Would it be time to change rules if NFC East winner is 6-10?

[chad72]

Just wondering if it would be worth changing rules for hosting a home game if you win a division with a sub .500 record.

 

I can see the NFC East winner at 6-10, they’d be a potential Top 10 pick if they didn’t win the division.

 

A .500 record at minimum is not an unrealistic requirement for a home game in the playoffs, IMO.

 

Thoughts???

[crazycolt1]

I have been an advocate of changing the playoffs to seeding the conference for a long time. 

[pacolts56]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

Just wondering if it would be worth changing rules for hosting a home game if you win a division with a sub .500 record.

 

I can see the NFC East winner at 6-10, they’d be a potential Top 10 pick if they didn’t win the division.

 

A .500 record at minimum is not an unrealistic requirement for a home game in the playoffs, IMO.

 

Thoughts???

 

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

I have been an advocate of changing the playoffs to seeding the conference for a long time. 

 

I agree.....seed all teams after the regular season. 

 

And if that means a 12-4 "Wild Card" team gets a bye week then so be it.... they will have earned it in the win column.

[danlhart87]

Here's my suggestion:

Keep the AFC and NFC but remove divisions

 

The top 8 seeds from each make playoffs

1 vs 8

2 vs 7

3 vs 6

4 vs 5

 

Top seed plays lowest remaining seed next 

 

The following year the 8 playoff teams from each conference all play each other once so the same teams don't make it every year.

 

The other 8 games are 4 from separate conference and 4 of teams that didn't make it.

 

My only concern is how the schedule would be chosen. 

[Myles]

I'd like to leave it as it is.  I like the divisions.   Maybe every few years a division winner has a .500 record, oh well, no big deal.

I also like to see how divisions rotate as far as which divisions are good and which are not.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

I would like to get rid of divisions and just have conferences = AFC and NFC. Keep the playoff format how it used to be, 2 best records get Bye's 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5 in each conference. Every game matters in the regular season then as well.

[Nesjan3]

I would just make it so that the better record always hosts the game. Divison winner should just get you in the playoffs. Keep everything else the same. I would also go back to the way it was last year and before. Im pretty annoyed they added another team from each conference, but wild card weekend will be fun 3 games a day.

[Fluke_33]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

I'd like to leave it as it is.  I like the divisions.   Maybe every few years a division winner has a .500 record, oh well, no big deal.

I also like to see how divisions rotate as far as which divisions are good and which are not.  

Same here.  I like division battles meaning something.  

[shakedownstreet]

Leave it as is

[ColtsBlueFL]

Winning your division means something, and should remain that way.  Irrespective of how good or your division is perceived.

 

It's often a teams first milepost goal for the season.

[bestQBever]

honeslty just do what the NBA does

[2006Coltsbestever]

If I was an owner I wouldn't hang division banners. People mock us for hanging a Final 4 banner in 2014 but yet think hanging a division banner (hypothetically for going 8-8) is ok? Think about how silly that sounds. I would rather be in the AFC Title Game than win my division, that is common sense.