How I think NFL would play out in with an Interleague Playoffs.

[mdonnelly21]

First record, then won division, followed by NET points. 

4 Team Byes

#1. Saints 

#2. Rams 

#3. Chiefs 

#4. Bears 

 

#5. Chargers 

#6. New England Patriots 

#7. Houston Texans 

#8. Baltimore Ravens 

#9. Dallas Cowboys 

#10. Seattle Seahawks

#11. Indianapolis Colts 

#12. Pittsburgh Steelers. 

Which games do you disagree with, and what would the score be? 

First Round Matchups. 

#12. Steelers @ #5. Chargers (Chargers win 27 - 17) 

#11. Colts @ #6. Patriots (Patriots win 28 - 24) 

#10. Seahawks @ #7. Texans (Seahawks win 23 - 20) 

#9. Dallas Cowboys @ #8. Baltimore Ravens. (Cowboys win 20-13) 

Picked who I think would win. 

Second Round Matchups. 

#5. Chargers @ #4. Bears (Chargers win 24 - 17) 

#6. Patriots @ #3. Chiefs. (Chiefs win 27 - 20) 

#9. Cowboys @ #2. Rams (Rams win 30 -22)

#10. Seahawks @ #1. Saints (Saints win 31 - 17) 

Championships 

#5. Chargers @ #1 Saints 

#2. Rams @ #3. Chiefs 

Superbowl. 

Saints V Rams (Saints 37 > Rams 34) 

[JAF-N72EX]

No offense but is there some follow up question to this?

[BayRaider]

I do agree the Saints and Rams are the two best teams in the league. 

[mdonnelly21]

10 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

No offense but is there some follow up question to this?

My question is, how would you determine what the seedings look like in an Interleague playoffs?

I went 

#1. Record 
If someone has the same record, 

#2. Did they win their division. 

#3. If they both won their division, then go by Net Points. (Points scored minus points allowed.) 

[DoleINGout]

I like "interleague" seeding much better.

[FinSting]

This word interleague should be interconference, no? 

[mdonnelly21]

On 1/13/2019 at 10:01 AM, FinSting said:

This word interleague should be interconference, no? 

I suppose that would be interconference yes. 

 

[x0x]

The CFL has a cross-over policy after the top 2 teams in each division. In a 6 team playoff format this means one division could sport 4 teams as oppose to 3 which is bolstered by one division having 5 teams while the other has 4.

I think if this was ever done (unlikely) the system employed would have the 4 division winners from each conference seeded accordingly but the wildcards could be switched depending on record. For 2018 this would look like so:

AFC
1. Chiefs
2. Pats
3. Texans
4. Ravens
5. Chargers
6. Colts

NFC
1. Saints
2. Rams
3. Bears
4. Cowboys
5. Seahawks
6. Steelers

Basically you're looking at the Steelers having a 9-6-1 record over the Eagles 9-7. If two teams were tied then it would go towards head to head and if they hadn't played each-other than either out of Conference Records or own Conference Records. You can't decide on points. But anyways, this would have a minimal difference that I think would be easiest to digest. So basically the Steelers face the Bears as oppose to the Eagles. In 2017 it looks like this:

AFC
1. Pats
2. Steelers
3. Jags
4. Chiefs
5. CONTESTED
6. CONTESTED

NFC
1. Eagles
2. Vikes
3. Rams
4. Saints
5. Panthers
6. Falcons

As you can see, the Panthers and Falcons in the NFC would not be moved, but you had a glut of four 9-7 teams in the AFC and three in the NFC. Of these 7 teams which 2 gets the last two spots in the AFC?

Going by head to head:
9-7 Cowboys lost to 9-7 Chargers and went 2-2 against AFC
Chargers went 3-1 against NFC

This effectively rules out the Cowboys. Now you look at other 5 teams and how they match-up, essentially figuring out which ones went 3-1 or better against the other Conference first then look at their head to head.

Bills went 2-2  for example and didn't beat any of the other 5 contending teams so they're ruled out.

This leaves Titans who finished 5th in AFC, Ravens, Lions and Seahawks.
Seahawks went 2-2 and lost to Titans, out.
Ravens went 2-2, lost to Titans, beat Lions.
Lions went 1-3 and lost to Ravens.

Titans went 1-3 against the NFC but beat the Seahawks and Ravens. So this becomes hard because it's now a jumbled mess where it seems like the Chargers move up to 5th in the AFC because they're 3-1 against the NFC and didn't lose to any of the other 6 contending teams. In reality the Bills made it in because of the 3-way tiebreak procedure but in this scenario including the NFC bumps them out. The Titans meanwhile go 1-3 against the NFC but have wins against both the Seahawks and Ravens and Lions are 1-3 so they're not in contention.

So Chargers are the only difference in 2017 moving up to 5th seed from out of the playoffs.

[areksoo]

1 hour ago, x0x said:

The CFL has a cross-over policy after the top 2 teams in each division. In a 6 team playoff format this means one division could sport 4 teams as oppose to 3 which is bolstered by one division having 5 teams while the other has 4.

I think if this was ever done (unlikely) the system employed would have the 4 division winners from each conference seeded accordingly but the wildcards could be switched depending on record. For 2018 this would look like so:

AFC
1. Chiefs
2. Pats
3. Texans
4. Ravens
5. Chargers
6. Colts

NFC
1. Saints
2. Rams
3. Bears
4. Cowboys
5. Seahawks
6. Steelers

Basically you're looking at the Steelers having a 9-6-1 record over the Eagles 9-7. If two teams were tied then it would go towards head to head and if they hadn't played each-other than either out of Conference Records or own Conference Records. You can't decide on points. But anyways, this would have a minimal difference that I think would be easiest to digest. So basically the Steelers face the Bears as oppose to the Eagles. In 2017 it looks like this:

AFC
1. Pats
2. Steelers
3. Jags
4. Chiefs
5. CONTESTED
6. CONTESTED

NFC
1. Eagles
2. Vikes
3. Rams
4. Saints
5. Panthers
6. Falcons

As you can see, the Panthers and Falcons in the NFC would not be moved, but you had a glut of four 9-7 teams in the AFC and three in the NFC. Of these 7 teams which 2 gets the last two spots in the AFC?

Going by head to head:
9-7 Cowboys lost to 9-7 Chargers and went 2-2 against AFC
Chargers went 3-1 against NFC

This effectively rules out the Cowboys. Now you look at other 5 teams and how they match-up, essentially figuring out which ones went 3-1 or better against the other Conference first then look at their head to head.

Bills went 2-2  for example and didn't beat any of the other 5 contending teams so they're ruled out.

This leaves Titans who finished 5th in AFC, Ravens, Lions and Seahawks.
Seahawks went 2-2 and lost to Titans, out.
Ravens went 2-2, lost to Titans, beat Lions.
Lions went 1-3 and lost to Ravens.

Titans went 1-3 against the NFC but beat the Seahawks and Ravens. So this becomes hard because it's now a jumbled mess where it seems like the Chargers move up to 5th in the AFC because they're 3-1 against the NFC and didn't lose to any of the other 6 contending teams. In reality the Bills made it in because of the 3-way tiebreak procedure but in this scenario including the NFC bumps them out. The Titans meanwhile go 1-3 against the NFC but have wins against both the Seahawks and Ravens and Lions are 1-3 so they're not in contention.

So Chargers are the only difference in 2017 moving up to 5th seed from out of the playoffs.

Personally, we really shouldn't be looking at a league that lets in 67% (and 75% not that long ago) of the teams qualify for the playoffs on ideas to change the playoffs in the NFL, but this suggestion is interesting.  There have been years where 11-5 (once) team and a few 10-6 teams didn't make the playoffs, but really should have been there if we want to have the best teams in the playoffs.

 

Except you really can't apply the tie breakers like you did.  Once the Division winners are established, here's my take on determining the wild cards (using the NFL tiebreaker rules):

1. Best record

2. Head to head record... this should stay, but when a boat load of teams involved, this rule is skipped as not all teams have faced each other.  Like what happened in 2017, Ravens beat the Chargers and the Chargers beat the Bills.  But since the Bills never played the Ravens, this rule was not used.  

3. Best record in Conference... this tie breaker should be thrown out.  It made sense that the best Divisional record represents that Division (in the Divisional tiebreaker rules).  Much like the best Conference record represents that Conference, but now we are comparing teams across the league and should look at how they performed across the league... and that's really just the first tie breaker.

4. Best record with common teams (at least 4 teams)... with 2 teams in different conferences, the chances of this becomes much harder, but I think it should stay.  In the scenario this would be skipped.

5.Strength of Victory... this will probably be the deciding factor for last year, but too lazy to figure out which teams get in.

6. Strength of Schedule... if the above is still a tie, this will likely break it. 

7. , 8., 9. Then point differential, most points and most touchdowns.

Often with many teams across the league, it'll likely be 5, 6, 7 that really decide the ones who go in and what seed they are and honestly, I don't mind that.