Blog Entry

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

Posted on: December 13, 2011 1:20 am
 

Week 14 brought us some separation as the top teams in the AFC (NE, BAL, HOU, PIT) all won and the Jets grabbed a Wild Card spot for now with a badly needed win since all 5 of NYJ's losses are conference losses.  And then there's DEN-BOW.  Seriously?  This story just keeps on getting more and more incredible each week!

On the NFC side, NYG pulled out a huge late win at DAL and secured the lead in the NFC East (DAL could have clinched division title in wk 15 if they had won).  GB and NO continued their positive push forward with NO gaining a playoff berth and GB getting a first round bye, but the field goal happy 49ers stumbled against ARI.  DET and ATL kept up their Wild Card positions, but the Tebow-ed CHI squad is now on the outside looking in.

Playoff clinching scenarios for Week 15 are below.  Looked at DET and ATL potential clinching scenarios, but since both teams are playing AFC opponents they could still end up with 6-6 conference records (not typical for playoff teams) and DET can still be caught by CHI and lost to ATL H2H and ATL lost to CHI H2H...both teams have to wait at least another week for playoff qualification.

Also...since the only scenario keeping PIT from having already clinched a playoff berth is a PIT-TEN-DEN Wild Card tie at 10-6 that goes to Strength of Victory, we looked at whether any combination of game results during Wk 15 could clinch that SOV for PIT and there is none.  So PIT must rely on the scenarios below.

Joe

AFC PLAYOFF PICTURE

Clinched: HOUSTON (AFC South Champ)
Eliminated: IND (Wk 12), JAC (Wk 13), BUF (Wk 14), CLE (Wk 14), MIA (Wk 14)  

NEW ENGLAND clinches division title with:
1) WIN
2) TIE + NYJ loss/tie
3) NYJ loss

NEW ENGLAND clinches playoff berth with:
1) TIE
2) CIN loss/tie + TEN loss/tie + OAK loss/tie

BALTIMORE clinches playoff berth with:
1) WIN or TIE
2) NYJ loss + TEN loss/tie
3) NYJ loss + OAK loss/tie
4) TEN loss/tie + OAK loss/tie

PITTSBURGH clinches playoff berth with:
1) WIN or TIE
2) NYJ loss
3) TEN loss/tie
4) OAK loss/tie
5) DEN loss

NFC PLAYOFF PICTURE

Clinched: GREEN BAY (NFC North Champ + 1st Round Playoff Bye), SAN FRANCISCO (NFC West Champ), NEW ORLEANS (Playoff)
Eliminated: MIN (Wk 12), STL (Wk 12), CAR (Wk 14), TB (Wk 14), WAS (Wk 14) 

GREEN BAY clinches home-field advantage with:
1) WIN or TIE
2) SF loss/tie

NEW ORLEANS clinches division title with:
1) WIN + ATL loss/tie
2) TIE + ATL loss

Comments

Since: Dec 27, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 11:19 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

However, what is not addressed is if both promotion *and* elimination can occur in a step - as the team pending elimination is no longer "tied" with the other teams in the tiebreaker.

Actually, the wording does cover all such possibilities.

If teams are both eliminated and advanced, leaving 2 tied teams, the winning team advances and all others regroup into a 3-team race. that comes from the wording

If a team wins the tie-break, it simply doesn't matter how they won, and how the rest were eliminated , One team won -- the others revert back to H2H with all other teams.

The tie-breaks are there to determine the winner (advancer) in a particular spot. That is consistent in all the wording

Thirdly, the additional language you posted in bold seems to indicate reversion occurs on either elimination or promotion.

Well, sure, ' but reversion' mentioned here only covers elimination, since reversion on promotion was already adressed in wording that has been there for years (that portion had to be added to clarify reverting after 1 team won a multi-team WC TB for 1 spot but there were other spots still up for grabs for the other tied teams) .

No one is "left" to carry on in a TB when the winner is declared. That TB process ends.  What was unclear, until this new wording, was that what happened when 3 or more teams were left when a team was eliminated.



Since: Dec 15, 2011
Posted on: December 16, 2011 11:06 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

Thanks to the forum for answering my first question.  I have another based upon the comments I have read here.

For the non-divisional tiebreaker of three or more teams, are my comments below correct?


www.nfl.com
1. Apply divisional tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. more .....
2. Head-to-Head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others)
3. Best won-lost-tied precentage in games played within the conference.
4. More......


should read 

1. Apply divisional tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. more .....
2. Head-to-Head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others)
2a. Best won-lost-tied precentage in games played amoung the tied teams. (Applicable only if all clubs have played each other)
3. Best won-lost-tied precentage in games played within the conference.
4. More......


Thanks



Since: Dec 16, 2008
Posted on: December 16, 2011 10:45 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

Joe,

Glad to have you back again.  When resolving a Strength of Argument tiebreak, if they're still tied, do you go down to Combined Raucousness of Supporters/Detractors?

Anyway, serious question about "Other Tie-Breaking Procedures".  It would seem to me that order of promotion vis-a-vis elimination matters.

The last sentence in OTB #1 indicates that upon promotion, all other tied teams return to Step 1.  Secondly, the first sentence of OTB #1 indicates that only one promotion can occur in a step.  Thirdly, the additional language you posted in bold seems to indicate reversion occurs on either elimination or promotion.

However, what is not addressed is if both promotion *and* elimination can occur in a step - as the team pending elimination is no longer "tied" with the other teams in the tiebreaker.

As an example, let's look at an 8-8 AFCW with the following.

KC swept DEN, was swept by SD, split OAK. (3-3 H2H/Div)
SD was swept by DEN and split OAK (3-3 H2H/Div)
OAK splits with DEN (3-3 H2H/Div).

H2H is thus equal, Div is equal - so to CG.
CG's among all 4 teams are AFCE, NFCN in 2011 (so 2 "uncommon games" are vs. AFCN and AFCS).
Assume the following: KC 3-5 in CG, SD 5-3, OAK/DEN 4-4.

So, SD would be subject to promotion and KC subject to elimination on CGs.

If we only promote:
SD wins (CG), then we revert and KC wins on H2H (3-1), and finally OAK/DEN are down to SoV, seeding the division as SD-KC-(OAK/DEN).

If we only eliminate:
KC eliminated (CG), then we revert and SD is eliminated (H2H, 1-3), then again OAK/DEN are broken on SoV, resulting in seedings of (OAK/DEN)-SD-KC.

If *both* can occur:
SD promoted (CG), KC eliminated (CG), and then we revert and OAK/DEN are sorted once again on SoV, resulting in
SD-(OAK/DEN)-KC.

Clearly, these are different outcomes - and some clarity could be useful.

-Dave



Since: Dec 27, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 10:43 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

thanks nflrules

Obvioulsly the 2011 book is online right now,



 the 2010 version 


Hope I haven't broken through a pourous offensive line to get theseInnocent



Since: Dec 12, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 10:08 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

I googled a short snippet of the new added wording, and have found nowhere on the internet where such a new version is found.


The updated 2011 wording was included in the 2011 NFL Record & Fact Book (electronic version) that was sent to the media prior to the start of the season.  Besides the wording that Joe pointed out, "...If three clubs remain tied after a fourth club is eliminated during any step, tie-breaker re-starts at Step One [for divisional tiebreakers, Step Two for WC tiebreakers] of three-club format," also for clarity, "in all games" was added to the following tiebreakers (agn, I may have mentioned this to you before):

- Strength of victory in all games.
- Strength of schedule in all games.
- Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed in all games.
- Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed in all games.

I guess the problem is that nfl.com does not have this official re-write either.


Also, remember that last year, we pointed out that in the explanation for the tie-breaking procedure for the draft, nfl.com was still using old language from the 1990's.  It was corrected soon after we pointed it out here.  Hopefully they will update the new officlal language soon.   



Since: Dec 27, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 9:31 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

Believe me, the way brett and database were hepped up about changing the wording last year, if that wording change had been made public, they would have broadcast it from the hills.

Belated congratulations
Kiss



Since: Dec 27, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 9:29 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

I googled a short snippet of the new added wording, and have found nowhere on the internet where such a new version is found.




Since: Dec 27, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 9:20 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

Joe,

I guess the problem is that nfl.com does not have this official re-write either.



does not have the added wording

Also,

I was pretty sure last year you said that after consultation with Elias, that  1-0-1 vs. 1-1 vs. 0-1-1 was considered a H2H sweep.

Oh well.


SoA does trump HH2HH, except on talk radio -- and in Congress.




Since: Dec 27, 2006
Posted on: December 16, 2011 9:16 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS




Since: Nov 21, 2011
Posted on: December 16, 2011 7:52 am
 

WEEK 15 PLAYOFF SCENARIOS

Joe VOR (LOL!), a distinct possibility here is that I'm blind, but I don't see the new portion added to the tiebreakers on nfl.com. But im glad the rules are/will be more specific. It's amazing to me that they leave gaping holes (well only gaping holes to tiebreaker maniacs but gaping holes nonetheless) in their tiebreakers. I hope because of this we never get to a situation like the Luckett coin toss where we don't know who's won (would be funny but incredibly controversial and bothersome). It seems the nfl has lost the POV tiebreaker via strength of argument...


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com