Talk:2019 NFL season

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2019 NFL season article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 2 November 2018 by reviewer Robert McClenon (talk · contribs).

American football Low‑importance

	American football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject American football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of American football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.American footballWikipedia:WikiProject American footballTemplate:WikiProject American footballAmerican football articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Football League High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

2020 Pro Bowl Page Doesn't Exist[edit]

2020 Pro Bowl page doesn't exist yet and it's tagged, dead link. --Kudosether (talk) 02:10, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Standings Week 4?[edit]

How are the Seahawks behind the Rams in the NFC West standings but ahead of them in playoff seeding? I'd fix it but I don't know the right answer. 71.231.189.174 (talk) 04:16, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Buoniconti's Date of Death[edit]

Nick Buoniconti died on July 30, 2019. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.64.88 (talk) 13:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spygate 2.0?[edit]

Is this really notable enough to warrant its own section in the article as it stands right now? I might've missed some updates, but it seems the only thing that's known right now is that a Pats camera crew filmed the Bengals sideline for 8 minutes during their game, and everything else is pure speculation and allegations. When the league eventually concludes their investigation and presents a ruling this might be a notable enough event to be included. Not to mention the header "Spygate 2.0" really makes it sound like a bigger deal than it currently is. KristofferAG (talk) 13:15, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is appropriate in the notable events section, as it is a "notable event" with properly sourced content. However, there has to be a better title than "Spygate 2.0." Frank Anchor^Talk 14:12, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah given the video that surfaced, Spygate 2.0 might not be a bad name for it. Pending a ruling or at least news from investigation, a different header title might be best for now though. "Patriots taping incident" or something like that? KristofferAG (talk) 21:40, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two Records in same game[edit]

@Frank Anchor has made a decision that Brees' two records in the same game (Career passing TDs and Single-game completion percentage) belong in one paragraph. I am simply wondering why? It is two records. The facts that they happened in one game should be irrelevant. If he passed Manning in Yards and TD in the same game it should be hidden in one paragraph. Both are special in their own right. I am writing here to avoid an edit war and to hope a consensus can be reached. Jdavi333 (talk) 21:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My rationale is that it has been done this way in the past (for 2018, refer to Tom Brady in Week 5, Phillip Rivers in Week 12, or the Patriots in Week 16). Not saying this is right or wrong, and I would be open to discussion to how these multi-record games should be handled. Thanks! Frank Anchor^Talk 21:31, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I guess precedent is an answer, but seems kind of foolish (nothing against you; just the fact that 2 records happened on one play or in one game should be irrelevant). While I cannot go and fix all previous seasons, I think it would be prudent to at least make the chance from now on. Jdavi333 (talk)

Makes sense. I self-reverted my change from earlier today. I may go back and update some of the previous ones like what I had cited, although admittedly not on the top of my to-do list. Frank Anchor^Talk 02:54, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too Much Stuff[edit]

Maybe it's just me but there seems to be way too much information on this page. Some of the sections, like trades, are way too long, and the most important sections, like divisional standings and playoffs, are buried at the bottom. This is just my impression. I apologize for not having constructive suggestions at the moment.BumbleBum (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For free agency, we only include the most notable players to switch teams. Perhaps for trades, we could include only the most notable trades as well (i.e. remove some inconsequential trades, such as the preseason trades of a random third-string player for a 7th round pick, when that player would have otherwise been cut by his original team). Frank Anchor^Talk 13:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I consolidated the "other retirements" section into columns. I think the trades section is largely repetition to the trades from the independent draft article. Perhaps only list player-for-player trades, and link draft pick trades to the draft article. Jdavi333 (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the german wikipedia were all Trades, that did not include a fourth round pick or higher, not included. Could be adopt here too.--JTCEPB (talk) 09:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about San Francisco/Seattle matchup[edit]

If the Sunday night game between Seattle and San Francisco ends in a tie, does Seattle win the division title by virtue of their Week 10 victory over San Francisco? Also would a tie between the Seahawks and 49ers affect which teams get the number 2 and 3 seeds in the NFC in any way? Joshuaharalson (talk) 06:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco is 1 game ahead of Seattle, so why do you think Seattle would win the division with a tie?--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 09:52, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are 3 teams which are 12-3 , so obviously any result of these teams will effect number 1,2 and 3 seeds.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 10:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If they tie SF gets the division on record alone and SEA gets #5 seed. SF would only get #2 seed if GB OR NO lose. SF would only get #1 seed if GB AND NO lose. Jdavi333 (talk) 15:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To add, by the time the SF-SEA game starts, we will already know the results of GB and NO, so we will know by then exactly what each of the 3 possible outcomes (SF win, SEA win, tie) will produce. Jdavi333 (talk) 15:44, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I forgot that the head-to-head-tiebreaker only applies if their records were identical. If Seattle and San Francisco were entering this week with identical records, though, would a tie game have given Seattle the division title based on the fact that Seattle won their first matchup in Week 10? Joshuaharalson (talk) 18:30, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. H2H would be SEA 1-1-0, and SF 0-1-1. Jdavi333 (talk) 20:35, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marshawn Lynch[edit]

If a player 'retires' and comes out of retirement in middle of the season, does he still get included in the retirement section? I would think not, but I can't remember the last time this happened. Witten stayed out the whole season and did not return mid-season. Any thoughts? Jdavi333 (talk) 03:12, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I remember in the NBA 2015-16 when Elton Brand retired before the season but returned for the 76ers mid season. He still stayed in the retirement section but was noted to have returned to play mid season. I did the same for Lynch before he was removed entirely. I think it should return to the way I had it. DrewieStewie (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Denver Oakland Indianapolis NY Jets Tiebreaker[edit]

I understand that Denver wins tiebreaker over Oakland, and then Denver wins tiebreaker versus both Indianapolis and NY Jets. Question: Once Denver is out of the picture, do we break the tie between Indianapolis and NY Jets, OR insert Oakland in the mix and do a tiebreaking procedure involving Oakland, Indianapolis and NY Jets? If it's the latter, I believe the notes should reflect the fact that Oakland beats both Indianapolis & NY Jets (or more accurately, NY Jets drop out first due to Conference Record, and then Oakland wins tiebreaker over Indianapolis due to head-to-head victory) instead of showing Oakland beating Indianapolis first, and then NY Jets after. Sorry if I missed something.MicroManagingAH (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Something like this: Oakland finished ahead of Indianapolis based on head-to-head victory, NY Jets had been initially eliminated based on conference records.MicroManagingAH (talk) 02:22, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

According to league rules, any 3 or 4-team tie must only be between teams in different divisions. So in the case of the end of the 2019 season in the AFC, the tie between OAK and DEN must be broken before anything else. Then DEN, IND< and NYJ are ranked based on the applicable tiebreaker (conference record since there is no H2H sweep). Then, OAK, IND, and NYJ are assessed again from the beginning. In that case, NYJ drops out on conference record, leaving OAK and IND, to be broken by H2H. Finally, IND and NYJ are assessed, to be broken by conference record. Jdavi333 (talk) 16:04, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:1970 NFL season which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]