NFL: NFL Owners Want To Expand Playoffs?

[Aftermath]

(12-13-2012 01:40 AM)Drathdon Wrote:  Exactly ATLBound. Goodell doesn't say anything the owners don't want him to. You people (one in particular) painting him as a renegade rebel are buying exactly what the owners are selling. He is there to insulate them from the words they put in his mouth. Attacking him is pointless... they would just replace him with another puppet. Attack the ideas and words, not the person.

More playoff games is a bad idea, but it is not the idea of Goodell alone.

agreed. Goodell is nothing more than a figurehead, but nobody wants to lay the blame on the 32 men behind the curtain.

[Jesus]

Why a London team?

Note that all the teams on the West Coast have struggled over the past 10 years. Too much long distance travel in a game this violent already taxes their bodies. Having 8 teams every year travel to London to play is nuts.

[phocis850]

Owners want more money. With salaries going up, do you blame them for wanting to have a better shot at playoff games?

I'm for it.

[papachaz]

why not just put every team in the playoffs and turn football into a never ending thing like basketball is.......

this is a bad idea, we already experienced just recently a team with a losing record going to the playoffs. I don't want to see losing teams get into the playoffs at all

[RFlagg]

(12-13-2012 10:35 AM)Jesus Wrote:  Why a London team?

Note that all the teams on the West Coast have struggled over the past 10 years. Too much long distance travel in a game this violent already taxes their bodies. Having 8 teams every year travel to London to play is nuts.

Right now, I really don't think adding more teams would be that good of an idea. Look at MLB where the talent level has been spread thin due to expansion to the point that a few years ago contraction was actually on the table.

Personally, if LA was going to get a team, I'd prefer if they let a team move there instead of building a new franchise.

I think London is a bad idea unless you were going to have every road team afterward have a bye week. the London team could never have a Thursday or Monday night game. It's about a 7 hour flight from NY to London, can you imagine a team like San Fran having to travel there? It's an 11 hour flight, they'd have to leave for London on a Monday to get over the jet lag by Sunday. Bad idea.

[AUTiger7222]

More teams in the playoffs would mean more 8-8 and 7-9 and God forbid a 6-10 team in the playoffs. It's bad enough every few years an 8-8 team makes the playoffs and then 2 years ago we had the 7-9 Seahawks in the playoffs. That's just ludacris!

[Aftermath]

(12-13-2012 12:54 PM)AUTiger7222 Wrote:  More teams in the playoffs would mean more 8-8 and 7-9 and God forbid a 6-10 team in the playoffs. It's bad enough every few years an 8-8 team makes the playoffs and then 2 years ago we had the 7-9 Seahawks in the playoffs. That's just ludacris!

Those 7-9 Seahawks stomped all over the Saints that year, regular season records mean very little. Adding 2-4 teams wouldn't mean adding more teams with losing records to the playoffs but it would mean more teams with winning records actually made the playoffs. Like the 11-5 Patriots. 7-9 Seahawks also won their division, so they would be in no matter what unless the entire playoff format was changed. If you add another WC to each conference you still wouldn't see any losing teams make the playoffs unless they were division champs. Even with 16 playoff teams and 4 WCs from each conference most years you would at worst see a team with an 8-8 record get a WC spot.

Edit: Going back 4 years and adding two WC spots to each conference only 5 8-8 teams would make the playoffs, out of 16 extra teams admitted. (no 7-9 teams would make the playoffs as a WC)

[ATLBound]

(12-13-2012 01:21 PM)Aftermath Wrote:  Those 7-9 Seahawks stopped all over the Saints that year, regular season records mean very little. Adding 2-4 teams wouldn't mean adding more teams with losing records to the playoffs but it would mean more teams with winning records actually made the playoffs. Like the 11-5 Patriots. 7-9 Seahawks were also won their division, so they would be in no matter what unless the entire playoff format was changed. If you add another WC to each conference you still wouldn't see any losing teams make the playoffs unless they were division champs. Even with 16 playoff teams and 4 WCs from each conference most years you would at worst see a team with an 8-8 record get a WC spot.

Edit: Going back 4 years and adding two WC spots to each conference only 5 8-8 teams would make the playoffs, out of 16 extra teams admitted. (no 7-9 teams would make the playoffs as a WC)

Good shit Aftermath. I never understood that approach or reasoning either. The 7-9 Seahawks was an anomaly and would have still been an anomaly even with any of these format changes because they were division champs.

AND like you said they WON against the previous year champs no less.

Now 8-8 teams making it don't sit that well with me. I can tolerate it, but it goes back to why I dislike it. It lowers the competitiveness from the regular season. It's wouldn't be that dire to win, but I think I'm still in the middle. More Football playoffs is awesome. I think if a change was made.....just 2 more teams would suffice

[AsylumGuido]

(12-13-2012 01:42 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  Good shit Aftermath. I never understood that approach or reasoning either. The 7-9 Seahawks was an anomaly and would have still been an anomaly even with any of these format changes because they were division champs.

AND like you said they WON against the previous year champs no less.

Now 8-8 teams making it don't sit that well with me. I can tolerate it, but it goes back to why I dislike it. It lowers the competitiveness from the regular season. It's wouldn't be that dire to win, but I think I'm still in the middle. More Football playoffs is awesome. I think if a change was made.....just 2 more teams would suffice

They won because of another stupid rule giving division winners home field. I have very little doubt the outcome would have been different had the game been played at the home of the team with the better record.

[ATLBound]

(12-13-2012 02:06 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  They won because of another stupid rule giving division winners home field. I have very little doubt the outcome would have been different had the game been played at the home of the team with the better record.

You should be over this by now. Its been years. You don't seem over it. They beat you because they played better. Specifically your defense played like they have been playing for the majority of this year. If you can't beat a 7-9 team away, then you don't deserve to be there in the 1st place. That's the approach I would have taken. Don't make excuses.