Template talk:12TeamBracket-NFL

message: I started this template as a hack of Template:Round16, which is primarily used on articles related to the FIFA World Cup and the football (soccer) tournaments. I might modify it in the future so that there are separate parameters for the seed numbers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 13:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

message: If you are going to use this on the Arena Football League articles, you might want to rename it. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Changing the existing references to NFLBracket would be a lot of work, and the name is appropriate because the template is primarily for the NFL.  It happens to work for now because the AFL has changed to an NFL-style playoff format.  The comment in the AFL page clarifies that it works OK with the AFL.  Were we talking about the name by which casual users access the information, I'd agree that it needed to be renamed, but this is an under-the-hood bit, so it's probably not worth the effort. The Monster 03:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename 

message: Is it just me or does the note about re-seeding seem a lot more complicated than it needs to be?
The rule in the NFL is quite simple. The lowest-ranked team remaining always plays against the highest-ranked team remaining, and the highest-ranked team in a game gets to play at home.
Plus, I really don't like the term "re-seeding." Teams keep the seed they had since the beginning of the playoffs. The uncertainty in who plays in which divisional game (and where) stems only from not knowing which teams will be through to that round.62.30.213.185 (talk) 15:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Go take a look at the articles that use this template, and you'll see why it's necessary.  Every year there's someone who tries to move things around because they don't understand the "quite simple" rules for the NFL playoff.  I developed the conditional logic to put this re-seeding information in just long enough to keep the uninformed at bay, but so that it would go away once it's no longer needed.  It's worked fairly well at that since it was put in place. Whether you like "re-seeding" or not, that's the name for it.  A traditional seeded tournament (NCAA basketball, Wimbledon) assigns teams to bracket positions based on initial seeding, allowing upsets to unbalance the bracket.  Professional leagues often re-seed their playoffs at least after the first round; sometimes more. That's what the people who do it call it, so that is what we call it. The Monster (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I think the OP is correct on several points. Teams are not 're-seeded' -- the bracketing adjusts to the seeding after the wild card round. I'm going to be bold & change the wording to match what the parent article National Football League playoffs says, "The NFL does not use a fixed bracket playoff system. The number 1 seed will host the lowest surviving seed from the first round (seed 4, 5 or 6), while the number 2 seed will play the other team (seed 3, 4 or 5). ref."  Thus, I'm using the term re-bracketing (admittedly, not the best term but not as misleading as re-seeding). Neither that article (nor the linked reference) mentions the term "reseed' at all. In fact, this season we see the term "Re-seeding" used appropriately: the proposal to re-assign seeding based on records and not division win, because of a losing team getting home field advantage in round one. I notice that the related article Playoff_format#Reseeding incorrectly uses the term 'reseeding', but I don't see any sources listed there. That page should be fixed. I also wonder if the conditional change to the bracketing should be mentioned once the bracket is set, so as to explain the inconsistencies from year to year. -PrBeacon (talk) 02:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to be more bold and revert your unilateral changes.  "Re-bracketing" is not what anyone calls it.  Everyone calls it "re-seeding".68.94.165.151 (talk) 22:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Follow-up on the above.  I did some googling for "tournament re-bracketing" and found the term is in use, but isn't referring specifically to seeding the highest remaining team against the lowest, etc.  Instead, this was in the context of HS sports, where the re-bracketing was done to reduce the distance the teams and their supporters would have to drive to a game.  I found far more hits for "tournament re-seeding", nearly all of which used it in the sense it's used here.  Several of the top hits were from people dissatisfied when the NCAA Final Four paired two 1-seeds in one semi-final game, and two 5-seeds in the other.  Several of the articles said that the NCAA should not re-seed like the NFL does.  The recent proposal to seed wildcards with better records ahead of low-performing division winners has been called "re-seeding" in a few places, but this seems to be a neologism; use of the term consistent with the language here has been around much longer.68.94.165.151 (talk) 04:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, WP:BRD and all. But I'm still not convinced 're-seeding' is right, and Google hits don't mean much for proper terminology. I know re-bracketing isn't much better, as I said, but the teams are not re-seeded: they retain their seed numbers throughout the playoffs. Just because the improper term has been adopted doesn't make it appropriate here, I think we have a greater obligation to be clear and unambiguous for the reader, especially given the uneasy connections between athletics and academia (ie, proper use of English). -PrBeacon (talk) 07:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-seeding information too complicated 

message: Is there any way of modifying this bracket so that the colours switch over when the NFC is on the top? See 2009–10 NFL playoffs for an example of when this would be necessary. – PeeJay 22:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colours