NFL NFL Considering Changing Playoff Format

[Jem]

I believe the Nfl should consider scrapping the 1st round bye and having 8 teams in the playoffs in each conference and having a seeded knockouot or having the same playoff system as the AFL because too often you get what has happened this year in the AFC where there are 7 excellent teams (Indianapolis, New England, Jacksonville, Denver, San Diego, Cincinatti and Baltimore.) One of these teams is going to miss the playoffs but they are all very capable of making it to at least the AFC championship game. Some might argue that this method would not be as motivational to finish top 2 in the conference biut i think that it gives them to much of an advantage anyway.

What are other people's thoughts on this?

 

[JeffDunne]

It will change because networks and team owners will force it.

Not sure if the NFL would ever introduced a system like the AFL simply because of the concept of a 'second-chance' in playoffs. Although I suspect Indy might be warm to the suggestion.

I have no doubt in the coming seasons we'll see more teams in the playoffs simply to satisfy the networks and team owners.

Personally, I like the present format. IMO if you can't win your division then you really don't deserve a crack at the title. But having two wild card spots allows for teams that are in tougher conferences to still have a crack when they are better than teams that win a soft conference (like the NFC West).

 

[usalion]

As JD says, TV will be the deciding factor....but how would you do it- wild cards outside the division winners, or the top two from each division? Remember, you have an unbalanced schedule, with only the divisional games the same for the teams.

I like the teams with the best records getting a week off- at that point of the season it can mean a lot- plus having the home field edge- they have earned that, for the most part.

8-8 teams may be what Pete rozelle envisioned with parity in the NFL, but it can make for some pretty dull games. You MIGHT have an exception this year in the AFC, but a lot can happen in the next 3 months.

 

[Woodson]

I believe the Nfl should consider scrapping the 1st round bye and having 8 teams in the playoffs in each conference and having a seeded knockouot or having the same playoff system as the AFL because too often you get what has happened this year in the AFC where there are 7 excellent teams (Indianapolis, New England, Jacksonville, Denver, San Diego, Cincinatti and Baltimore.) One of these teams is going to miss the playoffs but they are all very capable of making it to at least the AFC championship game. Some might argue that this method would not be as motivational to finish top 2 in the conference biut i think that it gives them to much of an advantage anyway.

What are other people's thoughts on this?

I like it the way it is thanx. The owners don't have an issue with it so why should you? It's always been said, the play-offs is different contest, it's PRESSURE, CUT THROAT, no turning back, the Steelers started thier play-offs in Week 13 last season, one loss and it was see ya later amigo.

(what a great ride that was..... beats losing 2 games all season and nothing to show for it )

The AFL have got the final 8 system finally correct but why do 6-8th teams merit a chance?? I'll tell you why >>> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Bring back the final 5 and hand 6th spot the FIRST draft pick. That's my AFL
change I'd like to see, AFL reward mediority. Pffft! Time to move on. Shape up or ship out.

 

[kimirocks]

Personally, I like the present format. IMO if you can't win your division then you really don't deserve a crack at the title. But having two wild card spots allows for teams that are in tougher conferences to still have a crack when they are better than teams that win a soft conference (like the NFC West).

Don't bag on my conference boy. I won't be surprised if both Seattle and the Rammies both make it to January, wouldn't be too soft then would it?

 

[JeffDunne]

The Rams? LOL

The same team that lost to the 49ers and has managed wins over Arizona (just and very, very lucky), Detroit (gave up 34 pts to the Lions) and Green Bay (again just).

I can't believe the crap I keep reading about Haslett and their defense. Jim showed in NO he's not the defensive guru people like to believe. Ok, he did a good job in Pittsburg - FFS who hasn't in their system?

Rams have Seattle, @San Deigo, Kansas City, @ Seattle, @Carolina over the next 6 weeks - they might win one.

It wasn't that long ago that Seattle won the divison 9-7, and for most of that season it looked as though a losing record would win the division. Seattle had a good season last year, but other than that in recent times this division has been full of heartbreakers.

 

[kimirocks]

The Rams? LOL

The same team that lost to the 49ers and has managed wins over Arizona (just and very, very lucky), Detroit (gave up 34 pts to the Lions) and Green Bay (again just).

I can't believe the crap I keep reading about Haslett and their defense. Jim showed in NO he's not the defensive guru people like to believe. Ok, he did a good job in Pittsburg - FFS who hasn't in their system?

Rams have Seattle, @San Deigo, Kansas City, @ Seattle, @Carolina over the next 6 weeks - they might win one.

It wasn't that long ago that Seattle won the divison 9-7, and for most of that season it looked as though a losing record would win the division. Seattle had a good season last year, but other than that in recent times this division has been full of heartbreakers.

Bias takes a team a long way. You can't argue with 4-1. We'll see tomorrow against Seattle. Then 5-1, only gotta win 4 more to be a good chance. I expect the Rams to lose to Seattle away, and Carolina away, and expect wins against Kansas and San Diego. Could take it to 5-5 or could be 9-1, with Linehan I just don't know. They aren't the same team as their Superbowl years, a little older yeah, but whilst Bulger and Holt are out there, the job will get done. Just need some god damn protection.

 

[Exe Gesis]

This may seem a little fresh, but I trust the NFL and American sports administration to find the very best rules and systems in the world.

The AFL playoff format is hindered with problems. While Australian Football is plummeting further into worsening on-field rules.

As for 8 teams from each conference, that would promote mediocrity (1 to 3 teams in each conference with .500 or less record), and doesn't give a bye reward to the 'z' team.

However, we all have ideas and I don't mock you for that at all. I often think of newer ways the NFL could organize their playoff format.

I came up with a few...

a) Re-organize the whole NFL, not into conferences, but divisions. East, West, South, North. 8 teams per division. 14 games against division rivals, plus 4 games against another half of a division which alternates every year. Or, 14 + all 8 from another division. Remove preseason games. Come playoff time, the top two teams from each division proceed to playoffs. Knock-out system, home-field advantage, culminates in Superbowl.

b) No divisions, just two conferences of 16 teams. A team plays 15 games against teams in their conference, and 4 from the other conference, which alternates every year. No preseason. Top 4 teams from each conference proceed to playoffs. Knock-out format, home-field advantage, culminates in Superbowl.

c) Don't mess with the current system and leave all the existing long-time rivalries as is.

 

[Jem]

I like it the way it is thanx. The owners don't have an issue with it so why should you? It's always been said, the play-offs is different contest, it's PRESSURE, CUT THROAT, no turning back, the Steelers started thier play-offs in Week 13 last season, one loss and it was see ya later amigo.

(what a great ride that was..... beats losing 2 games all season and nothing to show for it )

The AFL have got the final 8 system finally correct but why do 6-8th teams merit a chance?? I'll tell you why >>> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Bring back the final 5 and hand 6th spot the FIRST draft pick. That's my AFL
change I'd like to see, AFL reward mediority. Pffft! Time to move on. Shape up or ship out.

Fair points but i believe some slight tweaks at least are required because remember the current format was originaly based on three divisions, not four. I am happy with the current system though, I just think it's a little unfair that one great team that would make the playoffs easily in the NFC will miss them in the AFC.

 

[Woodson]

Fair points but i believe some slight tweaks at least are required because remember the current format was originaly based on three divisions, not four. I am happy with the current system though, I just think it's a little unfair that one great team that would make the playoffs easily in the NFC will miss them in the AFC.

I hear what you're saying S=H, BUT it's been the same story for the last 5 seasons really. That 'great AFC team' is just good enough to beat out '2 or 3 AFC teams' that arguably merit a fair shot at the play-offs IF they had pinched a few close games along the way. Why did San Diego miss last season you ask? Loss to Miami!! That result basically opened the gates for Pittsburgh to streamroll thru. Miami finished with a flurry last season after a slow start. San Diego were Ok last season, not great! If San Diego didn't fire up this season, Marty Schottenhiemer would be a gonna by now. You've just come along and cranked the Chargers up as a great team, they still have to win the West to become a great team, big question I put to you S=H is whether Cinci is a play-off bound team in your opinion?

The other thing you've just to understand S=H, Defences WIN Championships more than not, the NFC don't have as many consistant team D's than the AFC and that's why we have the AFC dominance. Bears are undefeated for that simple reason.

 

[Jem]

Fair Points Woodson having four extra teams would certainly take away a lot of excitement for the last 4-5 weeksnof the regular season. What would you think of only having the top team in each conference having a bye and there being three wild cards? The playoff races would remain, it would give the top two teams in each conference more incentive to get first and the quality of the playoff games would still be be competitive. (Last year the 2vs7 matchups would have been KC at Denver and Dallas at Chicago)

As for the Bengals playoff hopes I say the next 7 weeks are crucial. The have to play Baltimore twice, Altanta, Carolina, San Diego, New Orleans and Cleveland. Out of all those games the one against the Browns is the only one they would be expected to win but after last week against Tampa even that game could be doubtful. By the end of Week 13 they could be 4-8 or even 3-9 and be well out of the playoffs. However if Palmer and the Johnsons can step up and if they can get some big plays out of players like Keiwan Ratliff on defence they could well end up being 8-4 and still in playoff contention. Right now i'd say they are unlikely to make the playoffs mainly because of their weak defence. Once again the oldest NFL cliche that you mentioned "Defence wins championships" will prevail.​

 

[Woodson]

Fair Points Woodson having four extra teams would certainly take away a lot of excitement for the last 4-5 weeksnof the regular season. What would you think of only having the top team in each conference having a bye and there being three wild cards? The playoff races would remain, it would give the top two teams in each conference more incentive to get first and the quality of the playoff games would still be be competitive. (Last year the 2vs7 matchups would have been KC at Denver and Dallas at Chicago)

So you prefer to have an expanded play-off series with teams that barely got a 8-8 record? not to my liking. The play-offs would stretch an extra couple weeks, think of the extra 'irrevelavent' games that would need to be played just to get to the Big Dance. Last season, my 11-5 Steelers had THREE TOUGH ROAD games that were acid tests and you want to give 8-8? teams a show as well? that's just silly, who wants to watch blow-outs in play-offs? We do get them enough as it is and this 'extended teams' just stretches the saga.

I believe that the NFL have got it right. You lose in play-offs, YOU GO HOME, not be given 'willy-nilly' second chances like a 5th place/rank team can lose and still given a chace to play off in the GF ie: Adeliade 1998

The NRL have that formula atm that just sucks. Back to the NFL, the 11-5 Broncos of the 80's MISSED the play-offs as I recall and AFC Central champs at the time >> Cleveland, got thru with a 8-8 record !!! That really sucked and makes this div structure very unbalanced but that was when there was two wild card teams to three divisions. Since then, more teams have joined the comp and the extra wildcard has been gifted to each conference and fair enough. I like the NFL play-off structure as it is.

 

[haterade]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/nf...e-change-the-playoff-structure-?urn=nfl,65500

Roger Goodell wants to make it so that in the first round of the playoffs, division winners wouldn't automatically have a home game. If they played a wildcard team that had a better record, the wild card team would get the game in their own crib.

The idea is that it gives teams more incentive to play hard throughout the end of the regular season, so we don't end up seeing something like a Charlie Batch vs. Jim Sorgi matchup in Week 17.

For example, this year, the Bucs couldn't have sat on their hands in weeks 16 and 17, knowing they had their division sewn up. If they wanted to play a home game in the first round, they'd have had to take the field in Week 17 with a line-up a with a little more firepower than was brought to the table by Luke McCown, Michael Bennett, and Chad Lucas...

 

[Alberton_Magpie]

not a bad Idea but its not highly common that a wildcard team would have a better record than and divisonal champion, might happen once a year.

 

[Dagless]

Leave it as it is... I'm sure Giants and Steeler fans will agree

Nothing going to happen but it SOUNDS like the right thing to do... Don't raise their seeding but let them play at home...

 

[SriLankanCat]

Great idea...i hate seeing teams rest their big guns...its not fair on oither teams genuinely chasing a playoff spot when the other teams play weakened teams

 

[JeffDunne]

I think it's a tad ironic the NFL are worried about teams resting players in the lead up to the playoffs but they want to introduce a 17th game.

My first reaction is leave it as is, but I see their logic (to a point).

I'd be pissed though if we won the division and had to play on the road because a team with a WC is in a division with 2 easy beats and an easy schedule.

 

[sjsdu]

Not a bad idea, but I don't see it happening. For years, they have toyed with the idea of seeding the teams 1-12 and doing away with the NFC v AFC format. This was ideal in the mid 90's when the best 2 teams were SF and Dallas.
Goodell isn't afraid to make bold moves, so who knows this might happen.
Honestly, does a 9-7 division winner deserve to have a home game against a 12-4 wildcard team? Not really. It has happened before, though.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I think Goodell is crazy.
If he wants to change this then there's no point even having divisions!
One example of a flaw in his thinking is that a wild card team at 10-6 could have had a very easy schedule and division, while a division winner at 9-7 could have had a very tough schedule and division.
Goodell with his international week 17 games, superbowls outside of America, pro-bowls outside of Hawai'i, etc, is losing the plot imo trying to leave a mark on the NFL....instead of actually just doing a good job as commissioner and worrying about more important things like, you know, Spygate.

 

[FootyJunkie]

Teams seeded 3 and 4 could find that winning their division produced no benefit over a wild card club which didn't win its division. It's a quirky little anomaly that does exist in American sports playoff systems where you have divisions within conferences, I agree, but can't see it changing.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

I think Goodell is crazy.
If he wants to change this then there's no point even having divisions!
One example of a flaw in his thinking is that a wild card team at 10-6 could have had a very easy schedule and division, while a division winner at 9-7 could have had a very tough schedule and division.
Goodell with his international week 17 games, superbowls outside of America, pro-bowls outside of Hawai'i, etc, is losing the plot imo trying to leave a mark on the NFL....instead of actually just doing a good job as commissioner and worrying about more important things like, you know, Spygate.

But that could easily happen the other way. Look at this season.
Giants 10-6 Bucs 9-7. Giants in a way tougher division , yet Tampa gets home field advantage. Even the Redskins with 9-7 deserved home field more than Bucs.

In the AFC, Jags were wc & finished 11-5 in a very tough division, yet play at Pittsburgh 10-6 who were in a crap division.

This is a great idea by the NFL. Should have happened years ago.
I've said it before here but winning a division is overrated.

 

[mcgarnacle]

But that could easily happen the other way. Look at this season.
Giants 10-6 Bucs 9-7. Giants in a way tougher division , yet Tampa gets home field advantage. Even the Redskins with 9-7 deserved home field more than Bucs.

In the AFC, Jags were wc & finished 11-5 in a very tough division, yet play at Pittsburgh 10-6 who were in a crap division.

This is a great idea by the NFL. Should have happened years ago.
I've said it before here but winning a division is overrated.

imo, a team should be rewarded for winning their division. each division has its own unique schedule and its difficult comparing records of teams in one division to those in another (the old apples with oranges argument), unless ofcourse, the teams feature in each others schedule.

the only time id want to see a wild-card receive home field adv over a division winner, is if the wild card already defeated that division winner during the regular season and the wildcard's record is better than the division winner's. in this case, their rights to the advantage are extremely valid.....such as the jags over the steelers this past season. but i would still be reluctant to introduce it.

 

[mcgarnacle]

and i completely agree with this passage.....

However, if it was put to a vote, I'd vote no, and here's why: If there's a coach out there who saw the Colts and Bucs tank the end of this season, and saw the Giants put forth a gargantuan effort with nothing to play for in Week 17, and then saw what happened in the playoffs, and that coach is still dumb enough to be letting his players collect rust over the last two weeks of the season, then I'm opposed to the league stepping in and saving this coach from his own idiocy.

i wouldnt be giving my QB the green light to holiday in Mexico for a few days on a bye week during the playoffs either.......

 

[Exe Gesis]

But that could easily happen the other way. Look at this season.
Giants 10-6 Bucs 9-7. Giants in a way tougher division , yet Tampa gets home field advantage. Even the Redskins with 9-7 deserved home field more than Bucs.

In the AFC, Jags were wc & finished 11-5 in a very tough division, yet play at Pittsburgh 10-6 who were in a crap division.

This is a great idea by the NFL. Should have happened years ago.
I've said it before here but winning a division is overrated.

Ditto what mcgarnacle said, for me.
Each division is its own special dynamic, schedules, etc.
While the point you bolded CAN go both ways, that's why there's no point changing the rule! Because it will happen both ways under the current system too! Either way you do it it makes no difference.
So it just ends up coming down, again, to what HCs decide to do -- tank and rest stars, or play hard in preparation for the playoffs.

 

[usalion]

Ditto what mcgarnacle said, for me.
Each division is its own special dynamic, schedules, etc.
While the point you bolded CAN go both ways, that's why there's no point changing the rule! Because it will happen both ways under the current system too! Either way you do it it makes no difference.
So it just ends up coming down, again, to what HCs decide to do -- tank and rest stars, or play hard in preparation for the playoffs.

So why not reward the teams with the best record then? You win the games, you deserve it, right? Make the division winners earn their HF by having good records. With divisions of 4-5 teams, you can't really moan too much

As for your other comments on RG....

1) International games- why not? Spread the market around and sell the NFL product in other countries. You've got fans watching in places like Canada, the UK, Japan, China, Australia....scheduling can be arranged without too much hassle. You'll note the EPL is looking at doing the same thing now.

2) Super bowl outside the US- certainly not as hidebound as the Vics insisting the GF will stay at the MCG forever- TBH, I don't see this happening until after there are NFL franchises well established outside the US, which is still some way off....but in the fullness of time, why not?

3) Pro Bowl- well, nobody gives a damn about the game anyway, so who cares where you p[lay it or when?