I am told that the NFC's six playoff teams have all been clinched, with only seeding to be finalized. Three division champs are obviously in, and can't be caught by anyone in their respective divisions. Green Bay, Minnesota, and Seattle can't be caught in terms of record by anyone else in the NFC...
...but for the fact that it may happen that both Seattle and Atlanta finish 9-7. But apparently this is irrelevant, and I want to understand why, hence the analytics.
Suppose that Seattle and Atlanta both finish at 9-7. Then per the below, we must examine tiebreaker scenarios (where the two teams are not in the same division).
1) head-to-head (not applicable this year).
2) conference records (in the event that Seattle and Atlanta have tied records at the end of week 17, then they would also have tied 6-6 conference records, requiring...)
3) THE ABSTRUSE "COMMON GAMES" SCENARIO, which I mean to analyze with your help.
It's like in pic related. But notice how each side has a symmetric pair of division games which are conceivably "common" with the other side's single matchup with same.
The general question is: is this how "common games" are actually reckoned, or did I get something wrong/make wrong assumptions? The question has several angles (do the football gods always ensure such symmetric scenarios?)
I'm going to bump this rather persistently for a bit, since I know it's an actual good question deserving of detailed discussion. The language about common games suggests that the 4+ thing is always baked in, since the next tiebreakers get more opaque (not being spelled out).
But do you know anything about common games analyses, anon?
Suppose that one side had not played any of the other teams in the others' division, etc. Or do the schedulers just bake in a certain symmetry these days?
Now I know that you have totally missed the point of the thread, and that I can dismiss your opinion. The thing that you mentioned isn't even relevant, if you look and think a bit.
Because, the point of the thread is that Seattle has (apparently) clinched, while Atlanta is shut out. The hypothetical is not between either of these with Minnesota, but it can only involve these two against each other. And this, exactly because Minnesota already has ten wins.
And so the question is not so much a seeding question as it is a cutoff question. We have apparent knowledge of a cutoff, a shut-out, and that's what I want to understand.
I don't understand the question
If you want to know h definition of common games its opponents that both teams faced on their schedules
Yes the divisional opponents are counted twice
If there isn't a minimum of 4 common games then the step is skipped entirely
It would be possible I forgot how though
Yes this is guaranteed to happen with the way schedules are generated. Your 12 conference games are:
6 in division
4 vs. one particular other division
2 vs. the teams from the other 2 divisions that finished in the same position as you last year. That means that one of three things has to happen:
1)The two teams are in the same division and therefore have 12 or 14 games in common, depending on whether head-to-head = "in common"
2)The two teams finished in the same position in their divisions the previous year, which would force a single head-to-head game, which have broken this tie already
3)The teams finished in different positions in their divisions last year, and you get 6 games in common (the scenario in your image)