Sign in to follow this  
League_Champion

Playoff Expansion

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Shaft said:

What do you know, we can actually agree on something.

 

Haha, I actually like this idea. However it's probably a prelude to a 17 game season, seems inevitable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan of the 17 game season. It seems like an easier sell with the additional team in each conference reaching the playoffs but getting that No. 1 seed becomes really, really important since the No. 2 seed gets no bye. Will a longer season and more teams in the playoffs result in even more teams resting players at the end of the year? I'd think at least a little. If you do not have a shot at the No. 1 seed, then resting players makes more sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This gives the #1 seed in each conference a HUGE advantage.  Not sure if I like.  

And I certainly don't like that 44% of the teams will now be eligible for the post-season.  I feel like that crosses the line on watering down the significance of the regular season (the NBA s-u-c-k-s-a-s-s partly because of that).  

 

As for 17 games...  as long as each team gets a neutral site game, it will be fair.  No problem with that.

 

 

Edited by Dcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expanded playoffs dilutes the product, as does a 17-game season. The owners will kill the goose and her golden eggs soon enough.

 

In the face of rising and unrelenting pressure from the realities of head trauma in football, the solution is unlikely to be "play more games."

Share this post


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

Expanded playoffs dilutes the product, as does a 17-game season. The owners will kill the goose and her golden eggs soon enough.

 

In the face of rising and unrelenting pressure from the realities of head trauma in football, the solution is unlikely to be "play more games."

 

Agree to an extent. There will still be a hefty battle for that new final playoff spot to keep us interested. It's the 17 games that we can do without. I see no reason for it other than a money grab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.  But $$ talks.  I guess we'll have to see how it shakes out, but personally I'd prefer to keep it the way it was.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL playoffs are perfect as is.  I think we've already had two 7-9 teams make the postseason.  Next bargaining agreement maybe they can do participation trophies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Bobby Brown said:

The NFL playoffs are perfect as is.  I think we've already had two 7-9 teams make the postseason.  Next bargaining agreement maybe they can do participation trophies.

 

That's actually a really good point. What happens when a 5-11 team gets in? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate it.  The con's really outweigh the pro's, particularly with the adding of extra playoff teams.  One step closer to becoming the NBA, where the regular season is in large part irrelevant, and the first round of playoffs are mostly a formality.  The NFL already has teams with losing records making the playoffs.  If not losing records, there are teams that really don't feel like they can do much damage in the post-season.  Adding more of those average to slightly-above-average teams to the mix doesn't do anything for me.  But, let's be real... If there is more $$ to be made by the owners, it will likely happen.  If not for that, I'm not sure why you try to fix something that is far from broken.  But, money trumps common sense, what the fans want, and certainly the interests of those who play fantasy football.  For the common fan, players resting isn't a problem, and the more teams in the playoffs, the merrier.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

That's actually a really good point. What happens when a 5-11 team gets in? 

2010 - Seahawks 9-7

2014 - Panthers 7-8-1

 

Outside of the strike shortened 1982 season these are the only two teams with losing records to make the playoffs. Both teams won their division and then actually won on Wild Card Weekend. In 2010 there were two teams that finished 10-6 and did not make the playoffs in the NFC (Buc and Giants). In 2014 a 10-6 Eagles team did not make the playoffs. A Wild Card team is not going to make the playoffs with a losing record, so adding a Wild Card would not make it any more likely for a team with a losing record to make the playoffs.

 

That being said I am not arguing for or against this, just stating the facts. Although adding an additional wild card does increase the chances of a mediocre 9-7 team making the playoffs but that happens pretty often anyway. 

Edited by blaw23
Adding more thoughts

Share this post


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

Both ideas are dumb.

 

It may be, but your Barbecue eating ass will still be watching with bated breath. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more against the playoff expansion than the 17 game season. 

 

Playoff expansion does make it closer to half the teams making the playoffs, but still less than half (NBA/NHL were half or more at one point, not sure now as I don't follow either that much). It also means a really busy first weekend of NFL playoffs with 6 games, probably 3 each Saturday and Sunday in similar times as a Sunday in regular season. Yes it also makes the #1 seed much more important, and does devalue the #2 seed. But I think teams will still be fighting pretty hard over seeds, 2 is still better than 3 and so forth. This season the 2 extra teams would have been PIT (8-8) and Rams (9-7), neither team was that good, especially PIT struggling without Ben.

 

The 17 game season should allow them to allocate games to be played in London, Mexico City and anywhere else without teams having to give up one of their small number of home games. (So far only the Jaguars are really volunteering, most other teams were required to give up a game, or were volunteered by the league.) I don't know that all of those games will be neutral site, it would be the most fair but so far they only need about 5 games, not 16. They'll probably attempt to alternate any extra homes games so all teams get them equally. One thing I'm wondering, is who will that extra game be played against? Somebody on another board suggested AFC vs NFC for finishing order 1-16 (so an automatic SB rematch, as well as conf title game losers, down to worst team in each conference [CIN-DET].) It messes up the current perfect schedule of 6-4-4-2 (6 games in division, 4 against a division in conference, 4 against a division outside the conference, 2 against teams in conference [outside divisions from 6 and 4] based on finish in division).

 

One other headache with expanding to 17 games, that extends the season another week, pushing the SB out one more week. There is some talk of adding another bye as well, which means one week later. That may be difficult to handle short term with SB sites and dates already set several years in the future. The NFL does not want to return to starting on Labor Day weekend, but may have some tough choices to make there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in favor of both the extra playoff teams and the 17 game schedule. Here's why (other than more football is "good"):

 

Since the advent of the current playoff format, There have been a lot more 10-6 teams that have failed to make the playoffs than there have been 8-8 teams that have gotten in.  Which is the worse evil?  Letting an 8-8 team in to the playoffs or preventing a 10-6 team from getting in?  

 

IMO, it is far worse having 10-6 teams that don't get in than having the occasional 8-8 team that does get in.  This extra playoff spots will help with this.  

 

Also, it will make weeks 16 & 17 more competitive since there is that extra playoff spot being fought over.  Too many games in week 16 and waaaaaaaay too many games in week 17 are meaningless and pathetic to watch.  Adding the extra 2 playoff spots will help fix that mess and make more of those games meaningful and competitive. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I'm more against the playoff expansion than the 17 game season. 

 

Playoff expansion does make it closer to half the teams making the playoffs, but still less than half (NBA/NHL were half or more at one point, not sure now as I don't follow either that much). It also means a really busy first weekend of NFL playoffs with 6 games, probably 3 each Saturday and Sunday in similar times as a Sunday in regular season. Yes it also makes the #1 seed much more important, and does devalue the #2 seed. But I think teams will still be fighting pretty hard over seeds, 2 is still better than 3 and so forth. This season the 2 extra teams would have been PIT (8-8) and Rams (9-7), neither team was that good, especially PIT struggling without Ben.

 

The 17 game season should allow them to allocate games to be played in London, Mexico City and anywhere else without teams having to give up one of their small number of home games. (So far only the Jaguars are really volunteering, most other teams were required to give up a game, or were volunteered by the league.) I don't know that all of those games will be neutral site, it would be the most fair but so far they only need about 5 games, not 16. They'll probably attempt to alternate any extra homes games so all teams get them equally. One thing I'm wondering, is who will that extra game be played against? Somebody on another board suggested AFC vs NFC for finishing order 1-16 (so an automatic SB rematch, as well as conf title game losers, down to worst team in each conference [CIN-DET].) It messes up the current perfect schedule of 6-4-4-2 (6 games in division, 4 against a division in conference, 4 against a division outside the conference, 2 against teams in conference [outside divisions from 6 and 4] based on finish in division).

 

One other headache with expanding to 17 games, that extends the season another week, pushing the SB out one more week. There is some talk of adding another bye as well, which means one week later. That may be difficult to handle short term with SB sites and dates already set several years in the future. The NFL does not want to return to starting on Labor Day weekend, but may have some tough choices to make there. 

 

It doesn't bother me that an occasional weak 9-7 or 8-8 team will get in.  It bothers me a lot more when a solid 10-6 team doesn't get in.  This change will reduce that awful situation considerably.  As for pushing the SB back one week, I think the plan is to kill the empty week between the Conference Championships and the Superbowl.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OPP's don't concern me. The more games the better .. More teams equals more drama and more betting and more possibilities of a sleeping giant to awaken. I think fantasy seasons will have to lengthen as well. So more bang for the buck on all ends? Right? The bloat of the NFL will absorb all issues and pick up the pieces of broken players on the back end. Right? 

 

LOL 

 

We'll see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The major issue for me personally is that every game means something in the NFL, which is part of the reason I like it over other leagues.  Like basketball, hockey, baseball, etc.  No game is a must watch because there are so many of them.  Also, since playoff spots are more precious, again each game means something.  This dilutes that to more like the other leagues.  Is it enough to change it substantially?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I hope this means a shorter pre-season as well. 

The current CBA allows for the league to reduce the preseason.  They would do it with an expanded season.

Share this post


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

I hope this means a shorter pre-season as well. 

 

4 games down to 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could a nightmare for contracts. What about people under their current contracts that extend into the 17 game season? The teams can get them for an extra game at a discount. 

Edited by Shaft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shaft said:

This could a nightmare for contracts. What about people under their current contracts that extend into the 17 game season? The teams can get them for an extra game at a discount. 

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shaft said:

This could a nightmare for contracts. What about people under their current contracts that extend into the 17 game season? The teams can get them for an extra game at a discount. 

 

I've remember hearing on the radio that there was a bump amount already planned but honestly couldn't tell you all the details or if the talk was even factually correct.  I'm sure that's already factored in with the additional amount of money going to the players in this proposed CBA. Minimum salaries were for sure being bumped by somewhere between 200-250k with the proposal but not sure how that affects larger contracts. 

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.