Ranking the Weirdest potential 17-game records

The "God damn that looks horrible" new records

18.) 12-5

17.) 5-12

16.) 8-9

15.) 9-8

So, here's my thinking of why these are the worst of the new records. There were a few useful indicative records in the old sixteen game format. A team that went 12-4 or better was generally really good. A team 4-12 or worse was generally really bad. Very few teams lucked their way (or unlucked) into those records. Well, now I have literally no idea what to think of a 12-5 team. 12-4 is great, 11-5 is just very good. 12-5 means nothing. Same about a 5-win team. There was such a difference between an 11-loss and 12-loss team. Winning three of four or losing three of four was important. 

Now for the 9-8 and 8-9.... well that should be obvious. Not having a .500 option aside from a 8-8-1 (honestly, I hope we get one of those a year) is brutal. Just terrible. No other sport has an odd number of games for precisely that reason. We need that equilibrium and the NFL rudely took it away from us.

The "yeah... that's gonna take some getting used to" new records

14.) 16-1

13.) 1-16

12.) 10-7

11.) 7-10

So my issues with 10-7 and 7-10 are similar to the 12-5/5-12 awfulness. 10 wins was meaningful, but so was 7 losses in the opposite direction (and vice-versa for the 7-10 recrds). 10-6 was so much different than 9-7 and for whatever reason 10-7 really seems to devalue a 10-win season in my mind. Seven losses just seems bad. On the other hand, a 7-10 record seems to way overstate a 10-loss season. These are +/- 1 records that anyway indicated something pretty middling (10-6/6-10) so ultimatley not the worst change but it really makes a "10-win" season far more meaningless. 

For the 16-1/1-16, its mostly the fact that it resets a "16-win" and "16-loss" season away from being something historic. It will be annoying when the first time a team goes 16-1 there's a weird debate how the 2007 Pats 16-wins are more pure or whatever. Similar for the first 1-16 team not being seen, righfully so, as being as ignominous.

The "Honestly, who cares" new records

10.) 11-6

9.) 2-15

8.) 3-14
7.) 6-11

These are all fine to me. Honestly, I kind of like the weirdness of these - even the 11-6 which I find even more hilariously indicative of a good but not great team than either 10-6 or 11-5. Same for its opposite at 6-11. For the poor 2-15 and 3-14, their positive counterparts are way further up. To me all of these are fairly inoffensive and other than just all of these seeming somewhat weird, I feel like I'll get used to these pretty quickly.

The "actually, this looks fine" new records

6.) 13-4

5.) 4-13

4.) 0-17

3.) 17-0

I honestly have no idea why I like the 13-4/4-13 set so much. I figure it's because you're making a traditional benchmark (4-win, 4-loss) but making it better on the good side (13-4 vs. 12-4) and worse on the bad side (4-12 vs 4-13). Hidden in this aside from the undefeated and win-less records is the fact these are all combinations of numbers sports fans will be very much used to as they're seeding matchups in March Madness.

Now to the two that very much are not seeding matchups. I actually don't mind 17-0 and 0-17 one bit. For one, the number isn't meaningful at all, its the '0'. Undefeated and Winless remain 'undefeated' and 'winless' though if anything they're more polarizing now. I can't wait for the first 17-0 team (if it ever happens) to argue if that team is better than the 16-0 Patriots (I guarantee you people in Boston will not take this well at all). Similarly the first 0-17 team will be a damn hoot. 

The "you know what, this is better!" new records

2.) 14-3

1.) 15-2

Yeah, these are just great. 13-3 was cool, 14-2 is cool. The record in between is still really cool. There's no ambiguity in the record. A team that is 14-3 is so good they can win fourteen games and fallible enouhg to lose three and those are both very meaningful statements. 

For the coup-de-grace, the 15-2 is just a massive improvement, honestly, on both 14-2 and 15-1. I always found 15-1 a bit strange. I would rather go 14-2 than 15-1 (assuming no seeding impact). 15-1 is so close to perfect. 14-2 is human enough that you lost twice, but still awesome enough that you won 14 games. Well, now 15-2 is the same thing but a whole extra win! 15-2 to me is the new gold standard record.