I don't pay that much attention to the NFL, but the Woof Gods do. Heard Dak Prescott say before the game vs the Pats yesterday (when asked about the Pats' tough defense) "well, they haven't seen an offense like ours."
Duly noted. (I wouldn't have minded seeing both of those teams lose, FWIW).
Sorry to be late to this thread, but did anyone project the 49ers as a dominant team this year? Or even a good team?
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
The NFL preseason rankings had them 24th
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...aints-lead-way
"The future ain't what it used to be."
BD80, I take it you're never seen Napoleon Dynamite?
"Oh, man, if I could go back in time... we'd take State!"
LOL
Deadskins smoking the “We’ve given up” Panthers. Snyder still in position to draft Tua who may never play again.
And just to egg you on a little.
According to 247 sports.
Legendary Dallas Cowboys head coach Tom Landry may have felt like the "America's Team" moniker put a target on his team's back, but it's a damn good assessment. The Cowboys are one of the richest, most-prestigious brands in all of sports, and have as much of a national fanbase as they do in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Cowboys fans spend money on their team and travel a lot, as they rank No. 1 in both fan and road equity. They also have a great digital presence, as they are No. 2 in social equity. While the Cowboys have not won a Super Bowl in the past two decades, their checkered history and marketing machine has ensured that the Cowboys will be kings of the hill among NFL brands for a very long time.
Most of America does care .lol
DC4L
So, a lot has been said lately about reseeding the playoffs in light of the incredibly bad NFC East. The NFL has said "yeah, we're not ever going to do that" which I think is fine, because winning your division should retain some value.
That said, what about just adding a rule that a team must have at least a .500 record to make the playoffs. If a division fails to produce a .500 team, pick a 3rd wildcard from one of the other divisions.
I have not done all the math for it, but it is entirely possible that you could not have enough .500 teams to fill up the playoffs under that scenario. If intraleague was badly imbalanced in terms of wins and losses and there were a few dominant teams winning 13+ games in a conference, you could run out of .500 teams. I don't think the league would be willing to give up a playoff game and have an extra bye.
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Initial reaction: Statistically improbable
Preliminary final reaction: Probably statistically impossible
If I can run the numbers reasonably quickly I'll report back on whether I think it could happen or not. My gut feeling is you always have 6 .500+ teams in each conference. If it is even mathematically possible to have only 5 .500 teams, I would guess we are talking about <1% chance (like, multiple teams going undefeated or 15-1).
In the unlikely (maybe impossible) event that this happens: Then you take the sub-500 division winner. (Hint, you would never take the sub-500 division winner)