Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: We might see the first 11-5 team not make the playoffs
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
xsv
It's doubtful the Seahawks will lose to the Rans, so the 49ers really don't have anything to play for. I think Arizona will win this one to keep their slim playoff hopes alive. At the same time, though, NO plays the bucs, and all they need to do is win to get in.

If that happens, Arizona would be 11-5 and out of the playoffs. Unreal. Could you imagine if that happened here?

mcnabbulous
Didn't that happen to the Patriots in the Matt Cassell year? Or were they 10-6?
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 26 2013, 02:28 PM) *
Didn't that happen to the Patriots in the Matt Cassell year? Or were they 10-6?


Not sure if that was the team, but I know there has been a 10-6 team to not make the playoffs.

There has never been an 11-5 team to not make the playoffs, though. Seems kinda mind boggling to me.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (xsv @ Dec 26 2013, 02:38 PM) *
Not sure if that was the team, but I know there has been a 10-6 team to not make the playoffs.

There has never been an 11-5 team to not make the playoffs, though. Seems kinda mind boggling to me.

I think the 2008 Patriots, who finished 11-5, fit the mold.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/2008.htm

Miami also finished 11-5 and won the division.
make_it_rain
It happened to the Patriots during the Matt Cassel year. They were, I believe, the first 11-5 team to miss the playoffs. There's been several 10-6 teams to miss the playoffs... the Giants lost the tiebreak to us in 2010 finishing 10-6, and I think in 2011 the bears won 10 games and missed the playoffs. If I'm not mistaken, the Bucs also won 10 games under Raheem Morris and missed the playoffs.

Its brutal for teams to win 11 and miss out, but this is a consequence of the division alignment being set up the way it is. I'd much rather have a strong 11-5 team miss as a rare exception than expand the field and allow one extra 9-7 or even 8-8 team in every year
xsv
Wow, I stand corrected. I thought for sure they were 10-6 that year.

Honestly, I don't see how you can leave an 11-5 team out of the playoffs.

Phits
2010 Seahawks won their division with a 7-9 record. Saints were a wildcard team @ 11-5. GB was the other wildcard @ 10-6. Both TB and NYG missed the playoffs with a 10-6 record.
SAM I Am
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 26 2013, 03:18 PM) *
2010 Seahawks won their division with a 7-9 record. Saints were a wildcard team @ 11-5. GB was the other wildcard @ 10-6. Both TB and NYG missed the playoffs with a 10-6 record.

Too bad. They should have won their divisions. Except for the gnats of course rolleyes.gif
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (xsv @ Dec 26 2013, 02:20 PM) *
It's doubtful the Seahawks will lose to the Rans, so the 49ers really don't have anything to play for. I think Arizona will win this one to keep their slim playoff hopes alive. At the same time, though, NO plays the bucs, and all they need to do is win to get in.

If that happens, Arizona would be 11-5 and out of the playoffs. Unreal. Could you imagine if that happened here?


As someone mentioned, the Cassel year with the Pats it happened. Also, it happened to Elway's Broncos in 1985.

I've always said the 3 division 6-seed format is best, and this is a reason why. No 11-5 team should ever miss the playoffs (In 1985 only 5 teams made it).
Eyrie
We missed out in 1991 when we finished 10-6, but were only third in the old NFC East.

As regards three divisions, that would mean expanding the league to 36 teams so that each division has six teams. Home and away within the division would be ten games and matching up with an AFC division a further six, leaving only two games in an expanded schedule to face other NFC teams. Can't see that working.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Dec 27 2013, 12:00 PM) *
We missed out in 1991 when we finished 10-6, but were only third in the old NFC East.

As regards three divisions, that would mean expanding the league to 36 teams so that each division has six teams. Home and away within the division would be ten games
and matching up with an AFC division a further six, leaving only two games in an expanded schedule to face other NFC teams. Can't see that working.


Well obviously it wouldn't work now, up until 1999 it was perfect because each division had 5 teams. The Browns were moved to Baltimore in '95, and then of course adding
the Browns back in '99 fucked everything up, giving the AFC central 6 teams. They added the Texans a few years later along with the new alignment. From '95 to '98
is when they had even divisions with 6 seeds, and it was a great system. Regardless of an 11-5 missing the playoffs, we have a hell of a lot of important games this Sunday, should be fun.
Jax
So, arizona is our best win of the year? Did we beat anyone else with 10+ wins?
make_it_rain
QUOTE (Jax @ Dec 28 2013, 04:09 PM) *
So, arizona is our best win of the year? Did we beat anyone else with 10+ wins?


No. They Bears are a good team but will only be 9-7 if they win Sunday against the pack
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.