14 teams in the Playoffs confirmed. Are we a lock?

[Billl]

2 hours ago, MJS said:

 

Lower quality football. I do not need more football, personally. The structure was already perfect for me. More of a good thing is not always better. The law of diminishing returns illustrates this perfectly.

Why would it be lower quality football?  More teams in the playoffs means fewer games featuring teams eliminated from the playoffs, and only having one bye in each conference means fewer games with teams resting starters.  Unless you’re a fan of watching teams tank, there is no downside.

[billsfan89]

1 hour ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Good article, I agree with Mark Cuban.  These second generation owners are making the NFL an active investment by being greedy, rather than a passive one that will appreciate on its own like it has for years.  The NFL has a finite time to live the way it is going now.

 

The NFL should focus their efforts on growing the sport in the UK, Germany and Mexico as opposed to over expanding it in the USA. Sad to see the short sighted corporate thinking that these owners are engaged in. 

[machine gun kelly]

Ok, this argument is silly.  Over the last 10 years which is a pretty good sample size.

 

NFL

3- 10-6

1- 9-6-1

8- 9-7

1- 8-7-1

7- 8-8

 

That means not one team in 10 years had a losing record, and 13 of 20 had a winning record.  65% of all of these teams had a winning record.  Whether anyone likes it or not, there is no record in a decade of any team in a potential wildcard having a losing record.  There were two division winners who this won’t change had a 7-9 record in the last decade.

[MJS]

1 minute ago, Billl said:

Why would it be lower quality football?  More teams in the playoffs means fewer games featuring teams eliminated from the playoffs, and only having one bye in each conference means fewer games with teams resting starters.  Unless you’re a fan of watching teams tank, there is no downside.

It's not hard to understand. It's lower quality because you are letting two lesser teams into the playoffs. Worse teams = worse quality. Not to mention you will increase the number of blowouts because you have fewer teams with a bye and the top teams will now be facing worse teams.

[Cal]

Definitely ?

[uticaclub]

18 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The NFL should focus their efforts on growing the sport in the UK, Germany and Mexico as opposed to over expanding it in the USA. Sad to see the short sighted corporate thinking that these owners are engaged in. 

Please see the International Series. Also, more playoffs equal more foreign eyes. Many causal international have no interest in regular season football and will only pay attention to the playoffs, something they don’t have in their soccer leagues

[billsfan89]

10 minutes ago, uticaclub said:

Please see the International Series. Also, more playoffs equal more foreign eyes. Many causal international have no interest in regular season football and will only pay attention to the playoffs, something they don’t have in their soccer leagues

 

I thought from a competitive standpoint the 12 out of 32 with byes for the top 2 in the conference was a perfect playoff format that valued the regular season, finishing high in your conference and not making it too difficult to make the playoffs but not too easy. I also don't think that adding 2 more games to wildcard weekend is really going to draw that many more eyes. Saturday and Sunday already have 2 games each that weekend, does having a 3rd game each day really do anything for the casual fan who probably doesn't want to watch 9.5 hours a day of football in back to back days? 

 

I think that much like Thursday night football overexposure and fatigue is a real thing. The Thursday game is only really liked by some hardcore fans and isn't worth the overexposure and watering down of the product. The playoffs having 6 games in one weekend is just overkill and something that will only appeal to hardcore fans. I wish the NFL would just pour more effort into expanding into other markets (which they do but they could be doing a better job of) as opposed to overexposing their product in their most profitable market. 

Edited March 31, 2020 by billsfan89

[Golden Goat]

Can't recall off the top of my head: Would we still have had an 18-year drought with 14 playoff teams? If so, 

[uticaclub]

8 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I thought from a competitive standpoint the 12 out of 32 with byes for the top 2 in the conference was a perfect playoff format that valued the regular season, finishing high in your conference and not making it too difficult to make the playoffs but not too easy. I also don't think that adding 2 more games to wildcard weekend is really going to draw that many more eyes. Saturday and Sunday already have 2 games each that weekend, does having a 3rd game each day really do anything for the casual fan who probably doesn't want to watch 9.5 hours a day of football in back to back days? 

 

I think that much like Thursday night football overexposure and fatigue is a real thing. The Thursday game is only really liked by some hardcore fans and isn't worth the overexposure and watering down of the product. The playoffs having 6 games in one weekend is just overkill and something that will only appeal to hardcore fans. I wish the NFL would just pour more effort into expanding into other markets (which they do but they could be doing a better job of) as opposed to overexposing their product in their most profitable market. 

*gamblers, the Thursday night games are for gamblers

[Beast]

17 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I thought from a competitive standpoint the 12 out of 32 with byes for the top 2 in the conference was a perfect playoff format that valued the regular season, finishing high in your conference and not making it too difficult to make the playoffs but not too easy. I also don't think that adding 2 more games to wildcard weekend is really going to draw that many more eyes. Saturday and Sunday already have 2 games each that weekend, does having a 3rd game each day really do anything for the casual fan who probably doesn't want to watch 9.5 hours a day of football in back to back days? 

 

I think that much like Thursday night football overexposure and fatigue is a real thing. The Thursday game is only really liked by some hardcore fans and isn't worth the overexposure and watering down of the product. The playoffs having 6 games in one weekend is just overkill and something that will only appeal to hardcore fans. I wish the NFL would just pour more effort into expanding into other markets (which they do but they could be doing a better job of) as opposed to overexposing their product in their most profitable market. 

What’s this “over-exposure” and “fatigue” you speak of? 

Have you noticed how many games the NBA, NHL and especially MLB plays? Hell, the first round of the NHL playoffs is one of the more exciting rounds in sports overall and they have 16 teams.

 

No, give me more football, please.

 

Thank you.

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by Binghamton Beast

[Boatdrinks]

Nope, not a lock. The roster says the Bills should be a playoff team, but as fans we know that doesn’t mean much. I don’t think this change to the format will be a hindrance to the Bills chances , but there are still things that can go wrong. 

[In Summary]

If there is only one 1st week playoff bye per conference, will the top conference teams take their foot off the gas near the end of the regular season or try harder?

Are two extra middling teams likely to advance or are they there just to keep more people interested in the outcome of December regular season games?

 

[Chaos]

Yes we are a lock. 

[billsfan89]

12 minutes ago, Binghamton Beast said:

What’s this “over-exposure” and “fatigue” you speak of? 

Have you noticed how many games the NBA, NHL and especially MLB plays? Hell, the first round of the NHL playoffs is one of the more exciting rounds in sports overall and they have 16 teams.

 

No, give me more football, please.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Monday Night football used to be the event of the NFL week. Now thanks to Sunday night football and the Thursday night game (among other factors to be fair) Monday night football is an after thought. The fact that the NBA, NHL and MLB regular season games are often overlooked shows you that constantly playing games and putting your product 4-6 days a week on national TV can severely overexpose and water down how important games feel. 

 

Even on Thanksgiving no one really cares for the 3rd game. They want to see the Cowboys and Lions games early in the day and then just pass out or enjoy the day with family. To me personally I used to love the NFL a lot more before the Thursday game. It used to be that after Monday Night football the NFL would take some time and reset. Tuesday you would do a recap of the Monday game and power rankings/early previews. Wednesday to Friday were just building anticipation previewing the weeks matchup and Saturday was college. 

 

Now with the Thursday game the NFL is omni-present and it just waters down the specialness of NFL football to have it on every 2 or 3 days. It does long term damage to the brand in my opinion because if something is always on it is never on. 

 

I guess my gripe is that the increasing of the playoffs, Thursday games, adding of a 17th regular season game, and all these things don't expand the appeal of the NFL to the more casual audience but just simply milks the hardcore fan who is already buying the product. It is just a lazy cash grab one that could be very short sighted. 

Edited March 31, 2020 by billsfan89

[Beast]

I

13 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

Monday Night football used to be the event of the NFL week. Now thanks to Sunday night football and the Thursday night game (among other factors to be fair) Monday night football is an after thought. The fact that the NBA, NHL and MLB regular season games are often overlooked shows you that constantly playing games and putting your product 4-6 days a week on national TV can severely overexpose and water down how important games feel. 

 

Even on Thanksgiving no one really cares for the 3rd game. They want to see the Cowboys and Lions games early in the day and then just pass out or enjoy the day with family. To me personally I used to love the NFL a lot more before the Thursday game. It used to be that after Monday Night football the NFL would take some time and reset. Tuesday you would do a recap of the Monday game and power rankings/early previews. Wednesday to Friday were just building anticipation previewing the weeks matchup and Saturday was college. 

 

Now with the Thursday game the NFL is omni-present and it just waters down the specialness of NFL football to have it on every 2 or 3 days. It does long term damage to the brand in my opinion because if something is always on it is never on. 

 

I guess my gripe is that the increasing of the playoffs, Thursday games, adding of a 17th regular season game, and all these things don't expand the appeal of the NFL to the more casual audience but just simply milks the hardcore fan who is already buying the product. It is just a lazy cash grab one that could be very short sighted. 

 

I think you are doing a whole lot of speaking for yourself.

 

No one really cares for the 3rd game on Thanksgiving?

 

I do. So do a lot of people. 
 

https://deadline.com/2019/11/saints-falcons-thanksgiving-ratings-nfl-nbc-1202797348/

[Mr. WEO]

4 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

https://twitter.com/aroundthenfl/status/1245046430424678400?s=21

 

im glad/relieved we’ve been twice in 3 years before this change. The drought ended in the old way.

 

 

Ah yes!  The old fashioned way---through the back door after a long out of it team acted as the spoiler with a miraculous game winning bomb on their last play of their last possession  of their last game!

 

[IgotBILLStopay]

4 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

https://twitter.com/aroundthenfl/status/1245046430424678400?s=21

 

im glad/relieved we’ve been twice in 3 years before this change. The drought ended in the old way.

 

Yes we should be since I though we were a lock even with the 12 team format. This actually sucks a bit for us - since we were in the running for the top 2 seeds. This basically devalues the #2 seed. 

 

Since we have more than "reaching the playoff" aspirations, what this means is it is not just enough to win the AFC East and have the second best record in the conference. We just shoot for the #1 seed.

[Doc Brown]

The NFL thinking long term about making more money pry partly made this move so they can get two new expansion franchises up and running in the near future.  I think there were 28 teams when they expanded the playoffs from 10 to 12 teams.

[Gambit]

3 hours ago, The Jokeman said:

You could say that for several other playoff caliber teams like Green Bay, Seattle, New Orleans, Minnesota etc. 

Exactly why I do not understand why so many people keep bringing up if Allen goes down. Most teams will fall off if QB1 goes down.

[GunnerBill]

57 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I thought from a competitive standpoint the 12 out of 32 with byes for the top 2 in the conference was a perfect playoff format that valued the regular season, finishing high in your conference and not making it too difficult to make the playoffs but not too easy. I also don't think that adding 2 more games to wildcard weekend is really going to draw that many more eyes. Saturday and Sunday already have 2 games each that weekend, does having a 3rd game each day really do anything for the casual fan who probably doesn't want to watch 9.5 hours a day of football in back to back days? 

 

I think that much like Thursday night football overexposure and fatigue is a real thing. The Thursday game is only really liked by some hardcore fans and isn't worth the overexposure and watering down of the product. The playoffs having 6 games in one weekend is just overkill and something that will only appeal to hardcore fans. I wish the NFL would just pour more effort into expanding into other markets (which they do but they could be doing a better job of) as opposed to overexposing their product in their most profitable market. 

 

TNF > MNF for about the last 4 years. And it isn't close. MNF is the product that sucks and needs to go. 

[billsfan89]

14 minutes ago, Binghamton Beast said:

I

 

I think you are doing a whole lot of speaking for yourself.

 

No one really cares for the 3rd game on Thanksgiving?

 

I do. So do a lot of people. 
 

https://deadline.com/2019/11/saints-falcons-thanksgiving-ratings-nfl-nbc-1202797348/

 

I think fatigue and overexpose is real. Monday Night Football is not really a relevant game anymore and I think the 3rd Sunday game along with Thursday games have been a big factor in that. I think hardcore football fans love more football. However the hardcore fan is going to watch no matter what. I think that growing revenue by just making more of the product for hardcore fans isn't a sustainable business model. They should focus their efforts on improving their efforts to get international expansion and casual fans as opposed to just squeezing more out of their existing fan base. 

[billsfan89]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

TNF > MNF for about the last 4 years. And it isn't close. MNF is the product that sucks and needs to go. 

 

The  Thursday games are rarely good in my opinion. The players hate the 3 day turnaround, the games are often sloppy quality wise and they are rarely compelling matchups. MNF has been hurt by the fact that SNF took the best games when MNF moved to ESPN and the fact that it went from the only nationally televised game each week to now one of three makes it feel less special overall. Thursday games also ruin fantasy football in my opinion because it is a constant thing you have to monitor as opposed to just putting in your waiver claims Tuesday and adjusting your roster Wednesday and then you are good until Sunday. 

 

Monday being only one day removed from Sunday doesn't alter the players ability to prepare for games. I think MNF is a salvageable product whereas TNF is an abomination. 

Edited March 31, 2020 by billsfan89

[Cripple Creek]

4 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

https://twitter.com/aroundthenfl/status/1245046430424678400?s=21

 

im glad/relieved we’ve been twice in 3 years before this change. The drought ended in the old way.

I suppose you're one of those gugnys who wouldn't want any part of a shortened season WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP?

[without a drought]

4 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

If we had a better backup QB who could actually win games if Allen got hurt,  I'd say absolutely we'd be a lock with our roster.  We're a lock as long as Allen stays healthy as it stands now.

If we just get a backup who's better than Allen, then we're all set.

[Happy]

1 hour ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The NFL should focus their efforts on growing the sport in the UK, Germany and Mexico as opposed to over expanding it in the USA. Sad to see the short sighted corporate thinking that these owners are engaged in. 

 

I'm not so sure international is the way to go; I don't see American football catching on in Europe or Mexico.  I think the better bet would be to pull back a number of the changes that occurred in the last several years.  Quit the over officiating of the game, allow teams to play defense (fewer QB protections), go back to a 16 game schedule, and don't water down the playoffs to start.  The NFL doesn't have to expand into other countries that won't embrace the sport, but rather return to what made it great in the first place.  Too much tinkering has gone on during Roger Goodell's tenure that I would suspect a lot of fans are tired of.

[/dev/null]

If the Bills make the playoffs, they'll probably get stuck with the Nickelodeon game

 

Yeah seriously, check it out.  Somehow Nickelodeon scored an NFL playoff game

[CommonCents]

6 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

If the Bills make the playoffs, they'll probably get stuck with the Nickelodeon game

 

Yeah seriously, check it out.  Somehow Nickelodeon scored an NFL playoff game

Wow. The world really is going to end.

[billsfan89]

2 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

I'm not so sure international is the way to go; I don't see American football catching on in Europe or Mexico.  I think the better bet would be to pull back a number of the changes that occurred in the last several years.  Quit the over officiating of the game, allow teams to play defense (fewer QB protections), go back to a 16 game schedule, and don't water down the playoffs to start.  The NFL doesn't have to expand into other countries that won't embrace the sport, but rather return to what made it great in the first place.  Too much tinkering has gone on during Roger Goodell's tenure that I would suspect a lot of fans are tired of.

 

I think the growth in the USA is nearly impossible at a high level. How much more popular could football get in the USA? I am sure you could pull in some more casual fans but overall the growth in the USA only comes from milking the existing fans by putting on more games and creating more of the product. Whereas American football has gained a foothold in the UK and Mexico both markets that combine for over 100 million people. I also think that Germany is another spot where growth in it is possible. I don't know where else you could grow the game but international expansion in terms of marketing is a must if the NFL wishes to grow revenue meaningfully. 

 

As far as officiation of games? I agree the NFL needs to find a way to cut down on flags. But what exactly can they do to cut down on flags? What penalties do they call too much of? I legitimately don't know. Roughing the passer and QB protections are needed (I don't think allowing more borderline hits on QB's really adds to the value of the game) but they could be relaxed in a way where defenders know what they can and can't do more clearly. There are far too many rules that put too much onus on the defender to just know how to ease up on a QB in live play. 

 

I also don't know if "under officiating" the games makes them better. Seattle's legion of boom basically mugged receivers taking advantage of the NFL officials not wanting to "over officiate the game" and they were a slog to watch defensively as their pass defense amounted to pulling down receivers over and over again. Sure they were talented and still good in the years after but they went from an all time great defense to just a great defense because they couldn't take advantage of the way the rules are enforced. 

 

I think that you run the risk of coaches and players taking advantage of rules that are more lax in enforcement. But then you don't want to call flags on every play either?

[Passepartout]

Yeah but kind of wonder if people will suffer fatigue and if they expand the regular season, need to have two byes instead.

[Happy]

12 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I think the growth in the USA is nearly impossible at a high level. How much more popular could football get in the USA? I am sure you could pull in some more casual fans but overall the growth in the USA only comes from milking the existing fans by putting on more games and creating more of the product. Whereas American football has gained a foothold in the UK and Mexico both markets that combine for over 100 million people. I also think that Germany is another spot where growth in it is possible. I don't know where else you could grow the game but international expansion in terms of marketing is a must if the NFL wishes to grow revenue meaningfully. 

 

As far as officiation of games? I agree the NFL needs to find a way to cut down on flags. But what exactly can they do to cut down on flags? What penalties do they call too much of? I legitimately don't know. Roughing the passer and QB protections are needed (I don't think allowing more borderline hits on QB's really adds to the value of the game) but they could be relaxed in a way where defenders know what they can and can't do more clearly. There are far too many rules that put too much onus on the defender to just know how to ease up on a QB in live play. 

 

I also don't know if "under officiating" the games makes them better. Seattle's legion of boom basically mugged receivers taking advantage of the NFL officials not wanting to "over officiate the game" and they were a slog to watch defensively as their pass defense amounted to pulling down receivers over and over again. Sure they were talented and still good in the years after but they went from an all time great defense to just a great defense because they couldn't take advantage of the way the rules are enforced. 

 

I think that you run the risk of coaches and players taking advantage of rules that are more lax in enforcement. But then you don't want to call flags on every play either?

 

There was an NFL Europe, which has been defunct for a couple of years now.  If the NFL's intent is to have an exposition game in Mexico and Germany once a year, maybe it will help add viewers, but maybe not.  In those countries, the #1 sport is soccer and it's not even close.  I do think there is some room for expansion in the US; I say that because for the past several years, some stadiums could not fill up on Sundays.  I think cost (ticket, food, and beer) has a lot to do with it; there is a point where people stop paying and the NFL has to realize this.

 

I'm not saying to go back to the 70's as far as officiating, but you can't manage games with officiating to the point where the games are determined by the officials.  That is what is happening now.

[IronyAbounds]

The new playoff structure starts in 2020...assuming there's even a season in 2020. I have a hard time envisioning any crowds in stadiums by September.

[RiotAct]

1 hour ago, /dev/null said:

If the Bills make the playoffs, they'll probably get stuck with the Nickelodeon game

 

Yeah seriously, check it out.  Somehow Nickelodeon scored an NFL playoff game

April Fool’s!

[NickelCity]

Death and taxes. 

[CLTbills]

6 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Tougher schedule on paper but I'd be shocked if we weren't.

yes, but the division is as easy as it has been in 2 decades

[PromoTheRobot]

11 minutes ago, CLTbills said:

yes, but the division is as easy as it has been in 2 decades

 

Dolphins might be better than you realize. But yeah.

[PetermansRedemption]

7 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

The slow decline in the quality of the product during the regular season.  Reminds me of when baseball added a Wild Card spot.  Can't wait to see the 7-9 Lions take on the 14-2 Packers in the 1st round.

First, which season would a 7-9 team have taken the extra spot? Second, what happens when the Lions win. 

[Punching Bag]

8 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

The slow decline in the quality of the product during the regular season.  Reminds me of when baseball added a Wild Card spot.  Can't wait to see the 7-9 Lions take on the 14-2 Packers in the 1st round.

 

Maybe you can show games which allow that to happen so we can see how likely it will occur.

[Doc Brown]

30 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

First, which season would a 7-9 team have taken the extra spot? Second, what happens when the Lions win. 

 

22 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

Maybe you can show games which allow that to happen so we can see how likely it will occur.

You are right.  I am wrong.  You're very good looking.  I am not attractive.

[Turk71]

8 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Just the law of averages tells you they'll be an 8-9 Wild Card team once every three or so years if you have a top heavy conference.

   You would think that, but going back to when this current 4 division per conf alignment began not a single team with a losing record would have made it so far. A few 8-8 teams and more 9-7 teams, but none with losing records.

  Now watch 2 teams with losing records make it next year.?     edit: sorry, I guess that was already pointed out. I was on page 1.?

 

54 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

First, which season would a 7-9 team have taken the extra spot? Second, what happens when the Lions win. 

They tip over cars and light sh it on fire in downtown Detroit?

Edited April 1, 2020 by Turk71

[Doc Brown]

1 minute ago, Turk71 said:

   You would think that, but going back to when this current 4 division per conf alignment began not a single team with a losing record would have made it so far. A few 8-8 teams and more 9-7 teams, but none with losing records.

  Now watch 2 teams with losing records make it next year.?

 

Yeah.  I was surprised.  There's more examples of 7-9 division winners making it.  Once you expand the regular season to 17 games those 8-8 teams that made it under the current system will pry make it at 8-9.