T master Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 @andrewperloff Dan Patrick says he's been told that the NFL will add a wild card team in both conferences. Good idea? MO MONEY - MO MONEY - MO MONEY !! The NFL isn't greedy though they just want the fans to enjoy more games !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Can't see franchises being in favor of two less games without some means of replacing the lost ticket sales/luxury box revenue. rather than dividing by 20 you divide by 18, no revenue is lost & you have 2 extra playoff games to pad the coffers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester43 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 that's just get people to shut up and get off their back about their STUPID four-team divisions. They don't want to admit it was a mistake, so they are just trying to create a way to let the team in that is getting screwed by their format. Personally, I don't want the playoffs watered down any more. I want the Cards in INSTEAD of Green Bay, not along with them. Go to 4 eight-team divisions, with two BYE teams (the division champs) and 4 wildcards in each conference. I have had the whole thing worked out for years- the divisions, the scheduling, the playoff format, everything...all i need now is for the NFL to pay me for my brilliant ideas and implement them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I am a huge fan of this idea adding another team and making the #1 the only team with a bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Jester: how are the playoffs "watered down"? That GB game was a fabulous game and came down to the wire. Looking at standings, GB should have lost by 20 against SF - that's what makes the NFL different than other leagues. Much the same way an "inferior" SD went to Cincy and clobbered them over the head and stole their lunch money. Edited January 6, 2014 by bobobonators Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Good idea with one caveat: the NFL simply has to change the seeding such that the best records get the home games. No reason at all for 12-4 San Francisco to have to go to frigid Green Bay, who snuck (yes, I know that's not technically a real word) in with their 8-7-1 record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Good idea with one caveat: the NFL simply has to change the seeding such that the best records get the home games. No reason at all for 12-4 San Francisco to have to go to frigid Green Bay, who snuck (yes, I know that's not technically a real word) in with their 8-7-1 record. I hate that idea. If SF wanted a home game, they should have beat Seattle for the division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 It is in the aspect of a 8-7-1 Packers team made it into the playoffs, while the 10-6 Cardinals are sitting at home. Hell, a couple years ago a 7-9 Seahawks team made the playoffs. I get this line of reasoning, but... the Cards finished 2-4 in their division. If they had a winning divisional record, they'd be in the playoffs. If you don't want weak divisional leaders in the palyoffs, then get rid of the 4 divisions. But, this notion that its not fair some team with a good record didn't make the playoffs is crap. Win your division and you're in, that's the way the system was set up and it has served the NFL very well for over 50yrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Good idea with one caveat: the NFL simply has to change the seeding such that the best records get the home games. No reason at all for 12-4 San Francisco to have to go to frigid Green Bay, who snuck (yes, I know that's not technically a real word) in with their 8-7-1 record. I generally agree with this. However, it's the NFL rewarding the division winners. It gives a chance to some poor sap team to have a home playoff game. It's good for the league and the fans in general. And like Tom said, if you don't like it, win your division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) The NFL is working night and day to fix something that ain't broke. Exactly Extending the season and expanding the playoffs is a horrible idea Once they expand to 14 teams making the playoffs how long before its 16 and half the freaking league gets in Edited January 6, 2014 by Max997 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I get this line of reasoning, but... the Cards finished 2-4 in their division. If they had a winning divisional record, they'd be in the playoffs. If you don't want weak divisional leaders in the palyoffs, then get rid of the 4 divisions. But, this notion that its not fair some team with a good record didn't make the playoffs is crap. Win your division and you're in, that's the way the system was set up and it has served the NFL very well for over 50yrs. I would agree with this line of reasoning if 50% of a teams games were played within a division. Six games should not be deciding whether a team makes the playoffs, which are called the AFC/NFC playoffs. They finished 6-6 within the NFC, which was better than GB did. Also, winning the division, isn't really winning the division. Cincy finished 3-3 in the division, while Pittsburgh finished 4-2. KC finished 2-4 within the division while the chargers finished 4-2 but KC had the higher Wild Card spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) It is in the aspect of a 8-7-1 Packers team made it into the playoffs, while the 10-6 Cardinals are sitting at home. Hell, a couple years ago a 7-9 Seahawks team made the playoffs. Although it could still happen this is mainly due to when they expanded to 32 teams and having 4 divisions of 4 teams in each conference instead of 3 divisions of 5 teams since it added another div winner and automatic bid Edited January 6, 2014 by Max997 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I would agree with this line of reasoning if 50% of a teams games were played within a division. Six games should not be deciding whether a team makes the playoffs, which are called the AFC/NFC playoffs. They finished 6-6 within the NFC, which was better than GB did. Also, winning the division, isn't really winning the division. Cincy finished 3-3 in the division, while Pittsburgh finished 4-2. KC finished 2-4 within the division while the chargers finished 4-2 but KC had the higher Wild Card spot. Good points, but then it seems the Divisions and scheduling are the problem. Not the playoff seeding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 At the end of the day, it's impossible to have a perfect system. Most reasonable thing to do is that division winner gets home game, regardless of record (SF @ GB for example). There are countless factors that go into a team's W/L record over the season and sometimes one could argue that the 9-7 team that won their division had a much tougher strength of schedule than the team that finished 10-6 and second place in their division. Not saying that was the case this year, but that scenario could occur and then would that really be "fair" to give the 10-6 team a home game over the division winner at 9-7? Not sure. At least this way, it's easily known: win your division and get a home game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Dog Named Kelso Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 At the end of the day, it's impossible to have a perfect system. Most reasonable thing to do is that division winner gets home game, regardless of record (SF @ GB for example). There are countless factors that go into a team's W/L record over the season and sometimes one could argue that the 9-7 team that won their division had a much tougher strength of schedule than the team that finished 10-6 and second place in their division. Not saying that was the case this year, but that scenario could occur and then would that really be "fair" to give the 10-6 team a home game over the division winner at 9-7? Not sure. At least this way, it's easily known: win your division and get a home game. I am not sure that is true. The most reasonable thing to do is not award them a home game but only guarantee them a spot in the playoffs. Once the playoff contenders are set the league should then seed the playoffs awarding the teams with the best records(regardless of being a division winner) the home field and byes. This will also change the dynamic at the end of the season where teams rest players because they can not win their division. Adding another team does not solve the problem of a team with a worse record hosting a better team. And I believe it is a different issue entirely. I am not against the addition of another team but really it does not solve the problem that I believe they are trying to fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) CKLAPKA: Teams don't have exact schedules. If you're going to do what you state, you will then have to take into account strength of schedule if you really do care about "fairness". What would the point be to winnng a division? Might as well do away with them..which might not be a bad thing. Edited January 6, 2014 by bobobonators Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I hate that idea. If SF wanted a home game, they should have beat Seattle for the division. I generally agree with this. However, it's the NFL rewarding the division winners. It gives a chance to some poor sap team to have a home playoff game. It's good for the league and the fans in general. And like Tom said, if you don't like it, win your division. They lost one game to Seattle and won the other 5. If divisional games are so important, shouldn't the 49ers reap a reward for having a BETTER divisional record than Seattle, who went 4-2 in the division? If we want to play the "if you don't like it" card, then my retort is this: best team gets home field advantage, and if you don't like it, don't creep into the playoffs a half-game over 0.500. No team should have to play on the road when they finish tied for the 2nd-best record in the conference in the league's best division...that's crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Hope they just leave it as is. Also, what's kind of sad is that if they had this extra wild card team the last 14 years, we still never would have made it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Hope they just leave it as is. Also, what's kind of sad is that if they had this extra wild card team the last 14 years, we still never would have made it. Maybe the one 9-7 year. Would have to run the numbers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Huge plus for the networks. Extra playoff games at no extra cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts