Change Playoff Rule

[newcam2012]

I've been thinking about this change for awhile. I wanted to get some input. Currently, the division winners get an automatic playoff home game. This is despite if another playoff team has a better record. Likely going to happen to the Bills this year. 

 

I get the NFL wants to reward division winners but it's at the expense of other teams good seasonal records. Personally, I think it's more fair to have the team with the better record to host the playoff game instead of the divisional winner. 

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think at some point this might happen? 

Edited 3 hours ago by newcam2012

[boyst]

I like it, maybe I'm in the minority. Division games are very important and very impactful. Teams plan their offseason for division games to beat other teams in their division. I no we are blind to this since we've been able to walk through our division for years, and before that the Patriots did too. But look at the NFC north, the AFC north, and the AFC south. Maybe even the AFC West. Those teams build teams to beat the teams in their division and win their division crowns. The AFC North beats the crap out of each other just so they can try to win the North and they are more concerned with their division than any other matchup, and rightly so 

 

If you take that away from the game then you might as well get rid of the double headers against teams in the division. Which means you couldn't do strength of schedule scheduling among other things

 

The only thing I would say is that if somehow a division winner is not over .500 then they should forfeit their playoff spot. 

 

There is a chance for a team to win the division being under .500

[dorquemada]

teams shouldnt be punished for playing in more difficult divisions. the rule should stand

[gonzo1105]

I think that was Beanes thing that if a team had under a certain amount of wins it might have even been under .500  that the team with the better record should host. 

[Shaw66]

Just now, newcam2012 said:

I've been think about this change for awhile. I wanted to get some input. Currently, the division winners get an automatic playoff home game. This is despite if another playoff team has a better record. Likely going to happen to the Bills this year. 

 

I get the NFL wants to reward division winners but it's at the expense of other teams good seasonal records. Personally, I think it's more fair to have the team with the better record to host the playoff game instead of the divisional winner. 

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think at some point this might happen? 

Whenever I think about this problem, I always conclude the NFL has it right. Every season there are one or two weak divisions, and this rule makes those division races much more interesting. Your way makes the division races almost irrelevant - it means the teams are fighting for a chance to be the seventh seed in the tournament and have to go to the number two seed in the first round. If you're a fan of a team in a week division, you want to think that your team has some kind of shot in the tournament, and home field for the first game gives them at least a little edge.  

 

The message to the Bills, which is the message to every team every season is simple:  You want home field? Win your division.  The Bills should have thought a little more about that when they played NE the first time, and certainly when they played the Dolphins. Win one of those games, and the Bills would have been where they wanted to be.  

 

The change the NFL did make, which I like, is that they now reseed the playoffs after the first round.  That means that if the AFC North team survives the first round with a home win, they're going on the road the next game, even if they have a wildcard opponent.  

[gonzo1105]

1 minute ago, dorquemada said:

teams shouldnt be punished for playing in more difficult divisions. the rule should stand

Would you consider the NFC South to be a difficult division? It’s very likely that an 11-6 football team is going to be left out of the playoffs in the NFC, most likely from the North when Tampa Bay or Carolina could be 8-9 division winner 

[GolfandBills]

Get rid of the divisions problem solved 

[BullBuchanan]

You don't make rules to apply to exceptions, hence the saying. Once in a blue moon some team with a terrible record makes the playoffs, and everyone thinks the rules need to change. The league mostly has it right. The biggest issue they created was eliminating the bye for the top 2 teams AND expanding the playoffs to 7 per conference.

It's often the case that #1 and #2 are neck and neck or #1 was aided by an extremely weak schedule while #2 had a rougher go. This is reminiscent of when teams like Tenn would dominate their division and get bounced their first playoff game. #2 really gets hosed in this scenario.

Regarding the expanded playoffs, it was already rare to have 6 teams that had a legitimate shot at the SB and deserved to be there. Now, we're all but guaranteeing there's just a feeder team in the mix.

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:

Would you consider the NFC South to be a difficult division? It’s very likely that an 11-6 football team is going to be left out of the playoffs in the NFC, most likely from the North when Tampa Bay or Carolina could be 8-9 division winner 

 

Meh. That's the way the cookie crumbles. I wouldn't change it personally. 

[newcam2012]

6 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Whenever I think about this problem, I always conclude the NFL has it right. Every season there are one or two weak divisions, and this rule makes those division races much more interesting. Your way makes the division races almost irrelevant - it means the teams are fighting for a chance to be the seventh seed in the tournament and have to go to the number two seed in the first round. If you're a fan of a team in a week division, you want to think that your team has some kind of shot in the tournament, and home field for the first game gives them at least a little edge.  

 

The message to the Bills, which is the message to every team every season is simple:  You want home field? Win your division.  The Bills should have thought a little more about that when they played NE the first time, and certainly when they played the Dolphins. Win one of those games, and the Bills would have been where they wanted to be.  

 

The change the NFL did make, which I like, is that they now reseed the playoffs after the first round.  That means that if the AFC North team survives the first round with a home win, they're going on the road the next game, even if they have a wildcard opponent.  

This is very logical but it still remains that a better seasonal record team is getting slightly in most cases. I guess you can say it's at the expense of making the divisional races more relevant. Maybe that's the better way to go. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

You don't make rules to apply to exceptions, hence the saying. Once in a blue moon some team with a terrible record makes the playoffs, and everyone thinks the rules need to change. The league mostly has it right. The biggest issue they created was eliminating the bye for the top 2 teams AND expanding the playoffs to 7 per conference.

It's often the case that #1 and #2 are neck and neck or #1 was aided by an extremely weak schedule while #2 had a rougher go. This is reminiscent of when teams like Tenn would dominate their division and get bounced their first playoff game. #2 really gets hosed in this scenario.

Regarding the expanded playoffs, it was already rare to have 6 teams that had a legitimate shot at the SB and deserved to be there. Now, we're all but guaranteeing there's just a feeder team in the mix.

 

I don't say this often in response to your posts.... but I agree with every word of this. 

[MikePJ76]

No.  Division play means something.  Win your division you earn a home game.   

[newcam2012]

4 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

You don't make rules to apply to exceptions, hence the saying. Once in a blue moon some team with a terrible record makes the playoffs, and everyone thinks the rules need to change. The league mostly has it right. The biggest issue they created was eliminating the bye for the top 2 teams AND expanding the playoffs to 7 per conference.

It's often the case that #1 and #2 are neck and neck or #1 was aided by an extremely weak schedule while #2 had a rougher go. This is reminiscent of when teams like Tenn would dominate their division and get bounced their first playoff game. #2 really gets hosed in this scenario.

Regarding the expanded playoffs, it was already rare to have 6 teams that had a legitimate shot at the SB and deserved to be there. Now, we're all but guaranteeing there's just a feeder team in the mix.

Good point Bill!

[Matt_In_NH]

I knew this thread was coming.  When buffalo is going by to Pittsburgh or Baltimore with a better record it will get deafening.   I am good with the rules as is or changing it to just win division gets you in but the records determine seeding.  

[Epstein's Mother]

3 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:

No.  Division play means something.  Win your division you earn a home game.   

 

No.  Division play means something.  Win your division you earn a home playoff game.

[klumzyfule66]

I think the rule is ok as it stands.

 

However for a change, I would consider division winners are based SOLELY upon the 6 games within the division. Then the wildcard teams goes on the total WL record, or maybe the record in non division games or something, not sure.

Edited 2 hours ago by klumzyfule66

[MasterStrategist]

23 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

I've been thinking about this change for awhile. I wanted to get some input. Currently, the division winners get an automatic playoff home game. This is despite if another playoff team has a better record. Likely going to happen to the Bills this year. 

 

I get the NFL wants to reward division winners but it's at the expense of other teams good seasonal records. Personally, I think it's more fair to have the team with the better record to host the playoff game instead of the divisional winner. 

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think at some point this might happen? 

I like your thought, here is what I would propose for a rule change (Playoff seeding):

 

The winner of each division will host a playoff game, UNLESS, the following occurs:

1. Division winner's record is 2 or more games worse than the #7 seed in their conference (ie: #7 seed record is 10-7, the division winner would have to have 8 or fewer wins)

2. If #1 occurs and this team played the 5 seed AND they lost, then this team would switch seeding with the 5 seed (ie: Division winner becomes the 5 seed, and 5 seed becomes the 4 seed) - if the 4 and 5 seed did NOT play head-to-head, then just rule #1 applies

 

To me, this would only occur when a team likely finishes below .500 (but this year might different).  Also, it gives the division winner another option to stay as the 4 seed if they beat the 5 seed head-to-head.

 

In a year like this season, no way does a team like Baltimore or Pittsburgh deserve to host a playoff game.  Highly likely that division winner finishes with 9 wins tops.

 

This proposed rule change would also create more competition in week 18 --- ie: currently teams locked into the 4 or 5 seed have nothing to play for.

 

[gonzo1105]

13 minutes ago, GolfandBills said:

Get rid of the divisions problem solved 

I actually am on board with this scenario especially if they go to 18 games, which appears likely. 
 

You could do it a couple of different ways. Eliminating AFC/NFC regular season. Bills play the other 15 AFC teams once and to preserve rivalries you could play 3 AFC teams twice. 
 

Or you could do 15 AFC teams once and rotate 3 NFC teams every year.

 

This would cut down on strength of schedule issues significantly but I don’t know if they would do it because it might cost them TV matchups.

[MasterStrategist]

2 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:

I actually am on board with this scenario especially if they go to 18 games, which appears likely. 
 

You could do it a couple of different ways. Eliminating AFC/NFC regular season. Bills play the other 15 AFC teams once and to preserve rivalries you could play 3 AFC teams twice. 
 

Or you could do 15 AFC teams once and rotate 3 NFC teams every year.

 

This would cut down on strength of schedule issues significantly but I don’t know if they would do it because it might cost them TV matchups.

Not a fan of getting rid of divisions, because of rivalries and many NFL teams (to a certain degree) draft/build their team around opponents they play 2x per year.  And I don't like Option 1 (playing all AFC games), because it eliminates fans seeing any AFC/NFC matchups throughout the season (which is a big draw / creates excellent matchups).

 

And Option 2, I dislike because you end up losing out on the "rivalry" aspect.  

 

I have no issue with playoff seeding as it stands today.  The only enhancement is giving a deserving 5-seed the chance to host, if there is an undeserving 4-seed (I outlined an option above this post).

 

No perfect solution to this, but my bigger issue is with "average" to "below avg" 4-seeds hosting playoff games.  Rest of the seeding is just fine.

[Steve O]

43 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

I've been thinking about this change for awhile. I wanted to get some input. Currently, the division winners get an automatic playoff home game. This is despite if another playoff team has a better record. Likely going to happen to the Bills this year. 

I get the NFL wants to reward division winners but it's at the expense of other teams good seasonal records. Personally, I think it's more fair to have the team with the better record to host the playoff game instead of the divisional winner. 

What are your thoughts? Do you think at some point this might happen? 

This is a good life lesson. Life isn't fair. (if it were would we be Bills fans?)