Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Conference-less Superbowl


Proudiddy

Recommended Posts

I was just thinking after last night's debacle with only one team showing up to play, don't you think if we had the two best teams end up in the Superbowl, regardless of conference, that it almost ensures we wouldn't have this crap happen again?

With all the tweaking Goodell wants to make to the format, why not get rid of conferences? I'm venturing out of my comfort zone here in this discussion, but I suppose you could still keep divisions for incentive and to help determine seeding, but after that, anyone can play anyone because they're not divided by conference.

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the two best teams did play in the super bowl last night, problem was, only one of them showed up.

 

 

I honestly don't think so, the Niners would have been equally suited to beat the Broncos and even our Panthers would have been in a good position. 

 

Broncos could not get past a team that pressured Manning. 

 

9ers beat us fairly though. NFC Championship was the Superbowl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see the seeding. Something like the four division winners with best records get the bye week, the two with the best records getting homefield advantage. The remaining four division winners host the wildcard games. The four teams with the best records without winning their divisions are the wildcards. Keep tie breakers as similar as possible to now. Seeding is determined as 1-12 with lowest traveling to highest.

I can see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A blowout in the Superbowl is rare.  The last one I can think of was 11 years ago - Bucs vs Raiders.  I don't think anything needs to change because most of the time the Superbowl is a close game.  I feel like Brady and the Patriots would have put up more of a fight though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Exactly He's played two seasons and started 28 games. He's well beyond the point of being able to point to 2 or 3 games and being able to say, "THAT is the QB he is and will be in the future" Of course he can get there, but anyone trying to use just those couple of games to rank his place amongst the games QB's today and their full career's worth of playing at that level, is just asinine. Mahomes, Allen, Lamar, Burrow, Hurts, Herbert, Daniels, Stafford, Goff, Geno, Purdy, Baker, Love, Dak, Tua, Kyler, Lawrence That's 17 QB's right there that have played better over their careers than Bryce has played at his best.  And I'm not saying they're all studs or guys I'd want to be our QB moving forward, Tua for example I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole, but his body of work is a million times better than Bryce's has been. It's also not including any of the other QB's drafted in 2023/2024 other than Daniels. So again, say you believe in Bryce, say you think he's going to prove he can and should be our QB of the future, that's all fair and totally fine. But nobody can say he's been an above average QB in his career thus far, it's just an asinine notion.
    • I'd think we could get one of those from Dallas for... whatever. 
×
×
  • Create New...