Every NFL season ends with 16 division rivalries. This season opens with a bunch of them.

Eight of the 16 games to be played in Week 1 feature teams that reside in the same division.

In addition to Cowboys-Eagles on Thursday night and Friday's Chiefs-Chargers game from Brazil, the Bengals visit the Browns, the Commanders host the Giants, the Lions go to Green Bay, the Falcons host the Bucs, and the 49ers face the Seahawks in Seattle. The slate ends with Vikings-Bears from Soldier Field on Monday night.

With the NFL rejecting Detroit's league-instigated proposal for playoff reseeding, division titles remain very important. The champion hosts a playoff game — and is guaranteed one of the top four of seven seeds in the conference.

Although reseeding of some sort feels inevitable based on things we've heard from folks in the know, there's an argument to be made that, in a long season with limited preparation time, games with higher stakes than usual should be delayed until teams get their sea legs.

By January, most if not all teams will be very different than they were in Week 1. To have the outcome of a game from four months earlier provide the difference when it comes to the all-important division title, what's the harm in nudging division contests a little deeper into the calendar?

The league should want games with extra importance to the final division standings to be played when the teams are closer to what they're ultimately going to be. As it stands, one or more of the eight games played this weekend could have major significance when the calendar flips to 2026 — and when the dust prepares to settle on the final standings.

The fact that the NFL always ends the season with division rivalries essentially acknowledges that point. So why not defer the division games until Week 4 or 5?