Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tomur67

Off season discussion - Abolish the divisions!

Recommended Posts

The NFL wants to go to a 18 game schedule.  OK, if you're in the AFC, you have 15 AFC opponents.  You play every team once, 8 home games and 7 away games.  The next year you reverse it.  The remaining  3 games would be with NFC teams.  Using the previous year's NFC record, using a drawing, you play 1 game against a team that finished 1st thru 5th in the NFC, one game against a team that finished 6th thru 10th in the NFC, and one game against a team that finished 11th thru 16th in the NFC.  The playoffs would consist of the top four teams in the AFC and  the top four teams in the  NFC with the best records.  There are two real up sides to this.  First, and most important,  in the old format, a real strong team in a weak division, is almost guaranteed 6 wins every year. Their road to the playoffs is quite a bit easier because of it.  ( Unfortunately, we've seen this, first hand)  And secondly, as a fan,  you get to see more teams.  Personally, I think playing the Pats , Jets and Dolphins twice a year, every year  is getting stale.

  • Skeptical 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly would be okay with abolishing the divisions.

 

There's 16 teams in each conference.  No "interleague" play anymore.  Every team plays each other in the conference and the top 6 make it to the playoffs.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, would that also mean no more "rivalry" weeks that that NFL prides itself on cultivating? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tomur67 said:

The NFL wants to go to a 18 game schedule.  OK, if you're in the AFC, you have 15 AFC opponents.  You play every team once, 8 home games and 7 away games.  The next year you reverse it.  The remaining  3 games would be with NFC teams.  Using the previous year's NFC record, using a drawing, you play 1 game against a team that finished 1st thru 5th in the NFC, one game against a team that finished 6th thru 10th in the NFC, and one game against a team that finished 11th thru 16th in the NFC.  The playoffs would consist of the top four teams in the AFC and  the top four teams in the  NFC with the best records.  There are two real up sides to this.  First, and most important,  in the old format, a real strong team in a weak division, is almost guaranteed 6 wins every year. Their road to the playoffs is quite a bit easier because of it.  ( Unfortunately, we've seen this, first hand)  And secondly, as a fan,  you get to see more teams.  Personally, I think playing the Pats , Jets and Dolphins twice a year, every year  is getting stale.

 

I mean... good luck.   You play 1 game per week, so staying on the east coast is unreasonable to request.  You'll have teams traveling east to west and back all season long.  Players would absolutely hate it.  Not to mention you no longer get home games against certain teams every year.  

 

This type of thing works for all the other sports with 82 and 162 game schedules.  18 with games one time per week makes it kind of challenging from a logistical standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't care. Divisions or no divisions. Just don't expand the playoffs unless you add more teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing up divisions might be a good idea to get closer rivalries. I could see a couple divisions like so ...

 

Buffalo

Pittsburgh

Cleveland

Detroit

 

or

 

LA Rams

LA Chargers

London/Jacksonville

New England

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about, for now, swapping the Bills and Ravens? Us in the AFC North with CLE, PIT and CIN. That's a division that makes sense.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think I would like abolishing the divisions and just having 2 conferences. But they are waaaaaaaaay overdue and realigning the divisions. Personally I don’t care if they keep us with New England but I’d rather get rid of Miami. Makes no sense to have them in this division. A lot of divisions don’t make sense regionally anymore 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

I honestly would be okay with abolishing the divisions.

 

There's 16 teams in each conference.  No "interleague" play anymore.  Every team plays each other in the conference and the top 6 make it to the playoffs.

 

I like this scenario, only catch is with a 16 team conference that would mean a 15 game season. I would like this because it would mean each game would be more important to making the playoffs. I would offset the regular season "lost game" by adding one team in each conference to the playoffs, only giving the #1 team a bye, which would add a game to the playoffs. While I was at it I would eliminate 2 preseason games and trade it for more practice time during training camp.

 

This scenario eliminates the "false dynasties" of teams continually making the playoffs because they are in a weak division, and teams with a better record missing a playoff berth because a team in a weak division got in with an 8-8 record.

 

Also with the Super Bowl becoming the best of the AFC vs the best of the NFC (without Interleague meetings throughout the season) may bring back some of the old AFL/NFL rivalries/loyalties of day of old.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like MLB's old set up.  In the NFL it would look like this:

 

Two Conferences - AFC/NFC

Two Divisions in Each Conference - East/West

 

Playoffs: 

AFC East Winner vs. AFC West Winner

NFC East Winner vs. NFC West Winner

 

Super Bowl:

AFC Champion vs. NFC Champion

 

Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I like MLB's old set up.  In the NFL it would look like this:

 

Two Conferences - AFC/NFC

Two Divisions in Each Conference - East/West

 

Playoffs: 

AFC East Winner vs. AFC West Winner

NFC East Winner vs. NFC West Winner

 

Super Bowl:

AFC Champion vs. NFC Champion

 

Period.

As you know, I'm well versed in baseball. That being said, would you want to incorporate a "wild card" game in there or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I like MLB's old set up.  In the NFL it would look like this:

 

Two Conferences - AFC/NFC

Two Divisions in Each Conference - East/West

 

Playoffs: 

AFC East Winner vs. AFC West Winner

NFC East Winner vs. NFC West Winner

 

Super Bowl:

AFC Champion vs. NFC Champion

 

Period.

 

Might as well go back to what MLB used to do before that....best record in each conference plays against each other in the Super Bowl.

 

No thank you to either scenario.

Edited by Binghamton Beast
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nah the rivalries a big part of what I like about the NFL. I notice that the NBA lacks in this department where divisions have virtually no meaning and they pretty much have the type of schedule you describe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

As you know, I'm well versed in baseball. That being said, would you want to incorporate a "wild card" game in there or not?

 

I would definitely want wild cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I like MLB's old set up.  In the NFL it would look like this:

 

Two Conferences - AFC/NFC

Two Divisions in Each Conference - East/West

 

Playoffs: 

AFC East Winner vs. AFC West Winner

NFC East Winner vs. NFC West Winner

 

Super Bowl:

AFC Champion vs. NFC Champion

 

Period.

dude 2nd round playoffs is the best week in football. 4 games in 2 days with the top 8 teams! All goes downhill from there. Definitely don't want a 4 team playoff. At least give me an action packed 8 team quarterfinal.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pff. At this point we've put up with losing to NE for the last 18 years. Brady is almost done, and I have a feeling Belichick won't be far behind. I want the Bills to dominate them first, then we can get rid of divisions :)

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, macaroni said:

 

I like this scenario, only catch is with a 16 team conference that would mean a 15 game season. I would like this because it would mean each game would be more important to making the playoffs. I would offset the regular season "lost game" by adding one team in each conference to the playoffs, only giving the #1 team a bye, which would add a game to the playoffs. While I was at it I would eliminate 2 preseason games and trade it for more practice time during training camp.

 

This scenario eliminates the "false dynasties" of teams continually making the playoffs because they are in a weak division, and teams with a better record missing a playoff berth because a team in a weak division got in with an 8-8 record.

 

Also with the Super Bowl becoming the best of the AFC vs the best of the NFC (without Interleague meetings throughout the season) may bring back some of the old AFL/NFL rivalries/loyalties of day of old.

 

Good catch on the 15 games....

I guess maybe have the top two seeds from the year before do a home and away?

 

I won't call the Pats a false dynasty but the AFC East absolutely helped them along the way.  Many more #1 seeds just because they are gifted 4-5 division wins each year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

I won't call the Pats a false dynasty but the AFC East absolutely helped them along the way.  Many more #1 seeds just because they are gifted 4-5 division wins each year.

 

Actually I wasn't thinking about the Pats with that comment … I was thinking about the Bengals. As much as I hate to admit it over the last decade and a half the Pats were a legit good team … the Bengals on the other hand have made the playoffs numerous times with no real reason for them being there other than other teams in their division stunk up the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frostbitmic said:

Changing up divisions might be a good idea to get closer rivalries. I could see a couple divisions like so ...

 

Buffalo

Pittsburgh

Cleveland

Detroit

 

or

 

LA Rams

LA Chargers

London/Jacksonville

New England

 

 

I love the idea of getting the rivals/divisions closer.  Will encourage out of town fans, better game day experience, and likely overall greater interest.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gugny said:

I like MLB's old set up.  In the NFL it would look like this:

 

Two Conferences - AFC/NFC

Two Divisions in Each Conference - East/West

 

Playoffs: 

AFC East Winner vs. AFC West Winner

NFC East Winner vs. NFC West Winner

 

Super Bowl:

AFC Champion vs. NFC Champion

 

Period.

Nah, that's really restrictive and boring.


Even MLB realized that and changed the system because of it.

 

I like the OP's suggestion.

 

I agree there is no need for divisions.

 

Playing certain teams twice a year is boring; I'd rather see a greater variety of opponents than the same team twice.

 

With free agency and the salary cap, team turnover is such that there really are no rivalries anymore anyway.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tomur67 said:

The NFL wants to go to a 18 game schedule.  OK, if you're in the AFC, you have 15 AFC opponents.  You play every team once, 8 home games and 7 away games.  The next year you reverse it.  The remaining  3 games would be with NFC teams.  Using the previous year's NFC record, using a drawing, you play 1 game against a team that finished 1st thru 5th in the NFC, one game against a team that finished 6th thru 10th in the NFC, and one game against a team that finished 11th thru 16th in the NFC.  The playoffs would consist of the top four teams in the AFC and  the top four teams in the  NFC with the best records.  There are two real up sides to this.  First, and most important,  in the old format, a real strong team in a weak division, is almost guaranteed 6 wins every year. Their road to the playoffs is quite a bit easier because of it.  ( Unfortunately, we've seen this, first hand)  And secondly, as a fan,  you get to see more teams.  Personally, I think playing the Pats , Jets and Dolphins twice a year, every year  is getting stale.

Hate it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with getting rid of the divisions.  No way would I want to only play teams in one conference.  That is dumb.  You want national exposure.  It is too infrequent now for the Bills to play Dallas or Green Bay or Chicago.  It is much better for small market teams to get national exposure.

At a minimum I would recommend two things.  A playoff team must have a .500 record or better to make the playoffs.  No more 7-9 or 7-8-1 division winners.  And they must take away the automatic home field playoff game for division winners.  The top 6 teams should be ranked by record.  It is not fair for a 11-5 Saints team to travel to a 7-9 Seattle.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

I'm fine with getting rid of the divisions.  No way would I want to only play teams in one conference.  That is dumb.  You want national exposure.  It is too infrequent now for the Bills to play Dallas or Green Bay or Chicago.  It is much better for small market teams to get national exposure.

At a minimum I would recommend two things.  A playoff team must have a .500 record or better to make the playoffs.  No more 7-9 or 7-8-1 division winners.  And they must take away the automatic home field playoff game for division winners.  The top 6 teams should be ranked by record.  It is not fair for a 11-5 Saints team to travel to a 7-9 Seattle.  

 

Why do you only consider NFC teams as ones with "national exposure"? Why do you think Green Bay isn't a "small market" team?

 

IMHO a team gets national exposure when they become a team who consistently win more than they lose, a team who logically are in play for a playoff spot year in and year out throughout the season regardless of their local market, Green Bay being a case in point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dneveu said:

 

I mean... good luck.   You play 1 game per week, so staying on the east coast is unreasonable to request.  You'll have teams traveling east to west and back all season long.  Players would absolutely hate it.  Not to mention you no longer get home games against certain teams every year.  

 

This type of thing works for all the other sports with 82 and 162 game schedules.  18 with games one time per week makes it kind of challenging from a logistical standpoint.

I don't think I understand that post at all.  They'd only be traveling east to west when they were playing teams on the west coast.  Have you looked at the NFL cities map?map-of-nfl.jpg

 

The only people with a gripe would be the handful of team west of the Mississippi.  I mean, today we have teams flying to Mexico  You're flying 8 times per year.  Not that big of a deal.  Seems pretty logistically simple to me, for a team that travels 8 times per season vs. 81 times per season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...