NFC West division tiebreakers thread

[XXXIVwin]

Just an interesting tiebreaker note heading into this Sunday's game:

Even if the Rams lose to Detroit, they would win the NFC West, no matter what, IF they were to sweep the remaining 3 games (SEA, ATL, AZ).

So yeah, "all the games are big", but frankly the Seattle game is MUCH more crucial than the Detroit game.

I've looked into the tiebreaker scenarios. If Rams go 13-4 (loss to Lions, wins in the final 3), Rams win division even if:

--Seattle goes 3-1 with only remaining loss to Rams

OR IF

--SF sweeps all their remaining games.

Of course I want the Rams to sweep their remaining games. But Rams can still lock up the division despite a loss to Lions.

Final note: Rams might not keep the #1 seed in this scenario. Green Bay could beat them out if they win out. But to me, the crucial aspect is winning the NFC West. A #1 seed would be awesome, a #2 seed would be pretty damn good, but a #5 seed would be really disappointing, given the terrific season so far.

Tiebreaker notes: For two teams in division, 1st tiebreak is head-to-head, 2nd tiebreak is division record, 3rd tiebreak is common opponents, and fourth tiebreak is conference record. In the scenario I described above, the "common opponents" scenario is the crucial one.

 

[MaxQ28]

Bump. Nice post

 

[HitStick]

I’m more concerned with the #1 seed than the NFC west at this point. That #1 seed is huge

 

[Faceplant]

Fuck it....

 

[XXXIVwin]

That INT from the Chargers (to seal the victory over PHI) was a big deal in playoff seeding for our Rams.

If Rams were to go 3-1 or better in the final 4 games, including a win over Seattle, Rams would clinch the NFC West title AND at minimum the #2 seed.

(Explanation: If Rams were to win NFC West at 13-4, Eagles in NFC East could do no better than 12-5. Bucs and Panthers in NFC South couldn't catch 13-4 Rams, either).

Again, like everyone else, I hope the Rams sweep their remaining games and clinch the #1 seed. But even if Rams were to lose to DET, they'd still be able to control their destiny for the #2 seed, and could very possibly even still get the #1 seed.

 

[Steve808]

That INT from the Chargers (to seal the victory over PHI) was a big deal in playoff seeding for our Rams.

If Rams were to go 3-1 or better in the final 4 games, including a win over Seattle, Rams would clinch the NFC West title AND at minimum the #2 seed.

(Explanation: If Rams were to win NFC West at 13-4, Eagles in NFC East could do no better than 12-5. Bucs and Panthers in NFC South couldn't catch 13-4 Rams, either).

Again, like everyone else, I hope the Rams sweep their remaining games and clinch the #1 seed. But even if Rams were to lose to DET, they'd still be able to control their destiny for the #2 seed, and could very possibly even still get the #1 seed.

The Rams pass rush needs to come alive down the stretch. I haven't seen all the game the last few weeks but the stats didn't look pretty. And the Rams did somehow lose to the Panthers

 

[Da-Rock]

I don’t feel comfortable with the #1 seed as much as I should.

Over the years I’ve felt that the Rams always play better as the underdog.

I know keeping home field from other teams like Packers is important, I just feel off about the #1 seed.

Maybe I’m just being a scared baby!

 

[dang]

I’m more concerned with the #1 seed than the NFC west at this point. That #1 seed is huge

Gotta get one to get the other. If the Rams play very good (sustained drives, win the turnover battle, pressure Goff, key on Gibbs) all 4 quarters they can handle the Lions. I think the tough out will be Seattle away.

 

[DzRams]

I don’t feel comfortable with the #1 seed as much as I should.

Over the years I’ve felt that the Rams always play better as the underdog.

I know keeping home field from other teams like Packers is important, I just feel off about the #1 seed.

Maybe I’m just being a scared baby!

I get the concern, but having the bye is just as important as home field advantage. On any given Sunday, any team can lose so playing one less game to get to the SB is huge.

That advantage offsets everything else.

 

[Steve808]

I don’t feel comfortable with the #1 seed as much as I should.

Over the years I’ve felt that the Rams always play better as the underdog.

I know keeping home field from other teams like Packers is important, I just feel off about the #1 seed.

Maybe I’m just being a scared baby!

I posted this before, but the #1 seed gives you a buy, to heal injuries and get fresh, Then you play at home against the lowest remaining seed in the playoffs. Win that and you host the NFCCG. The fact that Rodgers and the packers had that 3 years in a row and didn't make the super bowl is a head scratcher.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

I don’t feel comfortable with the #1 seed as much as I should.

Over the years I’ve felt that the Rams always play better as the underdog.

I know keeping home field from other teams like Packers is important, I just feel off about the #1 seed.

Maybe I’m just being a scared baby!

Think about it this way, the last time we went to the Superbowl, we had two home games including the NFCC. So we had the advantage of a top seed even though we were 4th.

The last two playoff losses were close games in Detroit and Philly. I think we would have won at least one of those if we were at home.

 

[Merlin]

I’m more concerned with the #1 seed than the NFC west at this point. That #1 seed is huge

This. Only two home games to get to the dance. Let's do it right this time.

 

[FrantikRam]

The cool thing is that the Seahawks almost can't win the West with tie breakers over us. Lets assume we each go 3-1 to finish the year, with them beating us but losing to either the Colts, Panthers or Niners.

A loss to the Niners wins it for us because of division record. But a loss to either Indy or Carolina would also do it because the Seahawks two losses aside from us are both common games, so they'd have three common game losses and a loss to us. We lost to the Eagles, who they didn't play, which means we would end up with two common game losses, a loss to them and a loss to the Eagles.

All to say, Seattle cannot win a tiebreaker with us if we finish with the same record, no matter how it plays out from here.

 

[PhillyRam]

The cool thing is that the Seahawks almost can't win the West with tie breakers over us. Lets assume we each go 3-1 to finish the year, with them beating us but losing to either the Colts, Panthers or Niners.

A loss to the Niners wins it for us because of division record. But a loss to either Indy or Carolina would also do it because the Seahawks two losses aside from us are both common games, so they'd have three common game losses and a loss to us. We lost to the Eagles, who they didn't play, which means we would end up with two common game losses, a loss to them and a loss to the Eagles.

All to say, Seattle cannot win a tiebreaker with us if we finish with the same record, no matter how it plays out from here.

Problem is if the Rams lose and Seahawks lose to the Niners, and the Niners win out, the Niners win the division. We cant win a tiebreaker over the Niners. They only have 2 NFC losses, we have 3. If we lose another game we would have 4. So we can't get a better conference record than them. And in this scenario we would have the same division record or worse if we lose to Seattle.

 

[MaxQ28]

Fuck it....

View attachment 73644

Give em all whiplash

 

[Tumak61]

I think McVay would like to win these next 3 then rest the starters against the cards to end the season. It wouldn't surprise me if McVay rests the starters with the number 1 seed on the line in order to get a guaranteed week of rest for them. He may choose to roll with Jimmy and the backups and try and get a win against the cards at home.

 

[TexasRam]

Nice post and thread.

The 1 seed is much more desirable then 2 seed:

Bye week - 1 less game to get knocked out. If Rams are off. See Carolina game.

Injury - one less game for injury.

Get home field vs 2 seed.

Always play lowest ranked team.

So definitely need to aim for 1 seed. This could come into play in the final week of for example GB is 1/2 game back.

 

[kurtfaulk]

Give em all whiplash

Just after pulling their teeth.

.

 

[Steve808]

Think about it this way, the last time we went to the Superbowl, we had two home games including the NFCC. So we had the advantage of a top seed even though we were 4th.

The last two playoff losses were close games in Detroit and Philly. I think we would have won at least one of those if we were at home.

We were the #1 seed for our 1st super bowl win

 

[Steve808]

Nice post and thread.

The 1 seed is much more desirable then 2 seed:

Bye week - 1 less game to get knocked out. If Rams are off. See Carolina game.

Injury - one less game for injury.

Get home field vs 2 seed.

Always play lowest ranked team.

So definitely need to aim for 1 seed. This could come into play in the final week of for example GB is 1/2 game back.

Agreed. #1 seed. You get a bye and then you play the lowest remaining seed at home. Win that and you're hosting the NFC championship. The extra rest can be gold if you have some guys with minor injuries. As I said in a previous post, La Fleur is a damn good coach, but how do you get the #1 seed 3 years in a row and not even get to the Superbowl (cough cough Aaron Rodgers).