HankBulloughMellencamp Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) MO MONEY - MO MONEY - MO MONEY !! The NFL isn't greedy though they just want the fans to enjoy more games !! Exactly. The NFL is very savvy & opportunistic to float this idea out there after a full weekend of incredible ballgames. They are striking while the iron is HOT! Of course NFL fans will want more of that action! Adding another team means two additional games will occur, and that is a tidy 50% increase in all playoff/premium-priced revenues generated during wildcard weekend. Edited January 6, 2014 by HankBulloughMellencamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWings Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 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. In the end, it doesn't matter now...does it? They won a close game, but I think the better team won in Green Bay. Home field advantage is important, but apparently not THAT important in the playoffs. There are some cases against this, but I think the better teams win more often than not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Maybe the one 9-7 year. Would have to run the numbers... Yes, we finished 7th that year--Bills needed a win and NYJ loss to get in...Jets lost, Bills lost and finished 7th (earning the 20th pick in the draft--the lowest for a non-playoff team). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Dog Named Kelso Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 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. Selection into the playoff would remain the same. The only benefit of winning one's division would be a guaranteed spot in the playoffs. There would still be good teams left out of the playoffs as Arizona this year; however, the teams reaching the playoffs would be seated according to there records and tie breakers as they are now. I am sure that the NFL can figure out how to deal with tie breakers, they do it now for the final seeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWings 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. I'd bet my house that Mr. Jones is behind this. I'd like to see the numbers, too, but I wonder if Dallas would have made the playoffs in any of the past three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 It's fine the way it is and doesn't need to be changed IMHO. The whole better record/division/home field thing doesn't bother me either. Every year is different. Sometimes your division is strong, sometimes it's not. Teams only play a balanced schedule with teams in their own division. Comparing records cross division is apples to oranges. Once they change, some team will get in having played the easiest schedule in the history of the NFL over a team in a tough division and people will squeal about that. That being said, if it helps the Bills chances of making the playoffs, I'm for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 I'd bet my house that Mr. Jones is behind this. I'd like to see the numbers, too, but I wonder if Dallas would have made the playoffs in any of the past three years. Goodell talked about this possibility earlier this season: Roger Goodell: Playoff expansion a possibility for 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Maybe the one 9-7 year. Would have to run the numbers... No. If I remember correctly, they finished behind Jax and baltimore, both of whom didn't make it at 9-7 also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Now a wild card bye huh. Man those "what if" scenarios were crazy before near the end of the season. Imagine what they will be like now That being said, if it helps the Bills chances of making the playoffs, I'm for it. So like in American schools, if it is too hard to make the grade, lower the bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 It's fine the way it is and doesn't need to be changed IMHO. The whole better record/division/home field thing doesn't bother me either. Every year is different. Sometimes your division is strong, sometimes it's not. Teams only play a balanced schedule with teams in their own division. Comparing records cross division is apples to oranges. Once they change, some team will get in having played the easiest schedule in the history of the NFL over a team in a tough division and people will squeal about that. That being said, if it helps the Bills chances of making the playoffs, I'm for it. I'm in agreement with this response. The playoff system is fine the way it is, and I also like that the top 2 teams get a bye week in the playoffs. Of course this is all about money, and the NFL is always looking for ways to make more of it. I just wonder if this will stop the owners from wanting an 18 game regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 CKLAPKA: just so I follow. Under your scenario, in NFC, GB, SF, Hawks, & Eagles would be guaranteed a playoff spot this year. Got that. And then Saints/SF would make the "wild card"/or whatever we'd call it hereafter. Got that. So under your scenario, Hawks would be #1; Panthers #2; SF #3 (tiebreaker would have to go to Panthers since they won H2H); Saints #4; Eagles #5; and GB #6. So SF woulda played GB (in SF) and Saints woulda played Eagles (in NO). But what I don't follow is the logic of this on a whole. Because on one side you're saying, who cares about the division when ranking the playoff games (SF>GB despite SF not winning their division) but on other hand you're also saying we do care about division b/c we're excluding other teams from playoffs despite having a better record than a division winner (GB > Cardinals despite not having a better record than the Cardinals) That, in my opinion, would be not much different than the current system. It would still be flawed. Your scenario would be fine by me, but if we removed divisions and just had 2 conferences. The entire point of winning your division is obviously to get into the playoffs, but to also have at least 1 home game. Your scenario may take away from some divisional races towards the end of the season b/c you're removing any incentive to win the division other than the obvious: making the playoffs. Because there may be a scenario where there are 2 elite teams in a division and by Week 16 they may already know that regardless of W/L, they're going to have a better record than a 7-8 team who may only win their division at 8-8 and they'll get that home game over that 8-8 team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Dog Named Kelso Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) CKLAPKA: just so I follow. Under your scenario, in NFC, GB, SF, Hawks, & Eagles would be guaranteed a playoff spot this year. Got that. And then Saints/SF would make the "wild card"/or whatever we'd call it hereafter. Got that. So under your scenario, Hawks would be #1; Panthers #2; SF #3 (tiebreaker would have to go to Panthers since they won H2H); Saints #4; Eagles #5; and GB #6. So SF woulda played GB (in SF) and Saints woulda played Eagles (in NO). But what I don't follow is the logic of this on a whole. Because on one side you're saying, who cares about the division when ranking the playoff games (SF>GB despite SF not winning their division) but on other hand you're also saying we do care about division b/c we're excluding other teams from playoffs despite having a better record than a division winner (GB > Cardinals despite not having a better record than the Cardinals) That, in my opinion, would be not much different than the current system. It would still be flawed. Your scenario would be fine by me, but if we removed divisions and just had 2 conferences. The entire point of winning your division is obviously to get into the playoffs, but to also have at least 1 home game. Your scenario may take away from some divisional races towards the end of the season b/c you're removing any incentive to win the division other than the obvious: making the playoffs. Because there may be a scenario where there are 2 elite teams in a division and by Week 16 they may already know that regardless of W/L, they're going to have a better record than a 7-8 team who may only win their division at 8-8 and they'll get that home game over that 8-8 team. My point, I suppose, is that in reality the playoffs are a different entity then the regular season, as such, they can be treated that way. And I agree it is still flawed for picking the teams with the best records to enter the Playoffs. However, teams with the best records are not necessary the best teams, injuries schedule differences also determine a teams make up too. There will never be a perfect system. I understand the suggestion to eliminate divisions for a more accurate account of record to playoff berths, however, the divisions provide a benefits of rivalries that are manageable and timeless. Its hard to hate 15 other teams, much easier the focus on 3 not to mention the history there. We may not care as much about rivalries now that the Bills have been bottom feeders for so long but the AFC and NFC Norths show their benefit to the regular season. Your final point will happen from time to time, I suppose, no matter the selection process. But, I believe you will see more teams working to get a higher seed to perhaps get a playoff home game. This year the Chiefs would have play their starters in the final game so they would have a chance get a home game instead of the the Colts or Bengals. I am not sure there are any perfect solutions. It all depends on what any given person believes is a priority. Edited January 6, 2014 by cklapka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster Guy Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Wow this has to be the first topic of relevance that contains a new idea for the NFL that was liked by well over 90% of the board. we are entering a Golden Age here at the stadium wall. Mods you need to enshrine this thread in the TBD Hall of Fame as the most harmonious of all time. I think the reason for everyone agreeing is that NONE of the following topics/words can be woven into the thread: Ralph, Cheap, Gregg, TJ Graham, Lynch Hit and Run, McGahee, Maybin, Witner, Hamdan, Ronnie Jones, Drunk Guy drowning in creek, Drunk Guy peeing in the stands, Myra Kraft, Crafty Chan, CJ, TJ and EJ, Ed Wong, Marrone's Mom dating Eugene Parker, and the law firm of Hackett, Legursky and Gragg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Wow this has to be the first topic of relevance that contains a new idea for the NFL that was liked by well over 90% of the board. Besides firing Danny Crossman. But we all know how that went! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Would this start next season? CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 Would this start next season? CBF If approved, I believe it would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I do like it. It makes top seed very, very meaningful. #2 seed gets a consolation prize of at least two home games in the playoffs if you go with the chalk. And you still aren't letting half the league into the playoffs a la NHL / NBA. You also avoid some of these ghastly scenarios where 7-9, 8-8 teams are making it over 10-6 ones. And fwiw......playing that extra game hasn't prevented teams from winning the Super Bowl so it's not a big deal that only one team gets a bye. The upside for Bills fans is now the team would still be in contention with their customary 4 wins going into December.....so maybe they won't have quit on us before Thanksgiving for a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Huge plus for the networks. Extra playoff games at no extra cost. Wanna bet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Huge plus for the networks. Extra playoff games at no extra cost. those 2 extra games will be bid out.....i'm sure ESPN would pay big....they currently are shut out of the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Security Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 If they did they would have to re-seed the winner of the 3 "wildcard" games after they play by record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts