OK. Let me see if I can attempt to make sense of that mess I posted yesterday.
What I was trying to say was that the top eight teams in each conference should play each other in non-conference games, and the bottom eight teams from each conference should play each other on opening weekend. I don't think the first game of the season should be a divisional game. If I were making the NFL schedule, it would look like this for opening weekend:
Rams@Dolphins
Raiders@Falcons
49ers@Chiefs
Saints@Jets
Bears@Ravens
Bills@Lions
Panthers@Bengals
Broncos@Cardinals
Texans@Eagles
Browns@Vikings
Titans@Redskins
Jaguars@Giants
Buccaneers@Steelers
Chargers@Seahawks
Colts@Packers
Patriots@Cowboys
This is based upon:
1) final conference standings
2) conference record
3) non-conference record
4) divisional record
5) total points scored
6) total points allowed
This has nothing to do with the SuperBowl Champions specifically. What it has to do with is creating the best opening day matchups, matchups which do not schedule divisional games on opening day.
It further weights the schedule so that teams with poor records have a better chance of opening the season on a high note, and so that playoff teams can compete against other playoff teams and make changes or adjustments as necessary.
Playing against a division rival on opening day does not allow for any margin of error. On week one, teams should have a margin for error, and only non-conference games allow any margin of error.
I understand that every team starts off equally uncertain of the on-field product on week one. I just don't think divisional matchups of teams not playing at full game speed creates good opening day matchups.
No amount of pre-season or practice is equal to actual gameplay. To me, it is like sending a soldier into battle with the rifle, but without the ammunition.
