NFL pondering expansion of playoffs
Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:35 PM
Expanding to 14 teams
2011 NFC Chicago 8-8 & AFC Tennessee 9-7
2010 NFC NY Giants 10-6 & AFC San Diego 9-7
2009 NFC Atlanta 9-7 & AFC Houston 9-7
2008 NFC Tampa Bay 9-7 & AFC New England 11-5
2007 NFC Minnesota 8-8 & AFC Cleveland 10-6
2006 NFC Green Bay 8-8 & AFC Denver 9-7
2005 NFC Minnesota 9-7 & AFC Kansas City 10-6
2004 NFC New Orleans 8-8 & AFC Jacksonville 9-7
2003 NFC Minnesota 9-7 & AFC Miami 10-6
2002 NFC New York Giants 10-6 & AFC Miami 9-7
Exapanding to 16 teams(the teams listed above and one additional team from each conference
2011 NFC Arizona 8-8 & AFC Jets 8-8
2010 NFC Tampa Bay 10-6 & AFC Jacksonville 8-8
2009 NFC Carolina 8-8 & AFC Pittsburgh 9-7
2008 NFC Dallas 9-7 & AFC Jets 9-7
2007 NFC Philadelphia 8-8 & AFC Houston 8-8
2006 NFC Carolina 8-8 & AFC Cincinnati 8-8
2005 NFC Dallas 9-7 & AFC Miami 9-7
2004 NFC Carolina 7-9 & AFC Baltimore 9-7
2003 NFC New Orleans 8-8 & AFC Cincinnati 8-8
2002 NFC Atlanta 9-6-1 & AFC Denver 9-7
Over the past 10 seasons if the playoffs expanded to 14 teams would have added:
11-5 1 team
10-6 5 teams
9-7 10 teams
8-8 4 teams
Expanding to 16 teams would have added
11-5 1 team
10-6 6 teams
9-6-1 1 team
9-7 17 teams
8-8 14 teams
7-9 1 team Carolina in 2004.
So in the past 10 years if it were expanded to 16 teams it would have allowed one team with a losing record into the playoffs, the same amount that is afforded to division champions over the same time frame.
I stopped at 2002 since that was the first year of the new alignment of 4 divisions in each conference.
Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:38 PM
lets expand it to 32 teams in the next 5-6 yrs. why not? Any team can beat any other team on any given day. That's why u play the game. Expanding the playoffs is totally crazy. Keep it at 12. Make them earn it. This is football not wussyball
If the work stoppage would have ate into last season, that was a suggestion I made. play 8 weeks, then seed each conference 1-16 and let em have at it.
It wouldn't be sound to do on an annual basis but when there is a work stoppage it sounds like a much better idea.
Again it's a topic where people agree with expanding it or they want to leave it alone. If I had a vote, I would vote for expanding it. Some wouldn't oh well. I've been in the minority before, and will again. It certainly won't affect how I sleep at night.
Your "wussyball" comment has no relevance, unless that was just a failed attempt to insult me.
Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:56 PM
Your talking as if that has not gone on for years which Im sure it has, What Goodell is purposing is basically turning the NFL into a watered down (slightly) version of the FBS. The league is saying....alright we will allow more teams into the playoffs regardless if they have a 500 record or worse (yes I know Seattle got in a couple years back with a sub 500 record but that was much more luck related combined with whats has been a less than competitive division vs actually earning there way in)
The intergrity of a game where union ballplayers in New Orleans are encouraged by their coaches to pay 'hit money' to disable other union ballplayers...?
That game? That integrity?
Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:44 PM
Posted 14 December 2012 - 03:29 PM
I don't like this idea at all. The thing about the NFL that's so appealing is the importance of every game. If half the teams in the league make the playoffs, my fear is that we'll see the same mentality in the NBA/NHL/MLB, where teams just sort of coast through the regular season and only try hard enough to make the playoffs.====================================================================================
It's bad enough that we usually see at least one .500 team come in as a wildcard. Can you imagine how much it would suck for the sport if a 7-9 team made it in and somehow pulled off an improbable Super Bowl run? Having .500 teams qualify for the post season is bad enough... I'd prefer to see the NFL leave this as-is. Just my opinion.
also lets say a poor team happens to just have a good game and win 1 or 2, that means the poor team will get a worse than normal draft pick & the better team with 1 bad game getrs a better than normal pick,
Thus the next year that poor team is even worse and the good 1 better, of course its all hypothetical, hope I explained myself right but seems like if that happens it discoragees parity
HEY HOW AN BOUT A LOTTERY FOR DRAFT PICKS TOO
Posted 15 December 2012 - 02:03 AM
Let everyone over .500 play for the championship round robin style. Single elimination that would eliminate all the wah wah whining about the team with the better record being in the tougher division and getting left out.
Courage is being scared to death and saddling up anyway-John Wayne
Posted 15 December 2012 - 05:03 PM
Umm...No. Leave it the way it is. I really don't want a team that's under .500 playing in the playoffs.
That's a reason to change it, actually. It's possible for a team at or below .500 to make the playoffs now, and it happens from time to time.
Posted 16 December 2012 - 05:34 AM
what business doesn't try to make more money?
There's a huge difference between making money & sucking blood from a turnip. Doing this, runs shamelessly close toward the sheer hypocrisy of player safety no matter if you grant teams an additional bye week & a limited number of padded practices too.