PFT: NFC playoff picture - Will any of the South’s underdogs step up?

[Cotton]

NFC playoff picture: Will any of the South’s underdogs step up?

Posted by Mike Wilkening on November 25, 2014, 4:01 AM EST

Control of the NFC South reverted to the 4-7 Falcons after the Saints’ loss to Baltimore on Monday night.

It’s here we note the Falcons will keep the lead if all four South teams lose on Sunday.

And judging from the early lines in Nevada, that’s not impossible.

All four NFC South clubs are underdogs in Week 13. The 9-2 Cardinals are favored by a little less than a field goal at Atlanta, with the Bengals (7-3-1) opening as favorites of a little more than three points at Tampa Bay (2-9).

Similarly, the reeling Saints (4-7) opened as underdogs of a field goal at 7-4 Pittsburgh. Finally, the Panthers (3-7-1) play at 4-7 Minnesota (-2.5).

With wins so scarce in the South, an upset by Atlanta, Carolina or New Orleans could tilt the division race. And perhaps a surprise win would jump-start Tampa Bay, which is still in with a chance.

Here’s how the NFC stacks up after 12 weeks. The NFL’s standings and tiebreaking rules were cited.

THE BIG SIX

1. Arizona Cardinals (9-2, .818). NFC West leader. Earn first-round bye, home-field advantage.

2. Green Bay Packers (8-3, .727). NFC North leader. Earn first-round bye. Hold No. 2 seed on basis of head-to-head tiebreaker over Philadelphia.

3. Philadelphia Eagles (8-3, .727). NFC East leader. Host Seahawks in wild-card round. NFC East’s top-seeded team on basis of better division record than Dallas (2-0 vs. 2-1).

4. Atlanta Falcons (4-7, .364). NFC South leader. Host Cowboys in wild-card round. NFC South’s top-seeded team on basis of head-to-head win vs. New Orleans.

5. Dallas Cowboys (8-3, .727.). Wild card No. 1.

6. Seattle Seahawks (7-4, .636). Wild card No. 2. NFC West’s second-seeded team on basis of better division record than San Francisco (1-1 vs. 1-2). Seeded ahead of Detroit on basis of better record in common games.

JUST MISSING

7. Detroit Lions (7-4, .636). Earn No. 7 seed on basis of better NFC record than San Francisco (5-2 vs. 6-3).

8. San Francisco 49ers (7-4, .636).

9. Chicago Bears (5-6, .455).

10. New Orleans Saints (4-7, .364). Earn No. 10 seed on basis of better NFC record (4-4) than Vikings (4-5) and Rams (3-5).

11. Minnesota Vikings (4-7, .364). Earn No. 11 seed on basis of head-to-head win vs. St. Louis.

12. St. Louis Rams (4-7, .364).

THE REST OF THE NFC SOUTH

13. Carolina Panthers (3-7-1, .318).

16. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2-9, .182).

 

[Deuce]

Can't ask for a better road than that if you're a WC team. @ Atlanta and (presumably) @ Arizona without Palmer and with a healthy Romo.

Seeing Philly lose would be great, but I'd rather they win and have to get another mudhole stomped into them by GB and Seattle pull the upset and send us there.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

What an abomination it will be when a team under .500 wins a division. The Falcons in at 4-7 is just ridiculous. It would take a serious winning streak at this point for anyone in their division to even make it to .500.

 

[Rev]

What an abomination it will be when a team under .500 wins a division. The Falcons in at 4-7 is just ridiculous. It would take a serious winning streak at this point for anyone in their division to even make it to .500.

Their draft position is going to look funny as well. Sub 500 team drafting in the late teens.

 

[Clay_Allison]

making the playoffs based on divisions is stupid, IMO, the top records in the NFL should make the playoffs period.

 

[boozeman]

making the playoffs based on divisions is stupid, IMO, the top records in the NFL should make the playoffs period.

That is going to be Jerry's battlecry this offseason after Dallas misses the playoffs. Well, we had the sixth best record and didn't make it, dagnabbit.

 

[Cujo]

making the playoffs based on divisions is stupid, IMO, the top records in the NFL should make the playoffs period.

I agree. At the very least, you should have to be at least .500 to get in. Who wants to watch a 6-10 Atlanta team in the playoffs?

 

[boozeman]

I agree. At the very least, you should have to be at least .500 to get in. Who wants to watch a 6-10 Atlanta team in the playoffs?

New Orleans will probably take it with an 8-8 or 9-7 record. That was a pivotal win in Pittsburgh and they can take all of the other teams left on their schedule.

 

[Carp]

making the playoffs based on divisions is stupid, IMO, the top records in the NFL should make the playoffs period.

Division winners should get in...just not get an automatic home game.

 

[Clay_Allison]

Division winners should get in...just not get an automatic home game.

I don't see why you should reward teams for being in a shit division.

 

[Carp]

I don't see why you should reward teams for being in a shit division.

Sure, but this is not an every year occurrence.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Sure, but this is not an every year occurrence.

I agree but with a caveat. If a division winner doesn't meet a minimum winning threshold then a system needs to be in place to substitute a playoff team.

 

[vince]

I agree but with a caveat. If a division winner doesn't meet a minimum winning threshold then a system needs to be in place to substitute a playoff team.

Seriously. Someone with a better record or a team who has beaten the division winner should get in.

 

[Carp]

Seriously. Someone with a better record or a team who has beaten the division winner should get in.

No way...there are still divisions for a reason. If they want to do that, then do away with divisions altogether and just have conferences.

 

[Angrymesscan]

No way...there are still divisions for a reason. If they want to do that, then do away with divisions altogether and just have conferences.

Agreed

 

[Clay_Allison]

No way...there are still divisions for a reason. If they want to do that, then do away with divisions altogether and just have conferences.

I'd be fine with that.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

making the playoffs based on divisions is stupid, IMO, the top records in the NFL should make the playoffs period.

It's why it would be better with less divisions. When you only have 4 teams in each division you are just asking for a shit team to sneak in. Obviously the number of teams works out perfectly with 8 divisions and 4 teams in each division but in my opinion it was better with 6 divisions and more teams in each division. I would almost rather see 8 team divisions with 4 wild card teams.

 

[Clay_Allison]

It's why it would be better with less divisions. When you only have 4 teams in each division you are just asking for a shit team to sneak in. Obviously the number of teams works out perfectly with 8 divisions and 4 teams in each division but in my opinion it was better with 6 divisions and more teams in each division. I would almost rather see 8 team divisions with 4 wild card teams.

If it were 2 divisions with 8 teams each per conference it would be practically impossible for a shit team to sneak in.

 

[jeebs]

Once a decade, a shit team slips in. Yea, 1 out of 120 slots is no reason to start putting in special rules to strip shit division winners of the playoffs.

 

[boozeman]

I don't see why you should reward teams for being in a shit division.

How about not rewarding a team that beats up on a weak division? San Fran did that for over a decade and the Patriots are doing it now.