pf9 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 On the other hand, seeing Seattle win the wild card at Soldier Field, the NFC divisional at the Georgia Dome, and the NFC title game at either the Superdome or Lambeau Field would have been a real-feel good story, because weak division winners going on to the Super Bowl WITHOUT having a home playoff game along the way is a more believable Cinderella story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheatieMan Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 I think Dallas should be the 7th seed if they get in. Not going to happen though so gear up for a JerryWorld prime time game hopefully...😜 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 Meanwhile, without seeding priority for division winners, in 2012, the Ravens-Colts playoff game would have been played in Indianapolis instead with the Colts being the #4 seed and the Ravens the #5 seed. Thus to reach the Super Bowl, not only would the Ravens have to had win in Denver and either New England on Houston, but also Indianapolis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXsteeler Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 14 minutes ago, pf9 said: Giving thorough explanations for what I want to say helps though Ehhhh, it doesn’t when nobody wants to read a thesis and quits like 6 sentences in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 (edited) Furthermore, if MLB keeps its 16 team playoff, the seeding should likewise be done NBA style. Had that been the case this year, the matchups in the wild card series would have been: Houston at Tampa Bay Toronto at Minnesota NY Yankees at Oakland Chicago Sox at Cleveland Milwaukee at LA Dodgers Miami at San Diego Cincinnati at Atlanta St. Louis at Chicago Cubs The two best teams in the NL, the Dodgers and the Padres, would have gotten the top two seeds with NBA-style seeding, despite being in the same division, and thus have an opportunity to play each other in the NLCS, which would have been bigger than meeting in the NLDS. Edited December 28, 2020 by pf9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 Of course the NBA has another advantage over the NFL when it comes to playoff seeding. The NBA's playoff rounds, unlike those of the NFL, are not single-elimination. Thus, every NBA playoff team is guaranteed at least two home games in the postseason. Even if they are seeded between 5-8 in their conference. Thus, having NBA-style seeding in the NFL would mean winning your division isn't enough for a home playoff game. In fact, it would make the seeding process more competitive. By removing seeding priority for division winners, teams will fight harder to earn a particular seed by not resting their key starters as much, especially with my proposal to expand the playoffs to 16 teams. Under a 16-team bracket, every playoff spot right now would be clinched, except for the NFC East title. And under a system where winning your division doesn't guarantee you a top 4 seed, every team already in the playoffs will play for seeding. The NFC East champion would only be able to get the 8th seed in their conference, which right now would mean a trip to Lambeau Field in the first round. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 I mean, the main reason I want a 16-team playoff to begin with is because I don't want ANY team having a first-round bye. It has become too much of a competitive advantage. No team that played on wild card weekend has been to the Super Bowl since 2012. By making every playoff team play in the opening weekend, it levels the playing field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slingin' Sammy Posted December 28, 2020 Author Share Posted December 28, 2020 ^The triple posting is also off-putting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 32 minutes ago, pf9 said: No team that played on wild card weekend has been to the Super Bowl since 2012 Is this a byproduct of teams having a bye, or a byproduct of the fact that the best teams typically have a bye? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 No. You don't change rules because of outlier situations. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf9 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 17 minutes ago, lancerman said: No. You don't change rules because of outlier situations. It's becoming less and less of an outlier. It was never really an outlier to begin with. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
childofpudding Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 Division winners should get in the playoffs but should not dictate seeding. Simple enough change, and fair. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 This is going to be unpopular but here goes... I just made this up tonight, so deal with it Add 4 teams.. That brings us to 36 total, or 18 per conference. Let's say San Diego Portland Austin/San Antonio OKC Make it 3 divisions of 6 per conference Expand playoffs to 8 teams per conference. Division winners are seeds 1, 2, and 3 This eliminates my own, perceived issue of the 1 seed being OP, as now the only benefit is homefield, as opposed to homefield AND the only BYE week. I think we are going to start seeing the current setup as an issue By having fewer divisions with more teams, it greatly decreases the variance of division winners. You won't have these type of records for division winners in deeper divisions In a 17 game season Play each other member of your conference once per season You don't play your division twice (deal with it) You don't play the other conference (deal with it) In a proposed 18 game season Play each other member of your conference once per season 1 game from opposing conference. Possibly all done on opening weekend as a special treat of new matchups Conversely in a 17 game season (since I know people won't like the original idea) 10 games from your division 6 games from a different division on a rotating basis 1 bonus game (rivarly game or something) Realignment, just for fun Western Conference Pacific Division: Seattle Seahawks Portland Football Team San Francisco 49ers Los Angeles Rams Los Angeles Chargers San Diego Football Team Southern Division: Arizona Cardinals Oklahoma City Football Team Dallas Cowboys Houston Texans Austin/San Antonio Football Team New Orleans Saints Midwest Division: Las Vegas Raiders Denver Broncos Kansas City Chiefs Minnesota Vikings Green Bay Packers Chicago Bears Eastern Conference Northeast Division: New England Patriots New York Jets New York Giants Philadelphia Eagles Washington Football Team Baltimore Ravens Southeast Division: Miami Dolphins Jacksonville Jaguars Tampa Bay Buccaneers Atlanta Falcons Carolina Panthers Tennessee Titans Rustbelt Division: Pittsburgh Steelers Buffalo Bills Cleveland Browns Detroit Lions Cincinnati Bengals Indianapolis Colts *I would also allow a swap of Las Vegas Raiders and Oklahoma City Football Team **I would also allow Las Vegas Raiders to Southern, New Orleans Saints to Southeast, and Tennessee Titans to Midwest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 tl;dr to my previous post 6-10 should not be acceptable Having fewer divisions and more teams in a division, the math will prevent this from ever happening again 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich homie Posted December 28, 2020 Share Posted December 28, 2020 3 hours ago, RuskieTitan said: Seattle beating the Saints is all the reason I'd ever want to keep the playoff seeding exactly the way it is. If you can't go on the road and beat a sorry squad with a losing record, you have no business being in the playoffs in the first place. Stop making excuses for bad teams to fit a crappy narrative. On the flip side, you could say that it's all the more reason to change it. You have clearly superior teams that won more games being disadvantaged against crap teams who happened to fall backwards into the playoffs because they were in ta division with three other terrible teams. In the three examples of a 8-8 or worse team hosting a game against a team with 4 more wins than them, all three of them won (probably a great deal of it due to home field advantage) only to get pummeled in the divisional when they faced an actually good team (2008 Colts-Chargers, 2010 Seahawks-Saints, 2011 Broncos-Steelers), Going by your logic, we could also expand the playoffs so that the 8 seed gets in, and they can also get a home game against the 1 seed, because record doesn't matter, and if that one seed can't beat the 8 seed anyway they shouldn't be in the playoffs right? In the NFL right now there's way too much focus on divisions, especially when there are so many of them with so few teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.