NFL's own tie-breaking rules, New England can't possibly be the number 2 seed over the Ravens and according to an article (don't want to break any rules, but you can easily pull it up in any search engine) explaining how they (not sure who "they" is or how many "theys" there are) attempt to figure it, you can track multiple mistakes along their reasoning. Granted it is complicated (would have been prevented had it not been for mistake #1), that's still no excuse for being lazy. Also, relative to comparing divisional/common records (technically none of the following should even be relevant at this point), you shouldn't be able to fault a team for losses; only wins should be relevant. For example, one could make the argument that a divisional 4-1 record is weaker than 4 and 0 because of the loss. Regardless of the minor percentage disparity it's an unequal comparison because of the extra game insofar penalizing a team in this way errors on the side of assumption. Similarly, would you give a divisional record of 3-0--or even 2 and 0--the go ahead over a 4 and 2? This is why it's already a mistake to say "if the season ended today," because if the season did actually end today the numbers would be figured differently. Now none of this will matter at the end of the season but I mention it because the site doesn't exactly specify how common opponents are compared when they happen to be inter-divisional - here, I would make the same argument. On a side note, the rules do mention tie-games count as a half win and a half loss. Interesting phrasing on that considering

    EDIT: http://www.boston.com/sports/footbal...s4J/story.html
    Last edited by LoserSlick; 12-04-2012, 06:33 PM.
    fumpa.mybrute.com

  • #2
    It isn't against the rules to post articles.

    Comment


    • #3
      This isn't an issue now, obviously, and will likely go unnoticed because it's border-lined conjecture but how awful would that be if the season really did come down to a 3 way tie like this and the Patriots stole the #2 seed with a sneaky linguistics trick. Really surprised no one else seems to notice. oO
      fumpa.mybrute.com

      Comment


      • #4
        I mentioned this Sunday,it makes no sense how NE is the second seed.......I just dont get it,because I've been following the playoff tie-breaker format for awhile and this makes no sense at all....Just a few weeks ago,they said Baltimore could afford a lost,but still be the #2 seed and all of a sudden when they lose they're the #3 seed....??????????
        I support Kaepernick 100%

        Comment


        • #5
          I think I see your problem. You are looking at divisional record which is wrong. That is only for ties in a division. This is a tie in a conference so you go with the wild card tiebreakers. And Head to head is first, but since that doesn't apply yet it goes to conference record which NE has the advantage since 2 of their losses came against the NFC. So NE is currently the 2nd seed.

          http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures




          Adopted Broncos:
          (2011-2013) Eric Decker
          (2014-2018) Bradley Roby
          (2019-Current) Drew Lock
          Adopted posters:
          Everyone

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by LoserSlick View Post
            By the NFL's own tie-breaking rules, New England can't possibly be the number 2 seed over the Ravens and according to an article (don't want to break any rules, but you can easily pull it up in any search engine) explaining how they (not sure who "they" is or how many "theys" there are) attempt to figure it, you can track multiple mistakes along their reasoning. Granted it is complicated (would have been prevented had it not been for mistake #1), that's still no excuse for being lazy. Also, relative to comparing divisional/common records (technically none of the following should even be relevant at this point), you shouldn't be able to fault a team for losses; only wins should be relevant. For example, one could make the argument that a divisional 4-1 record is weaker than 4 and 0 because of the loss. Regardless of the minor percentage disparity it's an unequal comparison because of the extra game insofar penalizing a team in this way errors on the side of assumption. Similarly, would you give a divisional record of 3-0--or even 2 and 0--the go ahead over a 4 and 2? This is why it's already a mistake to say "if the season ended today," because if the season did actually end today the numbers would be figured differently. Now none of this will matter at the end of the season but I mention it because the site doesn't exactly specify how common opponents are compared when they happen to be inter-divisional - here, I would make the same argument. On a side note, the rules do mention tie-games count as a half win and a half loss. Interesting phrasing on that considering

            EDIT: http://www.boston.com/sports/footbal...s4J/story.html
            As Bernie24 said it isn't against the rules to post articles at all.

            The big reminders of rules can be found here:
            http://forums.denverbroncos.com/show...ode-of-Conduct

            Welcome to the boards and please be mindful of the Code of Conduct.
            sigpic
            The Bronco fan pledge;
            I am a Broncos Fan and I believe
            I believe in Mile High Magic and bleed Orange and Blue.
            I celebrate the Orange Crush, The Drive, and the Mile High Salute.
            I create the THUNDER, share the common dream, and will forever be a proud citizen of
            Bronco's Country.


            Adopt a Poster AZ Snake Fan & SecondsAway131

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by #87Birdman View Post
              I think I see your problem. You are looking at divisional record which is wrong. That is only for ties in a division. This is a tie in a conference so you go with the wild card tiebreakers. And Head to head is first, but since that doesn't apply yet it goes to conference record which NE has the advantage since 2 of their losses came against the NFC. So NE is currently the 2nd seed.

              http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures
              Makes me chuckle thinking about NE lost to Arizona.

              Arizona was 4-0 now on an 8 game losing streak, while NE was 2-2 and now won 7 of their last 8.

              But anyways I just want HOU to get the 1 seed, bout the only thing that matters to me. I'd love to get the 2 seed as long as we draw Baltimore in our first game. Then travel too HOU for an AFC Championship game and play in the warm weather.

              Comment


              • #8
                lol all of it is settled when the season is over and they've all played the same amount of games against each conference.

                And even then the Patriots are still the No. 2 seed because they've only lost to 1 AFC team. The Ravens lost to the Steelers and the Texans even though they "beat" the Patriots.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by beastlyskronk View Post
                  lol all of it is settled when the season is over and they've all played the same amount of games against each conference.

                  And even then the Patriots are still the No. 2 seed because they've only lost to 1 AFC team. The Ravens lost to the Steelers and the Texans even though they "beat" the Patriots.
                  What's the point of having a head to head tie breaker if they are not going to use it.... I've always thought it was head to head and then the Conference record when it came to conference opponents,because they sure are using the head to head tie breaker against us when it comes to the Broncos and the Patriots......
                  I support Kaepernick 100%

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by assassin216 View Post
                    What's the point of having a head to head tie breaker if they are not going to use it.... I've always thought it was head to head and then the Conference record when it came to conference opponents,because they sure are using the head to head tie breaker against us when it comes to the Broncos and the Patriots......
                    Because head to head can't determine the tie breaker in a 3 way tie unless they all play each other. Problem is if we beat the Ravens it isn't a 3 way tie and the pats head to head is useable.




                    Adopted Broncos:
                    (2011-2013) Eric Decker
                    (2014-2018) Bradley Roby
                    (2019-Current) Drew Lock
                    Adopted posters:
                    Everyone

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Just beat these last 4, and hope Ravens and pats both drop at least one... It's too dang confusing for this old man first thing in the morning... All you can do is your best, and let the chips fall where ever...
                      Bronco fan sine '61...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We're in the tournament and guaranteed at least one home game.

                        :cues "We're going MILE HIGH":
                        sigpic

                        Hooray, beer!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What I wonder if how the SF ST Louis tie will effect seeding for SF and whether St Louis can make the playoffs or not

                          I'd imagine so long as they have the same amt of wins as another playoff contender, they'd have less losses so that's clear enough. But is it that simple? How will that shake down?

                          Beating Baltimore would be such a huge win I just hope the team doesn't overlook OAK. This is a real possibility especially since it's a short week and it's an away game right before their biggest non divisional AFC game since the NE game.

                          I've heard the term trap game all year this year which made no sense but if ever there was a trap game it could be THIS week. I'm quite sure EVERYONE is predicting a Denver win. Whether or not it's a trap game I have confidence our Broncos will take care of their business.

                          The beatings will continue until morale improves....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by assassin216 View Post
                            What's the point of having a head to head tie breaker if they are not going to use it.... I've always thought it was head to head and then the Conference record when it came to conference opponents,because they sure are using the head to head tie breaker against us when it comes to the Broncos and the Patriots......
                            They aren't using the head to head matchup against us, we lost to 2 AFC teams like the Ravens.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by #87Birdman View Post
                              I think I see your problem. You are looking at divisional record which is wrong. That is only for ties in a division. This is a tie in a conference so you go with the wild card tiebreakers. And Head to head is first, but since that doesn't apply yet it goes to conference record which NE has the advantage since 2 of their losses came against the NFC. So NE is currently the 2nd seed.

                              http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures
                              No no no. I gave that as an example why percentages are not relevant at this point in the season and why those tie-breakers shouldn't be applicable.

                              Originally posted by #87Birdman View Post
                              Because head to head can't determine the tie breaker in a 3 way tie unless they all play each other. Problem is if we beat the Ravens it isn't a 3 way tie and the pats head to head is useable.
                              Not sure why my last post was deleted?

                              But, again, 1) if A is bigger than C, and B is bigger than A, then B is bigger than either A or C. This is simple elementary-school transitive logic. Now if NE had never played Denver then Denver would truly be isolated in which case you would have to move to the next tie-breaker--or if Denver had already played Baltimore and lost to complete that triangle. It should not matter whether or not each team has played BOTH other teams in a 3-way tie for the head-to-head tie-breaker to be applicable; it's simply illogical. 2) Not only that but it doesn't even make sense to use percentages from unequal samples in the first place. So if sports media is going to continue to write if-the-season-ended-today articles, they should (well, follow the tie-breaker RULES, for one) find a way to do so that makes sense in these kinds of situations instead of using semantics to throw a team they happen to like in the spot-light - even if it's only for one week.

                              EDIT: grammatical
                              Last edited by LoserSlick; 12-09-2012, 10:33 AM.
                              fumpa.mybrute.com

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X