Trending
Steve Brownlee
I made an off-hand comment in this column last week, saying "So I'm amazed I've even gotten two-thirds of my picks right...." Just a kind of a blase way of saying I'm a pretty good prognosticator, since my usual percentage is me struggling to hit 60% correct.
That was close enough to bragging so that the gambling gods, or oddsmaker gods, or whoever they are, struck me down this week with a "wonderful" 7-9 record.
I didn't think any of my picks were particularly bad -- did you really think the Bears using a third-string quarterback would beat Philly on Monday night? -- but that's the nature of picking with only limited information.
Enough of that. I wanted to get into a topic that's hot right now, even if it isn't about the NFL. It could be, under the right -- or wrong -- circumstances.
It's the seeding in Major League Baseball's playoffs, specifically the American League.
Looking at it in the abstract, it's set up correctly for six teams. The Nos. 1 and 2 seeds get a first-round bye, with the wild-card matchup pitting No. 3 vs. No. 6 and No. 4 vs. No. 5.
And it also seems correct to give the three division winners the top three seeds -- Nos. 1, 2 and 3 -- based on their records, with the bottom three seeds given to the best three records that didn't win their division -- i.e., the wild cards -- again ordered by record.
We've seen things go awry in the NFL with a similar kind of setup, in fact just last year when Carolina won the NFC South with a below-.500 record of 8-9. Despite being easily the worst team in the playoffs record-wise, the Panthers got to host a playoff game, facing the 12-5 L.A. Rams.
The Rams won anyway so it didn't seem so terrible.
This year, apparently just unlucky with how the brackets work out, the top three AL playoff teams record-wise are in one half of the bracket and the three worst that made it in are grouped in the other half.
How? Well, the top two wild-cards are the Yankees (93-68) and Red Sox (87-75), who also happen to have better records than both AL Central winner Cleveland (85-77) and West winner Houston (81-81).
AL East champ Tampa Bay, at 98-64, starts out as No. 1, with the Guardians getting No. 2 and Astros No. 3 as division winners. New York is No. 4 as the top wild card, Boston No. 5 and the Chicago White Sox (84-78) at No. 6.
With the way brackets work, they're set up always assuming the better seed will win. So the No. 3-No. 6 matchup has the assumption that No. 3 will win, thus playing No. 2 next.
Then No. 1 gets the "privilege" of playing the No. 4-No. 5 winner, again we're assuming No. 4 wins.
You now have No. 1 vs. No. 4, along with No. 2 and No. 3 in what I call a "static" bracket, like the NCAA basketball tournaments use. That means, if No. 6 knocks off No. 3 at the start, then it's still No. 1 vs. No. 4 and also No. 2 vs. No. 6.
The NFL does it differently, what I'd call a "dynamic" bracket, shuffling teams so that whoever is the lowest seed left after wild card weekend automatically plays No. 1 next.
So back to the AL. In the divisional round that comes up next, No. 1 Tampa Bay will play No. 4 New York, or if the Yankees lose, No. 5 Boston. Those are the three best records in the AL, not to mention they all play in the same division.
The other side will have No. 2 Cleveland playing either No. 3 Houston, or if the Astros lose, No. 6 White Sox. Those are the three worst records.
Going with the "dynamic" NFL way could, but likely won't fix this, since if Houston wins its wild-card series, it would set up the same matchups -- 2 vs. 3 and either 1 vs. 4 or 1 vs. 5.
The best solution I could think of was what the NHL of NBA did for awhile, though I'm not sure either still does.
The top seed will always be a division winner, so nothing changes there. But with eight qualifying teams in each NHL or NBA conference, their league only guaranteed a top-four, home-court-advantage seed for the three division winners, meaning a non-division-winning wild card could jump up to No. 2 if they actually had the second-best record. Even if the top wild card is better than only one division winner, that wild card moves up to No. 3.
For baseball, I'd want to guarantee the top two division winners get first-round byes and even the worst division winner would be guaranteed No. 4 so it could have home field for the wild-card round.
For the AL, that would've meant there was just one switch, the Yankees becoming No. 3 and Astros No. 4.
But that would've been enough to reshuffle it so New York would've hosted the White Sox this week, while Houston would host Boston. No problem there.
In the next round, the new No. 3 Yankees (or No. 6 White Sox) would take on No. 2 Cleveland, while the new No. 4 Astros (or No. 5 Boston) would play No. 1 Tampa Bay.
The only way the top two teams left would play each other is if the White Sox knock off the Yankees in the wild card round. And it wouldn't be the two best records meeting, just the two best that survived the initial round.
There's other scenarios that could work, even simply ordering the teams by record regardless of whether they're a division winner, but then what's the point of having divisions?
Now let's look at the NFL this week:
Today, 8:15 p.m.
Pittsburgh at Cleveland -- A pair of teams that each beat better-regarded squads last week. On a hunch that a still-quality Browns' defense will hound 42-year-old Aaron Rodgers into mistakes, give me the Browns, 22-19.
Sunday, 9:30 a.m.
Indianapolis vs. Washington, at London -- Our first European game, giving us that "morning tea" contest that will be repeated over and over this fall.
Here's two more teams that pulled off upsets last week, the Colts taking down Houston being a mild one, and Washington knocking off Seattle a major one. Likely the Commanders are still without Jayden Daniels, so give me the Colts, 24-20.
Sunday, 1 p.m.
Arizona at New York Giants -- I don't trust Giants QB Jameis Winston not to do something dumb to blow it for his team, and it's too early to get newly acquired J.J. McCarthy out on the field, so I'll take the Cardinals, 23-17.
Dallas at Houston -- The Texans got their defense together last week, looking at the 19 points given up in their loss, and the Cowboys' sieve of a defense will take care of making Houston's often-clunky offense look like a well-oiled machine. Texans, 28-21.
Green Bay at Tampa Bay -- While Jayden Daniels won't play QB for Washington, it looks like the similar-sounding Jalon Daniels will be behind center for the Buccaneers.
Who's he? An undrafted rookie who's been thrust into the starter's role after Baker Mayfield dislocated the thumb on his throwing hand on Sunday.
Just the antidote for Green Bays' defensive struggles. Packers, 30-20.
Jacksonville at Cincinnati -- This week's first few games pitted teams coming off upset victories. Here's a pair of teams rather up and down, even with both at 2-1. Jacksonville's highs seem higher, so I'll take the Jaguars, 34-29.
Los Angeles Rams at Philadelphia -- Two major disappointments last week, though at least L.A. kept it close while playing against a first-string QB. Rams, 27-17.
New York Jets at Chicago -- Not matter who coach Ben Johnson picks to play QB, things look good for Chicago right now. Bears, 27-16.
New England at Buffalo -- On the opposite end of the spectrum, Patriots QB Drake Maye looks flummoxed, or frustrated, or just pressured a lot. And that seems like it would be hard to fix in one week. Bills, 31-21.
Tennessee at Baltimore -- Speaking of being hard to fix in one week, Northern Michigan University grad Robert Saleh seems to have a season-long project trying to lift up the Titans to respectability. Ravens, 33-22.
Sunday, 4 p.m.
Miami at Minnesota -- The Dolphins lost their top running back De'Von Achane on Sunday -- I didn't know they had a top anything the way they've played. Vikings, 34-17.
Denver at San Francisco -- The 49ers are back filling up the injury report again. Haven't they heard of drinking milk to build strong bones? Broncos, 30-26.
Kansas City at Las Vegas -- Here's where I apply the old "If a team doesn't look like they should be 4-0, they won't be 4-0." Both these squads are 3-0, and you can guess who would surprise me being 4-0. Chiefs, 31-23.
Los Angeles Chargers at Seattle -- The Chargers are in free fall, while Seattle's struggles were just a hiccup last week vs. Washington. Seahawks, 37-28.
Sunday, 8:20 p.m.
Detroit at Carolina -- Keep putting the Lions or Packers in prime time every week, so the Lions won't be blacked out on TV when our two "local" teams play in the same Sunday window.
I was ready to pick against the Lions, but then I saw that Carolina has almost the same injury problems with its secondary as Detroit. So in a shootut, Lions, 41-39.
Monday, 8:15 p.m.
Atlanta at New Orleans -- Based on last week, the Falcons would be everyone's pick. But using my theory of "reverse momentum," give me the Saints, 24-20.
Last week
7-9, 44%. Season -- 30-18, 63%.
Journal Sports Editor Steve Brownlee's email address is sbrownlee@miningjournal.net.