What if we got rid of divisions?

[dochalladay32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaiser Wilhelm

The only significant change to the NFL scheduling I'd welcome is eliminating inter-conference play. Remember, the teams aren't vying for playoff berths, they are vying to represent their conference in the playoffs. The NFL isn't a pool of 32 teams going after 12 playoff spots. The playoff spots are divided between two conferences. So even if we got rid of automatic berths, we have 16 teams going after 6 playoff spots. In this scenario it makes sense for those 16 teams to play only those other 15 teams and not the other 16 teams who are not even in the same pool as them. You guys are only noticing the symptom but are diagnosing it as the problem instead of going after the underlying cause, inter-conference play. Inter-conference play throws record out of whack because you have teams who are not in competition for the playoffs playing each other and having it impact their ability to get their own respective playoff spots.

So you'd get rid of all inter-conference/league play in every single sport? I mean, in every sport teams are only vying for playoff spots in their own conference after all.

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

Quote: Originally Posted by dochalladay32

So you'd get rid of all inter-conference/league play in every single sport? I mean, in every sport teams are only vying for playoff spots in their own conference after all.

Interconference play in the MLB was one of the worst, if not the worst decision that league has made in the last 15 years, along with adding even more playoff spots.

As for the NBA, I don't watch, and thus don't care. I have no idea how MLS is done either. However, yes, in theory, teams should only really compete with the teams they are vying for a playoff spot with.

[kayfngee]

Quote: Originally Posted by dochalladay32

Yea, lilbiggio, that's called a slippery slope and they make for poor arguments. It's as simple as saying the top 6 in each conference get in. Guess what? Since you think it only happens once every 15 years, then it won't be a problem. The division champions are usually in the top 6 and we're good. When we do run into it, like we have in 2010, 2011, and 2013, then it's resolved as it should be. This is probably the first time I've seen two division champions with meh records possibly get in over wildcard teams. Actually, since he was the one who brought it up, the 2008 Cardinals would have lost tiebreakers to Da Bears. Let's also clarify that I'm not for getting rid of divisions. I'm just for getting rid of the automatic playoff berth for division champions.

How do you know who the top 6 teams are with random schedules? A random schedule will automatically make it an uneven schedule. We would just run into the same argument the first time a team getting saddled with a brutal schedule wins 10 and gets left out because other teams played easy schedules.

[dochalladay32]

Quote: Originally Posted by kayfngee

How do you know who the top 6 teams are with random schedules? A random schedule will automatically make it an uneven schedule. We would just run into the same argument the first time a team getting saddled with a brutal schedule wins 10 and gets left out because other teams played easy schedules.

What do you mean random schedules? No one plays an identical schedule now and yet we have no problem breaking ties.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaiser Wilhelm

The only significant change to the NFL scheduling I'd welcome is eliminating inter-conference play. Remember, the teams aren't vying for playoff berths, they are vying to represent their conference in the playoffs. The NFL isn't a pool of 32 teams going after 12 playoff spots. The playoff spots are divided between two conferences. So even if we got rid of automatic berths, we have 16 teams going after 6 playoff spots. In this scenario it makes sense for those 16 teams to play only those other 15 teams and not the other 16 teams who are not even in the same pool as them. You guys are only noticing the symptom but are diagnosing it as the problem instead of going after the underlying cause, inter-conference play. Inter-conference play throws record out of whack because you have teams who are not in competition for the playoffs playing each other and having it impact their ability to get their own respective playoff spots.

Sorry but this idea is up there with one of the silliest idea's I've ever read on this site.

It would make sense if we were talking about college football and the SEC was consistently playing the Big Sky conference where the outcome of the games is pretty much predetermined but that isn't the case in the NFL.

Playing teams, regardless of conference is not easy and is still an accurate indicator or your ability.

No reason to get rid of it.



Let me ask you. Is it more of an indicator of how good the Broncos are if they were to have played the Browns instead of the Redskins??? How would that change their worth in the ADC playoffs?

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by kayfngee

How do you know who the top 6 teams are with random schedules? A random schedule will automatically make it an uneven schedule. We would just run into the same argument the first time a team getting saddled with a brutal schedule wins 10 and gets left out because other teams played easy schedules.

I'm not sure you understand the context of the conversation for the post you quoted but either way, scheduled aren't random. 14 out of 16 games are predetermined every year with the other two games being determined by your finish in the standings the previous year.

[calcutta]

I'm a noob fan just started following the league, but my main issue with the playoffs in the 32-team league format is why any teams get bye weeks in the playoffs. I think it would be a lot better if the top 8 in each conference make the playoffs so even the top 2 seeded teams still play in the first week...why rewards teams with a bye just for winning one or two more game than their opponents during an "uneven" regular season (uneven because they would most likely have played different opponents during the regular season, unlike soccer for example where each team plays each other home and away).

The added first round games would also be a revenue generator for the league and the teams involved.

Quote: Originally Posted by adriano

It does seem odd that Green Bay is 8-7-1 and they are hosting a 12-4 team.. But I agree with most, leave it as it is.

I agree with this. I think its a joke the team with the better record is effectively punished with a road game because they play in a tougher division. By all means give the division winners automatic playoff spots, but team records should be the main factor when it comes to determining playoff seeds.

[FaceMask]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigbob

There are only three teams in the history of the NFL that have ever made the playoffs with a losing record, the Seahawks being the only 7-9 team. The other two were both in 1982, both at 4-5. No need to change anything.

Agreed. No need to change anything. But you know it's going to happen, because Goodell and his band of "let's make our unneeded mark on an already perfect game" nutjobs are hellbent on screwing with things.

I can't stand this regime of the current NFL. They're like EA/Tiburon with Madden, except the NFL still manages to produce a top of the line product so we all just accept their bull and enjoy the games.