Expanded Playoffs? Surprise Surprise Surprise

chitown steeler3 · May 22, 2014

Steel_in_DC said: ↑

But then again remember that 7-9 Seattle team beat New Orleans
Click to expand...

Yeah but you were punishing a team that went 11-5 that year by sending them to a 7-9 home just because Seattle won their division. I didn't agree with it then and still don't agree with it now. I know during our superbowl run in 05-06 the same thing happened. We had an 11-5 record and the Jags had a 12-4 record but because the Pats won their division at 10-6 they got a home game.

Steel_in_DC said: ↑

One other point - something they could do is put a rule in that you have to at least have a :500 record to make the playoffs. So even if you won your division at 7-9, if a team existed at 8-8 they would knock you out because you were sub :500. Of course there would have to be a tiebreaker that if multiple teams are 7-9 looking for the last spot, but that probably would rarely if ever happen.
Click to expand...

This I could live with. However it would contradict the division winner which I agree they should make the playoffs, just not be guaranteed a home game.

Bleedsteel · May 22, 2014

Ray D said: ↑

I can't agree with this.

There are years when 1 or 2 divisions are very good from top to bottom and ultra-competitive. They have to play each other twice. They beat the hell out of each other and all the teams end up with lesser records because of it.

The only way to make it that the only thing that matters is your record is to eliminate divisions completely. You never play the same team twice in a year unless you meet them in the playoffs.

But even that opens up a can o' worms. What about strength of schedule? And in the modern era of worst to first (and vice versa) teams, how do you determine the schedule and get it right?

Then the next argument will be "WHAAAA!!!! The Niners went 12-4 and didn't make the playoffs, but the Colts got in with 11-5. Take out conferences!!!!"

If you want to keep rivalries as a focus of the sport, then divisions have to stay. If you have divisions, then winning the division has to mean something. Wildcards are always there for the team who was exceptional, but just happened to have a juggernaught in their same division. Should you be excluded from the playoff for going 13-3 because a team in your division went 15-1? Sure, that's an extreme example, but that's why they're there.

For my money, regardless of how many wildcards they allow, finishing less than 9-7 should be an automatic disqualification.
Click to expand...

OK, Upon further review, this makes complete sense.
And is pretty much how it is now, other than the less than 9-7 record caveat.
What would you do, if none(or only one) of the wildcard contenders was under 9-7?
Take teams from the other conference, who had 9-7 or better records, if they existed, and throw them in the mix?
Yes, the system is flawed, but I really thik it`s about as fair, and good, as it can be.
Why change it at all?
Just to sell more tickets.
I disagree with that idea.
Leave it as is. It`s as good as it gets.
Like others have said. This is FOOTBALL, not baseball, basketball, or hockey.
16 games a season, puts a premium on wins, as does 12 out of 32 teams, making the playoffs.
LEAVE IT ALONE!

Kevin James · May 22, 2014

I am for more games, but not expanded playoffs.

steelersrule6 · May 23, 2014

The expanded playoffs will happen because the NFL is all about the almighty $$$.

Log in or Sign up

Expanded Playoffs? Surprise Surprise Surprise

chitown steeler3 Well-Known Member

Bleedsteel TSF Supporter

Kevin James Well-Known Member

steelersrule6 Well-Known Member

Share This Page