3 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Colts don't get enough heat for being a dog crap organization. Only reason they've been relevant is they sucked in the 2 best years to suck in the past 26 years

Said when he took the job, he was an idiot for taking it. It would ruin his future head coaching prospects. Should've held out another year and got a job with a real organization.

10 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I don't get why there is this constant need to try to rewrite the objective rules that have been in place since the beginning of the WC round being a part of the playoff process, because it suddenly doesn't fit their subjective notion of what is 'fair' or 'just'.  "Fair" and "just" is when the rules are executed without prejudice, without bringing preconceived notions into the equation.    OR... we could just eliminate the WC slots entirely and just let the division winners in the tournament.  Or go back even further and just make two divisions and let the division winner face off for the championship without a playoff of any kind, as it was in the pre-Super Bowl era.  

 

The tinkering with things that aren't broken needs to stop.  The kickoff rules they have put in place now to be 'safer' haven't proven to be safer, nor is it more dynamic.  Generally the rules as written are better than what they come up with as new wrinkle.   The new rules end up being difficult to enforce or sometimes even understand.

Things are becoming broken because the NFL doesn’t stop tinkering. They add a WC one year. Add another game the next year. Add another game the next year, etc etc. Once they go to 18 game seasons it’s only going to magnify the seeding problem when all the good teams get to pad their record even more and the bad teams have another game they probably will be bad. 

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I definitely think 17 games, 1 extra playoff team per conference, 1 fewer bye-award per conference has been flat out bad for the game and competitive balance.  It's probably been a good to great to spectacular financial move for the league, as it has generated 16 more regular season games and 2 more playoff games for the league...and people still watch in droves.  So $$$$$.  

IMO, the regular season has been seriously diluted.  How truly critical have any Eagles games been for a month?  Honestly.  The only teams playing critical games right now are .500 teams that might not belong in the playoffs anyway.  If you look across all 32 teams, I bet the average is 3 near meaningless games at the end of the year.

When there were 2 bye week awards per conference and one fewer playoff berth, there was more to play for in the closing weeks of the season.  Now we've got an entire week that means almost nothing to the vast majority of the NFL.  

Every single one of them... as the loss to Washington (and any other loss would have been similar) knocked them from contention to the 1 seed as they couldn't keep pace with Detroit.  Had they not lost that game, the matchup between the Lions and Vikings would have held great meaning for the Eagles.  The Vikings winning that game would have catapulted the Eagles to 1, the Vikings to 2, and the Lions to 5.  But alas... the loss of just one game made it so that now, the Eagles have no path to the 1 seed.  But each and every game mattered for the Eagles.  They had no margin for error since they dropped that game to Atlanta.   And now, they sit locked into the 2 seed.  

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Things are becoming broken because the NFL doesn’t stop tinkering. They add a WC one year. Add another game the next year. Add another game the next year, etc etc. Once they go to 18 game seasons it’s only going to magnify the seeding problem when all the good teams get to pad their record even more and the bad teams have another game they probably will be bad. 

Yup.  They are trying to break it by continuing to squeeze the golden goose to provide even more eggs.  Their greed will be their downfall.

7 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I would take it away but that’s just me. Feels like every year there is one or two barely .500 teams hosting that don’t deserve it. This year it will be another 9 or 10 win team playing a team with 14 wins. 

So in all likelihood if that was to take place this year we would drop to the #3 seed only have 1 playoff game and then have to go on the road boy would that’s suck.. 

12 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I definitely think 17 games, 1 extra playoff team per conference, 1 fewer bye-award per conference has been flat out bad for the game and competitive balance.  It's probably been a good to great to spectacular financial move for the league, as it has generated 16 more regular season games and 2 more playoff games for the league...and people still watch in droves.  So $$$$$.  

IMO, the regular season has been seriously diluted.  How truly critical have any Eagles games been for a month?  Honestly.  The only teams playing critical games right now are .500 teams that might not belong in the playoffs anyway.  If you look across all 32 teams, I bet the average is 3 near meaningless games at the end of the year.

When there were 2 bye week awards per conference and one fewer playoff berth, there was more to play for in the closing weeks of the season.  Now we've got an entire week that means almost nothing to the vast majority of the NFL.  

Dilution is in the eye of the beholder.  For Eagles beholders you may be right, but for Atlanta, Washington, Tampa, LA, Seattle and Phoenix fans there has been no let up in meaningful games.

On 12/24/2024 at 12:47 PM, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

So i went back and looked at WC teams having better records than divisional winners over the last 44 years. Basically 22 years prior to going to 4 divisions and 22 years worth of data since going to it.

22 years prior to going to 4 divisions: 34 wild cards had better records than divisional winners (80-89 only 5 teams made playoffs). Which is about 1.55 per year

22 years since going to 4 divisions: 44 wild card teams have made the playoffs with a better record than a divisional winner. Which is about 2 per year.

from 80-90: 19

from 91-2001: 15

From 2002–12: 20

from 2013-2023: 26

 The last 5 years nfl has seen 13 wild card teams have better records than a divisional champion. So on average 2.6 WC teams with better records than a divisional champion.

That doesn’t include his year where if GB wins another game and Washington wins out that’s another 2 along with the Vikings. making 3 in the nfc. Additionally Steelers/ravens, chargers and broncos may all have better records than Houston at end of the season. So potentially 6 wild card teams with better record than a divisional champ in their conference. So could essentially have 21 in 6 years which is over 3 per year. Even if you take half of that happening it’s about exactly 3 over the last 6 years so the trend has become it’s happening more frequently. Heck if all 6 things manage to happen you’d have 15 in 3 years. Which is 5 Wild card teams on average having a better record than one of the division champs. 

I brought up the data last week from 44 years. The 22 years prior to going to four divisions and the 22 years after going for divisions. Because the last 6 years there’s been been big jump from  wild cards having better records than division winners. Really the last 3 years you’ve seen a significant jump. 2022-2023 say 9 WC teams with better records then some division winners. Thats 4.5 per playoff. There is potential 6 teams this year who are going to be wildcard with better records than 3 of the division winners (locked in 3 in the nfc and afc potentially another 3 in the afc). So essentially you might be up to 5 WC per season over the last year with better records than division winners.
I discussed this last week, the numbers over 22 years to last 11 to 6 to now 3 have really shifted. It’s happening more and more. 

Let me go even deeper into this, the Texans have not played good football for like 2 months now. They have 3 wins in last 8 games (losing to titans and jets). They lose on Sunday they’ll be 9-8 and win the worst division in football. Meanwhile the bengals win Saturday they’ll be 9-8 (if they win they’d win 5 in a row and 6 of 9). Likelihood is they aren’t going to playoffs (chiefs resting starters) and played in a far tougher division but that’s the reward for the Texans winning the division. So it’s not enough we are rewarding the Texans by giving them a playoff berth for winning a bad division but also giving them a home playoff game? 

point this out they’re gonna go to an 8 playoff teams at some point time. So the traditional NFL playoffs we knew for years is gonna be completely different than what it was 20 years ago. So you might as well adapt to what the data is telling you 

Listening to Lane's interview after the game it was pretty clear that he (and I'm thinking the entire OL) are satisfied with the 2000yd season in 16 games.  They want the SB far more than the rushing record.

15 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Said when he took the job, he was an idiot for taking it. It would ruin his future head coaching prospects. Should've held out another year and got a job with a real organization.

Belichek from 1991 to 1995 would disagree with you. During his five year stint in Cleveland, he compiled a 36-44 record.

 

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

Listening to Lane's interview after the game it was pretty clear that he (and I'm thinking the entire OL) are satisfied with the 2000yd season in 16 games.  They want the SB far more than the rushing record.

I suspect they may adjust that opinion as this week progresses and the aches in their muscles subsides.

5 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I brought up the data last week from 44 years. The 22 years prior to going to four divisions and the 22 years after going for divisions. Because the last 6 years there’s been been big jump from  wild cards having better records than division winners. Really the last 3 years you’ve seen a significant jump. 2022-2023 say 9 WC teams with better records then some division winners. Thats 4.5 per playoff. There is potential 6 teams this year who are going to be wildcard with better records than 3 of the division winners (locked in 3 in the nfc and afc potentially another 3 in the afc). So essentially you might be up to 5 WC per season over the last year with better records than division winners.
I discussed this last week, the numbers over 22 years to last 11 to 6 to now 3 have really shifted. It’s happening more and more. 

Let me go even deeper into this, the Texans have not played good football for like 2 months now. They have 3 wins in last 8 games (losing to titans and jets). They lose on Sunday they’ll be 9-8 and win the worst division in football. Meanwhile the bengals win Saturday they’ll be 9-8 (if they win they’d win 5 in a row and 6 of 9). Likelihood is they aren’t going to playoffs (chiefs resting starters) and played in a far tougher division but that’s the reward for the Texans winning the division. So it’s not enough we are rewarding the Texans by giving them a playoff berth for winning a bad division but also giving them a home playoff game? 

point this out they’re gonna go to an 8 playoff teams at some point time. So the traditional NFL playoffs we knew for years is gonna be completely different than what it was 20 years ago. So you might as well adapt to what the data is telling you 

What is the data telling me?   That some team will be on the outside looking in because they weren't good enough to meet the objective rules put in place?  Big whoop.  If the Bengals don't like it, they should have been better.  If the road team with the better record than Houston doesn't like traveling, they can choose to stay home and give their spot to the Bengals.

 

It doesn't matter how many teams are allowed into the playoffs, there will always be a team that feels that they belonged in the playoffs over a team that got in.  In 1991, the Eagles and 49ers were 10-6, but both missed the playoffs.   Meanwhile, in the AFC, a 9-7 team and an 8-8 team got into the playoffs.     Oh well.  Too bad, so sad.   But wait... maybe we can create arbitrary rules that might fix the perceived injustice?  Maybe we can eliminate the conferences so that teams can flip sides for the playoffs and get in over the weaker teams in the other conference, that seems way more 'fair'. 

.  Where does it end?   

 

18 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Listening to Lane's interview after the game it was pretty clear that he (and I'm thinking the entire OL) are satisfied with the 2000yd season in 16 games.  They want the SB far more than the rushing record.

Mailata's comments were on the opposite side from Lane in the post-game.   Mailata said that going for the record is "an opportunity to make history".  So, I think that there will be some long conversations in the next day or so.

14 minutes ago, Cheesteakitis said:

So in all likelihood if that was to take place this year we would drop to the #3 seed only have 1 playoff game and then have to go on the road boy would that’s suck.. 

It sucks but losses to inferior teams did it. Also in theory it makes the WC round easier, so there are some benefits too. 

39 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Things are becoming broken because the NFL doesn’t stop tinkering. They add a WC one year. Add another game the next year. Add another game the next year, etc etc. Once they go to 18 game seasons it’s only going to magnify the seeding problem when all the good teams get to pad their record even more and the bad teams have another game they probably will be bad. 

Honestly from the inception of the 4 divisions this has been happening more and more. The first 11 years it was 20 times. The next 11 it’s been 26. You’d say that’s not that big of a difference. But then when you go look at the last five to then three years there’s been a significant jump. In the last five years, there’s been 13 wildcard teams with better records than the division winner. That does not include this year. This year there’s automatically going to be at least 3 in the NFC. With another potential 3 in the afc. If all 6 happen to have a better record it means 15 over a 3 year period. So on average in the last 3 postseasons it would mean 5 of the 6 total wild card teams would have a better record than a division champ. 

4 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I suspect they may adjust that opinion as this week progresses and the aches in their muscles subsides.

If the CEO coach leaves this decision to the players, god help him.

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Mailata's comments were on the opposite side from Lane in the post-game.   Mailata said that going for the record is "an opportunity to make history".  So, I think that tehre will be some long conversations in the next day or so.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Lane is the outlier. He’s the grizzled vet who’s had enough of this. The rest are young and dumb. 

1 hour ago, bpac55 said:

With all of these playoff scenarios, are there any that could see the Linc hosting the NFCCG or is it a foregone conclusion that the Eagles will have to win on the road after the first round?

The 2 seed gets a home game if they win on Wildcard weekend. 

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I wouldn’t be surprised if Lane is the outlier. He’s the grizzled vet who’s had enough of this. The rest are young and dumb. 

And the an option could be to let him rest and let Fred Johnson play RT.  🤷‍♂️

5 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

If the CEO coach leaves this decision to the players, god help him.

I disagree.  The team chemistry emanates mostly from the players. That chemistry needs to be respected.

15 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

What is the data telling me?   That some team will be on the outside looking in because they weren't good enough to meet the objective rules put in place?  Big whoop.  If the Bengals don't like it, they should have been better.  If the road team with the better record than Houston doesn't like traveling, they can choose to stay home and give their spot to the Bengals.

 

It doesn't matter how many teams are allowed into the playoffs, there will always be a team that feels that they belonged in the playoffs over a team that got in.  In 1991, the Eagles and 49ers were 10-6, but both missed the playoffs.   Meanwhile, in the AFC, a 9-7 team and an 8-8 team got into the playoffs.     Oh well.  Too bad, so sad.   But wait... maybe we can create arbitrary rules that might fix the perceived injustice?  Maybe we can eliminate the conferences so that teams can flip sides for the playoffs and get in over the weaker teams in the other conference, that seems way more 'fair'. 

.  Where does it end?   

 

If you wanna be a traditionalist and not change it then that is your prerogative. But the data has shown you that there is a sizable change from in the last decade to five years to last 3. If all 6 wild card teams have better record than a divisional winner (possible as it’s a lock for 3 in the nfc and potential 3 in afc then it makes it 15 over a 3 year period of time) this year that means the average 5 of 6 wild card teams are having better records than a divisional record over a 3 year period of time. Over 5 years it would be 17 (3.4). The data has shown it’s been big time changing over the past 6 and really the last 3 years it’s peaking.

This in my opinion is actually something that they should tinkered. It should’ve been tinkered when they decided to go to 17 games and add an additional playoff team. they’re going to have an 18th game and they’re eventually gonna add an 8 playoff team. so we can either tinker this as the data has indicated it’s happening more and more frequently or we could just ignore it for reasons we don’t want to change everything even though they’re changing almost everything else 

49 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Hey Captain Obvious! Welcome to the Eagles message board! Your welcome packet is in the mail. 

The welcome packet only includes a pair of @mikemack8‘s undies 

Hey Lenny Dikestra, 

Please provide a return label so I can take a giant Chipotle diarrhea in those worn out, ripped and already skid-marked panties. I’ll make sure to label it "Bomb inside, please don’t open,” so it just sits in your trailer and the smell spreads like a virus. 

Side note: As a joke gift, I literally got my SIL a fart (my fart) in a mason jar for Christmas.  I told her to open it in her son’s face when he turns 18. 

I say let Barkley go for the record.  It is within reach and it would be a lasting mark on the record book.  There may not be another chance to make history again.  The way he and the OL are playing, it may only be couple of quraters to make record.  Then he can sit back and rest for the play-off.

 

35 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.  They are trying to break it by continuing to squeeze the golden goose to provide even more eggs.  Their greed will be their downfall.

Everyone keeps saying it’ll be their downfall. But ppl continue to watch and the nfl continues to make boatloads of money. It won’t stop anytime soon. Doesn’t matter what they do. 
I for one, dislike the new playoff structure. Half the league makes the playoffs. That’s too many

27 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I suspect they may adjust that opinion as this week progresses and the aches in their muscles subsides.

Hopefully not

17 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Mailata's comments were on the opposite side from Lane in the post-game.   Mailata said that going for the record is "an opportunity to make history".  So, I think that tehre will be some long conversations in the next day or so.

BUT what does the analytics say tho?  Lol