MyBB Internal: One or more warnings occurred. Please contact your administrator for assistance.
The argument of "Playoff Teams"
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The argument of "Playoff Teams"
#1
I'm wondering how people feel about the argument of "playoff teams" as a way of legitimizing the Bengals season this year. One thing in particular that seems to be coming up around here in various arguments is the loss to the Houston Texans. Obviously there are fans divided on the argument. Some say the loss to them was a bad loss, others say it's not that bad of a loss because the Texans are a "Playoff team". I feel like this type of argument can be very misleading because it ignores two very important things.

First off.... just because a team goes to the playoffs does not mean that they are necessarily a "good" team. As a matter of fact, if it wasn't for the NFL rule that a team from each division gets to go to the playoffs, then the Texans wouldn't even be in the playoffs right now. They would have been knocked out by the Steelers.... But since the Texans are the leader of their division right now they get to go to the playoffs as it currently stands. It's something that has been an issue with fans for a long time...

The 2010 NFL season is a great example of this actually because a lot of people complained about it. It's the same year that Marshawn Lynch ended up having his game saving Beast Mode touchdown against the Saints to win their playoff game. But the funny thing about it is that the Seahawks were only in the playoffs to begin with because of the technicality of the NFL rule regarding divisional winners. That year there were 3 other teams that had better records than the Seahawks, but the Seahawks got to go to the playoffs because they won their division with a 7-9 record. The three other teams that had better records than them that didn't get to go to the playoffs that year were the New York Giants/Tampa Bay Buccaneers (both 10-6) and the San Diego Chargers (9-7).

So does this mean that those teams weren't good because they didn't get to go to the playoffs but the 7-9 Seahawks did? Of course not, nor does it mean they're good teams vice versa. People need to stop looking at this as "Team (whoever) made it to the playoffs, so that means they're a good team/it wasn't a bad loss". There's so many variables you have to look at besides the fact that they made it to the playoffs.

A team can be good for a few weeks but then be terrible for the rest of the season. This means that just because a team beats the Patriots in week 2 or 3, doesn't mean that they are automatically a "good" team just as losing to the Patriots wouldn't make them a bad team either. They could be having a rough start, they could have injuries, they could have personnel issues etc... The main point is that you have to look at the meat and bones of the situation rather than just the outside of it, ie "They made it to the playoffs, thus they are a good team" or "They beat so and so that week, so that makes them the better team". A team could make it to the playoffs and lose their starting quarterback and get lose their first playoff game. Does that mean they were a bad team? No, they lost their starting QB for crying out loud... Teams change throughout the season, coaches change throughout the season, injuries happen, bad ref calls happen, basically.... a lot happens throughout the season to determine who are the greats and who are the not so greats. Just look at the Kansas City Chiefs this year. They won their first game of the season against the Texans and then lost their next 5 straight and people were laughing at them. Then they rebounded and have now won their last 9 games. Does that make them a good team or not? I dunno, you tell me.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
The argument of "Playoff Teams" - Matt_Crimson - 01-01-2016, 10:54 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)