Congrats to your 5-8-1 first place Carolina Panthers!

[TEX]

Originally Posted by ChiefsChoke010414

The Panthers have had a terrible year. The kind of year that gets coaches fired and QB's benched. When you're 5-8-1, your'e not very good.

Instead, if the playoffs started today, they'd get to host a playoff game. That's why this system needs changing.

This season is an extreme example, but I'll give you an example of a scenario that isn't extreme. If the Panthers were 9-7, and someone else were 10-6, and both teams were in the top 6 and deserved to be in the playoffs, I'd still have the Panthers going on the road to face the 10-6 team, even if the Panthers won their division. Instead, under the current format, the Panthers would host the game. This kind of thing happens every season, where a division winner hosts a game against a team with a better record than them. It should never happen.

I agree - unless maybe if they played and during the regular season and lost head-to- head, but for consistency sake you have to draw the line somewhere, and your way does that.

[Aries Walker]

It would probably be fairer to blow up the Conferences completely, and restructure into 8 geographic divisions of 4 teams each, with the top however-many, regardless of division, going to the playoffs.

Northwest: Seattle, Oakland, Denver, KC
Southwest: San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix, Dallas (or LA, if the Rams move)
South: Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee, St. Louis (or Dallas)
North: Minnesota, Chicago, Green Bay, Detroit
Central: Indianapolis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh
Southeast: Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, Atlanta
East: Carolina, Washington, Baltimore, New York Giants
Northeast: New York Jets, New England, Buffalo, Philadelphia

But, there's all of the history and rivalries to think of. Just like our states have their formations to blame for why Delaware and California have the same number of Senators, and why Texas takes days to cross when you can walk across Maryland in less than an hour if you're at the right spot, the rather piecemeal method of how the NFL was constructed is intrinsic to its organization now. Plus, while this way keeps together two of the NFL's three most intense rivalries (Chiefs-Raiders and Bears-Packers), there are a lot of others that sell a lot of tickets; I can't imagine the Falcons ownership would be too drop-dead crazy to have to explain to its fans why three home games a year against the Dolphins, Jaguars, and Bucs are thrilling showdowns worthy of a ticket price.

So it's not perfectly optimized, but we've got what we've got.

That said, a few extra Wild Card games wouldn't hurt.

[MMXcalibur]

One more Saints loss away from clinching a sub-.500 record for the NFC South champion.

[Hammock Parties]

They would probably beat KC.

[Renegade]

Just a question I have been wondering lately. Lets say the Chiefs finish at 8-8 and the NFC South best is 7-9, who has the higher draft order--us or the "winner" of the NFC south?

[tk13]

Originally Posted by Renegade

Just a question I have been wondering lately. Lets say the Chiefs finish at 8-8 and the NFC South best is 7-9, who has the higher draft order--us or the "winner" of the NFC south?

The Chiefs would. Whoever wins that division is going to drop down in the order.

It's funny because take Atlanta... they were in 1st, now that they aren't, they are actually the 14 seed in the NFC due to tiebreakers. They are in the running for the 6th pick in the draft. But they could still win the division and drop down to 20.

[displacedinMN]

Originally Posted by tk13

The Chiefs would. Whoever wins that division is going to drop down in the order.

It's funny because take Atlanta... they were in 1st, now that they aren't, they are actually the 14 seed in the NFC due to tiebreakers. They are in the running for the 6th pick in the draft. But they could still win the division and drop down to 20.

Good thing to happen to Pioli

[tk13]

I think the players would be okay with playoff expansion, it'd mean more money for them too. And it wouldn't add an extra weekend unless they tried to go beyond 8 teams. They'd probably prefer that to the 18 game season.

[Aries Walker]

So, if the playoffs expanded to 8 teams per conference, and the playoffs ended today, we'd add Chargers at Patriots and Chiefs at Broncos, and in the NFC there would be a Saints at Cardinals game, and Eagles at Lions. The other four games would remain the same. I don't have a problem with that.

[TEX]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

So, if the playoffs expanded to 8 teams per conference, and the playoffs ended today, we'd add Chargers at Patriots and Chiefs at Broncos, and in the NFC there would be a Saints at Cardinals game, and Eagles at Lions. The other four games would remain the same. I don't have a problem with that.

Wow...You don't have a problem with 25% of the teams making the playoffs in the NFC would have a losing record? Problem is they don't end TODAY.. There are still two more games and chances for more losses to the teams that will eventually get in.

This is the NFL, not he NBA...

[Aries Walker]

This is an unusually lopsided year, though. Last year, this would have given us the 10-6 Cardinals at Carolina, the 8-8 Cowboys or Bears at Seattle, and two 8-8 teams (Jets, Dolphins, Steelers, or Ravens) at the Broncos and Patriots. In 2012, it would have been the 10-6 Bears at San Francisco, the 9-7 Giants at Atlanta, the 8-8 Steelers at New England, and the 7-9 Chargers or Dolphins at Denver. The same holds true looking further back: in 2011, the added teams would have been 9-7, 8-8, 8-8, and 8-8; in 2010, 10-6, 10-6, 9-7, and 8-8; in 2009, 9-7, 9-7, 9-7, and 8-8.

So across the previous five seasons, an expanded playoffs would have added twenty games, only one of which would have gone to a 7-9 team. Half of the time - including for four 10-6 teams - it would have meant playoff appearances for teams with winning records when under the current system they would get sent home.

I'm starting to talk myself into liking this idea.

[TEX]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

This is an unusually lopsided year, though. Last year, this would have given us the 10-6 Cardinals at Carolina, the 8-8 Cowboys or Bears at Seattle, and two 8-8 teams (Jets, Dolphins, Steelers, or Ravens) at the Broncos and Patriots. In 2012, it would have been the 10-6 Bears at San Francisco, the 9-7 Giants at Atlanta, the 8-8 Steelers at New England, and the 7-9 Chargers or Dolphins at Denver. The same holds true looking further back: in 2011, the added teams would have been 9-7, 8-8, 8-8, and 8-8; in 2010, 10-6, 10-6, 9-7, and 8-8; in 2009, 9-7, 9-7, 9-7, and 8-8.

So across the previous five seasons, an expanded playoffs would have added twenty games, only one of which would have gone to a 7-9 team. Half of the time - including for four 10-6 teams - it would have meant playoff appearances for teams with winning records when under the current system they would get sent home.

I'm starting to talk myself into liking this idea.

Please STOP!
Even FUGLY women look at 2:30AM after many beers...

.

[Eleazar]

The Panthers fans have to be miserable. They are like 49er fans who are stuck with Kaepernick for the time being, but most everyone has now realized that Kaepernick needs to go. Newton will never take a team anywhere but he still puts up decent enough numbers to hide it.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Adding more teams to the postseason is dumb as ****.

[Discuss Thrower]

Ignore conferences and divisions in playoff seeding.


Give viewers the best 12 teams any given season.