I was thinking about the last time we played the Cardinals while I was at the game today.  I remembered that fantastic game Kurt Warner had against us where he went 24 of 26 passing.  I then realized that this was only 4 years ago which was the last time we played the NFC West.  I also realized that NFL scheduling is built on a pretty easy to understand system where your team plays the divsions in the other conference on a rotating basis and you won't play the same division again for 4 years.  Also, the home and away teams are supposed to alternate to where you would only play the same NFC team here in Jax once every 8 years as we would be the away team once in the interim at the 4 year mark.  So what's up with us not playing this game in Arizona and the Seattle game earlier this year in Jacksonville?  We were at home 4 years ago against Arizona and away 4 years ago at Seattle and did not alternate with those two teams as we should have this year.  Has the league given any explanation for this?  Does this happen more than I may have realized?  Does this belong in the NFL at Large forum?   Does anybody care?  Sorry if this was brought up earlier in the year.  I don't recall this being a thread if it was.

---

Yes, this topic does belong in the NFL forum, because it will lead to discussions about many other teams. But nice job pointing that out.

 

My first thought about this scheduling error is was to figure out if this happened to any other NFL teams. Let's start with the rest of the AFC South. The Texans played at Arizona. Did they play there or host the Cardinals four years ago?

 

Next I wondered if it would make sense to also do this for AFC West teams, although that one is more complicated. How do you explain playing at Oakland two consecutive years?

---

Oakland is another AFC team.  We alternate playing the other 3 AFC divisions once every 3 years, but we do play the teams that finished in the same place as we did the previous year from the 2 divisions that we dont play against in a given year which is how we can play Oakland twice in two years.

---

Oakland is another AFC team.  We alternate playing the other 3 AFC divisions once every 3 years, but we do play the teams that finished in the same place as we did the previous year from the 2 divisions that we dont play against in a given year which is how we can play Oakland twice in two years.

 

My question is why didn't we host the Raiders this year and go to San Diego instead?

---

You have to look at the other teams' schedules and history as well, especially when talking about playing the team with the same division finish from the other 2 divisions. Because those 2 teams on the schedule cannot be predicted any further out than one season, the scheduling/history of the other team may play a role in such scenarios.

 

That's just a wild guess, without actually taking the time currently to look at Oakland, Arizona, San Diego scheduling history.

 

Now, as for why we would play Arizona at home in consecutive games 4 years apart, with no game played inbetween as a result of the same-finish-in-the-division schedule rule, I have no clue. And that goes not for Arizona specifically but for for any team that such may be the case with.

---

It would be impossible for the NFL to schedule games so that you alternate home/away games with teams in the other divisions.  That's why. You might could do it with opposing conferences only so that it rotates every four years:


2013:

Texans & Jags play at home vs Cardinals & Rams

Colts & Titans play at home vs Seahawks and 49ers


2017:

Texans & Jags play at home vs Seahawks & 49ers

Colts & Titans play at home vs Cardinals and Rams


and so on...

 

Doing it for both conferences however is a logisitcal problem because you can face say the Raiders two years in a row, and then when the Jags would be scheduled for the west, be expected to have a home game versus the raiders when the alternation would require an away game.  

 

I suppose they don't do it in the inter conference games is because they can't do it in same conference games.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I don't have an answer for that, but I understand why there wouldn't be a rule for these games to automatically alternate who is home and who is away because you could play against two opponents in a given year that you played at home the last time you played them.  If you played them both on the road this year, you'd have more away games than home games.  One of those two opponents must be a home game and the other must be an away game so you can't guarantee an alternating home and away schedule with same place opponents.  You can guarantee a home and away alternating schedule with out of conference opponents and until today I thought that was the case without issue, but obviously there is a reason why they didn't with these two teams this year.  I'm just curious as to why.

---

You have to look at the other teams' schedules and history as well, especially when talking about playing the team with the same division finish from the other 2 divisions. Because those 2 teams on the schedule cannot be predicted any further out than one season, the scheduling/history of the other team may play a role in such scenarios.

 

That's just a wild guess, without actually taking the time currently to look at Oakland, Arizona, San Diego scheduling history.

 

Now, as for why we would play Arizona at home in consecutive games 4 years apart, with no game played inbetween as a result of the same-finish-in-the-division schedule rule, I have no clue. And that goes not for Arizona specifically but for for any team that such may be the case with.

 

Do you know how to look up each team's scheduling history in the last four years?

 

How about this: Forget about the Raiders game last year. Go back to the last time we played against all four AFC West teams. Does the NFL go by that when alternating, instead of simply every time we play against the Raiders?

---

We seem to have been derailed by the Oakland question.  Lets focus on the original question which is why did we not play Arizona in Arizona this year and host Seattle which the schedule should have dictated if I'm correctly understanding how it works?  Anyone have an answer for this?

---

We seem to have been derailed by the Oakland question.  Lets focus on the original question which is why did we not play Arizona in Arizona this year and host Seattle which the schedule should have dictated if I'm correctly understanding how it works?  Anyone have an answer for this?

 

Well, I do remember we went to San Francisco four years ago, and this year the 49ers game was called a "home" game for us. So that alternated. Where did we play against the Rams four years ago? That I cannot remember.

---

I was thinking about the last time we played the Cardinals while I was at the game today.  I remembered that fantastic game Kurt Warner had against us where he went 24 of 26 passing.  I then realized that this was only 4 years ago which was the last time we played the NFC West.  I also realized that NFL scheduling is built on a pretty easy to understand system where your team plays the divsions in the other conference on a rotating basis and you won't play the same division again for 4 years.  Also, the home and away teams are supposed to alternate to where you would only play the same NFC team here in Jax once every 8 years as we would be the away team once in the interim at the 4 year mark.  So what's up with us not playing this game in Arizona and the Seattle game earlier this year in Jacksonville?  We were at home 4 years ago against Arizona and away 4 years ago at Seattle and did not alternate with those two teams as we should have this year.  Has the league given any explanation for this?  Does this happen more than I may have realized?  Does this belong in the NFL at Large forum?   Does anybody care?  Sorry if this was brought up earlier in the year.  I don't recall this being a thread if it was.

There is a multitude of websites you can go to to see who we play in the future. It is a rather easy rotation.

 

http://www.johnnyroadtrip.com/schedules/...e_afce.htm

 

http://www.fbschedules.com/nfl/nfl-footb...edules.php

 

http://www.pslsource.com/future_opponent_schedules

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

There is a multitude of websites you can go to to see who we play in the future. It is a rather easy rotation.

 

http://www.johnnyroadtrip.com/schedules/...e_afce.htm

 

http://www.fbschedules.com/nfl/nfl-footb...edules.php

 

http://www.pslsource.com/future_opponent_schedules

 

Thanks for responding, but none of those links have anything to do with an answer to why we didn't alternate as we should have with Arizona and Seattle this year.  All of those sites show the schedules as they should be in future years.  If you looked at those sites 4 years ago, they should/would have shown Arizona as an away game and Seattle as a home game for us this year.

---

There is a multitude of websites you can go to to see who we play in the future. It is a rather easy rotation.

 

We don't care right now what will happen four years later. The question is about what happened four years ago.

---

This is a total guess but maybe it has something to do with the networks.

---

The reason for the Jaguars playing the Cardinals at home twice in a row and playing the Seahawks on the road twice in a row is when the previous 8 year schedule cycle ended,   the NFL determined that it didn't want teams from other divisions to play two games on the West Coast against teams from the same division.    This was why the Lions played at home against the Chiefs in 2011 after playing them at home in 2007 and why the Lions played at Oakland both those seasons.  

---

My question is why didn't we host the Raiders this year and go to San Diego instead?

Yeah that was weird I was wondering about that too

---

The reason for the Jaguars playing the Cardinals at home twice in a row and playing the Seahawks on the road twice in a row is when the previous 8 year schedule cycle ended, the NFL determined that it didn't want teams from other divisions to play two games on the West Coast against teams from the same division. This was why the Lions played at home against the Chiefs in 2011 after playing them at home in 2007 and why the Lions played at Oakland both those seasons.  

 

Uh, what? That does not make any sense.

---

Uh, what? That does not make any sense.

 

Let me try to clarify this.

 

Arizona,  St. Louis,  San Francisco,  and Seattle are the 4 teams that make up the composition of the NFC West.

 

In 2010,  the new 8 year schedule cycle began.     The AFC South is scheduled to play the NFC West in 2013 and 2017.

 

In 2009,   the Jaguars played on the road in Seattle and San Francisco.

 

The NFL didn't want that to happen again in 2017.    As a result,   the Jaguars went to Seattle in 2013.     Hence,  in 2017,  the trip to San Francisco will be the only Jaguars West Coast trip regarding NFC West opponents.

---

Let me try to clarify this.

 

Arizona,  St. Louis,  San Francisco,  and Seattle are the 4 teams that make up the composition of the NFC West.

 

In 2010,  the new 8 year schedule cycle began.     The AFC South is scheduled to play the NFC West in 2013 and 2017.

 

In 2009,   the Jaguars played on the road in Seattle and San Francisco.

 

The NFL didn't want that to happen again in 2017.    As a result,   the Jaguars went to Seattle in 2013.     Hence,  in 2017,  the trip to San Francisco will be the only Jaguars West Coast trip regarding NFC West opponents.

 

But if it is all about the West Coast, the NFL could have sent the Jaguars to San Diego and the Raiders to Jacksonville to alternate with last year's trip to Oakland.

---

But if it is all about the West Coast, the NFL could have sent the Jaguars to San Diego and the Raiders to Jacksonville to alternate with last year's trip to Oakland.

 

The issue with the NFL is trying to limit the amount of trips teams take to the West Coast in the same season.  Both San Diego and Oakland are on the West Coast,  hence,  the league isn't concerned which of the two sites a team outside the AFC West ends up.      The main thing is that a team from a non-West Coast division doesn't have to take two trips to the West Coast in the same Division.   Hence,  if a team lets say from the AFC South goes to San Diego in the season that the AFC South and AFC West are matched up against each other,   the other AFC West Road trip will be to either Denver or Kansas City.    Then 3 years later,   the trips are reversed.    In the case of interconference games,   the reversal is 4 years later.

---