NFL: NFL Owners Want To Expand Playoffs?

[Aftermath]

If Lynch had a bounty on him he wouldn't have made it past the LOS

[ATLBound]

Their Super Bowl is too recent for me to go along with that, but once we win in the SuperDome then swanlee you can post what u said a million times

[AsylumGuido]

(12-13-2012 06:05 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  Their Super Bowl is too recent for me to go along with that, but once we win in the SuperDome then swanlee you can post what u said a million times

That is possible given the Super Bowl is played in the Superdome every five years or so.

[AUTiger7222]

(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)

Get this. If the 16 team playoff format had been in place since 2000 we would have had 10 addition 8-8 teams in the playoffs. That's pathetic.

Like I said you can count on 1 hand the number of teams that have won 10 or 11 games and not made the playoffs under the current format that took place in 1990.

1991 - 49ers (10-6)
2007 - Browns (10-6)
2008 - Patriots (11-5)
2010 - Buccaneers (10-6)

It just doesn't happen enough to warrant changing the playoff format. The NFL doesn't need to become the NBA and NHL where half the teams make the playoffs and teams with .500 and losing records are rewarded for being mediocre.

[ATLBound]

(12-13-2012 06:38 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  That is possible given the Super Bowl is played in the Superdome every five years or so.

Thanks....that means we can do it multiple times.

[juraitwaluzka]

(12-13-2012 06:44 PM)AUTiger7222 Wrote:  Get this. If the 16 team playoff format had been in place since 2000 we would have had 10 addition 8-8 teams in the playoffs. That's pathetic.

Like I said you can count on 1 hand the number of teams that have won 10 or 11 games and not made the playoffs under the current format that took place in 1990.

1991 - 49ers (10-6)
2007 - Browns (10-6)
2008 - Patriots (11-5)
2010 - Buccaneers (10-6)

It just doesn't happen enough to warrant changing the playoff format. The NFL doesn't need to become the NBA and NHL where half the teams make the playoffs and teams with .500 and losing records are rewarded for being mediocre.

I agree,I think it would make it more of a crapshoot and diminish the importance of the regular season.

[Aftermath]

(12-13-2012 06:44 PM)AUTiger7222 Wrote:  Get this. If the 16 team playoff format had been in place since 2000 we would have had 10 addition 8-8 teams in the playoffs. That's pathetic.

Like I said you can count on 1 hand the number of teams that have won 10 or 11 games and not made the playoffs under the current format that took place in 1990.

1991 - 49ers (10-6)
2007 - Browns (10-6)
2008 - Patriots (11-5)
2010 - Buccaneers (10-6)

It just doesn't happen enough to warrant changing the playoff format. The NFL doesn't need to become the NBA and NHL where half the teams make the playoffs and teams with .500 and losing records are rewarded for being mediocre.

2010-Giants (10-6)
2005-Chiefs (10-6)
2003-Dolphins (10-6)

Quote:Get this. If the 16 team playoff format had been in place since 2000 we would have had 10 addition 8-8 teams in the playoffs. That's pathetic.

so of the 44 extra playoff teams that we would have had, 10 would have been 8-8?

Lets not forget that there were not 32 teams in 2000 or 2001, thus skewing the results.

If it were up to me I would get rid of the conference and divisional considerations and the top 12-14-16 teams would automatically get to the playoffs, with records determining HFA and the seeding method (best plays worst) staying the same. While I think that 16 is a bit too much in a 32 team league I think that 14 would be perfectly acceptable, with a 1 team playoff it would be incredibly rare for an 8-8 or worse teams to make the playoffs as a wild card and it would mean a tone of more excitement during the last few weeks of the season.

[/quote]Right now in the NFC alone the Skins, Cowboys and Vikings are on the outside looking in at 7-6, if either loses another game they are likely done and we get a few more games that don't matter much, but if there was another WC slot we would have even more meaningful football towards the end of the season as well as more playoff football. I love seeing a dark horse team fight tooth and nail to make the playoffs and then surprise everyone once they get there.

[AUTiger7222]

(12-13-2012 07:20 PM)Aftermath Wrote:  2010-Giants (10-6)
2005-Chiefs (10-6)
2003-Dolphins (10-6)

so of the 44 extra playoff teams that we would have had, 10 would have been 8-8?

Lets not forget that there were not 32 teams in 2000 or 2001, thus skewing the results.

If it were up to me I would get rid of the conference and divisional considerations and the top 12-14-16 teams would automatically get to the playoffs, with records determining HFA and the seeding method (best plays worst) staying the same. While I think that 16 is a bit too much in a 32 team league I think that 14 would be perfectly acceptable, with a 1 team playoff it would be incredibly rare for an 8-8 or worse teams to make the playoffs as a wild card and it would mean a tone of more excitement during the last few weeks of the season.

Right now in the NFC alone the Skins, Cowboys and Vikings are on the outside looking in at 7-6, if either loses another game they are likely done and we get a few more games that don't matter much, but if there was another WC slot we would have even more meaningful football towards the end of the season as well as more playoff football. I love seeing a dark horse team fight tooth and nail to make the playoffs and then surprise everyone once they get there.

Ok. So 7 teams since 1990 with 10 or 11 wins that missed the playoffs. You bring up the NFC. But have you looked at the AFC? We would have 5-8 teams just 1 game out of the 8th playoff spot. Do you really want to see a potentially 7-9 team in the playoffs and quite possibly a 6-10 team? Good grief.

One way to make the rest of the season more meaning full is to seed teams 1-6 regardless of division. And Chris Mortensen said on NFL Live that it will happen possibly as soon as 2014 and than reseeding the playoffs was part of the discussion. That would be great.

The Falcons had a better record than the Cardinals in 2008 but had to play on the road and last year the Falcons had a better record than the Giants and had to play on the road.

[Aftermath]

(12-13-2012 07:45 PM)AUTiger7222 Wrote:  Ok. So 7 teams since 1990 with 10 or 11 wins that missed the playoffs. You bring up the NFC. But have you looked at the AFC? We would have 5-8 teams just 1 game out of the 8th playoff spot. Do you really want to see a potentially 7-9 team in the playoffs and quite possibly a 6-10 team? Good grief.

One way to make the rest of the season more meaning full is to seed teams 1-6 regardless of division. And Chris Mortensen said on NFL Live that it will happen possibly as soon as 2014 and than reseeding the playoffs was part of the discussion. That would be great.

The Falcons had a better record than the Cardinals in 2008 but had to play on the road and last year the Falcons had a better record than the Giants and had to play on the road.

I really hope this happens, but it would be even better if they eliminate conference seeding and seed all 12 teams together, that way as you said you don't have a 6-10 AFC team make the playoffs when there is a 9-7 or 10-6 NFC team sitting on the sidelines. I don't like the idea of each division automatically getting a playoff spot regardless of record and I don't like the idea of two wildcards being rewarded to each conference regardless of record. Having each division winner automatically awarded with a home playoff game is absolutely retarded IMO and needs to be changed ASAP.

[ATLBound]

Both of yall make compelling arguments and Im in the middle, but in my opinion Aftermath's opinion is more compelling.

I typed this before seeing the option of changing the seeding to best record instead of divisional rankings for the top 4.

The only bad side to that is strength of schedule. Howdo we combat that?