Sign in to follow this  
League_Champion

Playoff Expansion

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, DMD said:

 

It all makes me think there are aspects of the change that I have not - and maybe they too - thought about.

That's what you have your "wannabe" football experts here for. :headbang:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DMD said:

 

4 games down to 3

 

I could live with that. I hate paying for preseason games. I just give the tickets away anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

I could live with that. I hate paying for preseason games. I just give the tickets away anyway. 

Not worth traveling from SC to see them

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Not worth traveling from SC to see them

 

No, I have season tickets and only do 3-4 home games a year at most anymore. I sell the rest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind expanded playoffs if they extended the playoffs by a week.  So Week 1, 4 wildcards in each conference would play and the 4 division winners would have byes.  Week 2, the 2 winning wildcards in each conference and the 2 bottom division winners would play and the 2 top division winners would have a second bye week.

Edited by michaelredd9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean division winners, as there is on 1 winner per conference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Big John said:

Do you mean division winners, as there is on 1 winner per conference?

 

Yeah, I meant division winners, I fixed it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm not sure how I like it now, I'm teetering. Part of me thinks another playoff spot will increase interest and excitement for that last spot but on the other hand do we really need a 6-10 team in the playoffs? Especially if they are going to get smoked in the first round anyway. I'm all over the place on this one. I definitely don't want 17 games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well regardless, only 3 preseason games is a blessing.  4 was crazy. I might take a 17th game if only to get rid of a preseason game.  My major issue is the quality of games.  Guys might need to rest and preserve themselves a bit more.  17 games is a lot for football.  With playoffs too. They should consider raising the rookie deal $$ for RB's.  They get screwed pretty hard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, League_Champion said:

Yeah, I'm not sure how I like it now, I'm teetering. Part of me thinks another playoff spot will increase interest and excitement for that last spot but on the other hand do we really need a 6-10 team in the playoffs? Especially if they are going to get smoked in the first round anyway. I'm all over the place on this one. I definitely don't want 17 games. 

I'm against adding another team from each conference, but the part in bold is not likely to happen..  This rule change, in all likelihood, is not going to increase the chances that a team gets in with a losing record.  In other words, the two times that happened in the past, it was a division winner.  There are always (or at least usually) teams left out of the playoffs with winning records (non-division winners), or at least .500 records, and those are the teams affected by this potential change.  A team at 6-10 is very unlikely to get in, under the current format OR the proposed one.  It's not mathetmatically impossible, but pretty close.  

 

Going back the last ten years, here is a breakdown of the record of the teams who WOULD have been affected by this rule....

 

10-6 - 5 times

9-6-1 - 1 time

9-7 - 8 times

8-7-1 - 1 time

8-8 - 5 times

 

So, basically, 50% of the time, the teams impacted have between 8.5 and 9.5 wins, with 9-7 being the most likely scenario.  And, 8-8 is the worst record affected.  Nobody, in 10 years, would have gotten in with less than 8-8.  Furthermore, of the 20 teams impacted, only FIVE had a better record than one of the other playoff teams to have gotten in.... Four of the 10-6 teams, plus TEN at 9-7 in 2011 (DEN won the West at 8-8 that year).  

 

I guess my thing is this.  Does it really help the teams that got screwed because they were simply in a better division than other teams (who won their division with a lesser record)?  Well, it did five times.  Out of 20 possibilities, that's only 25%.  There is a much greater chance that the teams being added are going to be winners of 8-9 games, and probably not as strong as the teams already in the playoffs.  And, some of those 8-win scenarios were between 3-4 teams.  Does that really add a lot of value to the NFL playoffs?  A team who has to win a tie-breaker between 2-3 other teams, all of which were mediocre (.500 or MAYBE slightly above)?  

 

Again, it's all about $$, so if it's in the best interest of the owners, they're probably going to figure out a way to make it happen.  I just don't think it's very likely that this will add excitement to the playoffs.  Sure, a team like TEN is going to come along every once in a while, and make a run for a couple of games.  But, what happened this year was rare.  Like once in a decade rare.  If anything, the change just solidifies the #1 seed's chances of making the SB that much more, as they are now the sole holder of a bye week.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went back a little further (through 2003), just to see if I could find a team with a losing record who would have made it.  I did not.  From 2003-2009, there were another three instances of 8-8.  Everybody else was 9-7, 10-6, or in one case, 11-5 (2008 Patriots).  Altogether, 17 years, 34 teams, eight of which were 8-8.  Everybody else had a winning record, ranging between 8-7-1 and 11-5 (with by far the most common record being 9-7).  Conclusion?  There will be a few exceptions, but in most cases, the change will add another team to the mix that is SLIGHTLY better than average, while taking the bye away from the 2nd best team in each conference.  Meh... I don't think the former is worth it, at the expense of the latter.  

 

In other words, which adds more meaningful drama to the NFL regular season and playoffs?  Playing games in Weeks 16/17 (or 18?) that decide who gets the #2 seed and a bye (which significantly increases their chances of making the SB)?  Or playing those same games in Weeks 16/17 to see who gets in with the 7-seed at 9-7 (and has almost zero chance of making the SB)?  You can argue one way or the other, but in the overall scheme of winning a title, one is much more impactful.  More isn't always better, and in this case, adding more teams looks a lot more like the NBA, where the latter half of the regular season and first round of the playoffs are a snooze-fest, than March Madness, where parity runs rampant and anybody can seemingly make a run.  

 

All of that said, would this change ruin the NFL playoffs?  I doubt it. I'm a traditionalist, and don't see the benefit in adding teams.  But, the first couple of weeks of the NFL playoffs are (and will likely remain as) some of my favorite sports weekends of the year.  I'm a college hoops nut, and they're better than March Madness.  I'm a golf nut, and they're better than any major.  I just think four games during wild card weekend is plenty.  Six feels like watering it down.  :shrug: 

Edited by Gopher
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the extra pay for that 17th game, it is part of the CBA being proposed and capped at $250,000.  Which means that players making approx $5M or more per season are taking a pay cut on that last game, since their per game/week pay is already above that.

 

Future contracts will be adjusted to handle this, and the 17th game part won't kick in until 2021 or 2022. Meaning lots of new contracts will be written after CBA approval and before the 17th game is played. 

 

None of this ruins the NFL, but that WC weekend with 6 games (most likely 3 each Sat/Sun at 1PM/4:30/8 time slots) will be brutal. 

Share this post


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

Regarding the extra pay for that 17th game, it is part of the CBA being proposed and capped at $250,000.  Which means that players making approx $5M or more per season are taking a pay cut on that last game, since their per game/week pay is already above that.

 

Future contracts will be adjusted to handle this, and the 17th game part won't kick in until 2021 or 2022. Meaning lots of new contracts will be written after CBA approval and before the 17th game is played. 

 

None of this ruins the NFL, but that WC weekend with 6 games (most likely 3 each Sat/Sun at 1PM/4:30/8 time slots) will be brutal. 

This.  Trying to watch four games in two days is hard enough these days.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/25/2020 at 12:10 PM, stevegrab said:

 

 

None of this ruins the NFL, but that WC weekend with 6 games (most likely 3 each Sat/Sun at 1PM/4:30/8 time slots) will be brutal. 

 

Brutal? You serious, Clark?

 

That sounds like football heaven. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chief Dick said:

 

Brutal? You serious, Clark?

 

That sounds like football heaven. 

 

Its just a lot more football in a weekend than I'd usually watch. Don't do college, so Saturdays are spent on other things. Sundays are regularly NFL action from 2-3PM until midnight (watch all games on delay on DVR). Maybe its the compressed format (no commercials or halftime, sometimes no breaks between games), that has my brain a bit frazzled after 3 games are complete. Doing that 2 days in a row will compound that. 

 

I'm not complaining, or saying I won't watch. Just saying it is a lot more football than I normally consume on a weekend, 2 more games. 

 

Of course if a couple of games are blowouts that will open up some gaps and make it a little better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2020 at 3:02 AM, Wolverines Fan said:

 

I read elsewhere (believe it was an article on SI) that the league has already negotiated deals with NBC and CBS to carry the additional 2 wild card games. Believe it said that Amazon continues to get streaming rights, possibly extending that deal. I suspect for simplicity the scheduling will be 3 games each day (Saturday & Sunday) in pretty traditional time slots we see on a Sunday during the regular season (1PM, 4:30PM, 8PM). I know that isn't ideal, and people will want a game Friday, or Monday, or both. But there are issues with that, from time off between games for opponents in subsequent rounds to the placement of the NCAA championship game. 

Edited by stevegrab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the 17 weeks of regular season. I do, however, mind the expanded playoffs. What a lame idea that only results in a crappy team in the playoffs the majority of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2020 at 6:37 PM, League_Champion said:

Yeah, I'm not sure how I like it now, I'm teetering. Part of me thinks another playoff spot will increase interest and excitement for that last spot but on the other hand do we really need a 6-10 team in the playoffs? Especially if they are going to get smoked in the first round anyway. I'm all over the place on this one. I definitely don't want 17 games. 

well, we were able to witness one of the best runs in playoff history due to a 7-9 team making the playoffs (beast mode vs the saints on the road).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bier Meister said:

well, we were able to witness one of the best runs in playoff history due to a 7-9 team making the playoffs (beast mode vs the saints on the road).

The game was in Seattle as they won the division with a 7-9 record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Big John said:

The game was in Seattle as they won the division with a 7-9 record.

ty.. i was going strictly by my poor memory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Papajohn said:

I don't mind the 17 weeks of regular season. I do, however, mind the expanded playoffs. What a lame idea that only results in a crappy team in the playoffs the majority of the time.

 

Plenty of crappy teams already make it as division winners and lose in the playoffs. Heck the crappy wild card Titans (9-7) beat both the Pats(12-4) and the Ravens (14-2). I bet when they first started adding wild card playoff teams people thought "oh those teams suck they'll just lose". Of course we've seen at least a few go on to win the whole thing. 

 

The extra wild card team is probably going to be 8-8 at worse, often 9-7 which is a common record for wild card teams. There's been a few seasons with a 10-6 missing the playoffs.

 

It wasn't something I really wanted, but it was inevitable. It is still much better than NBA/NHL where over half the teams get in. Or MLB where they added another playoff team and made that a one game series while all others are multiple games (mostly 7).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.