Should the NFL change its playoff format?

[ichab]

Right now the way the NFL is structured, each conference has four divisions. The division winners make the playoffs along with two wildcards for each conference.

This year the Seattle Seahawks won the very weak NFC West with a 7-9 record. They will be going to the playoffs while the 10-6 Giants and 10-6 Buccanears stay home.

Should the NFL change it's current structure? One alternative would be for each conference to have 6 playoff spots with the decision based on record.Under that format, the Giants would be replacing the Seahawks in the playoffs.I'm not a giants fan by any means, but they are certainly more deserving of the playoffs than the Seahawks, who have lost in embarassing fashion this year.

Personally I think that would work out a lot better.

 

[Roger Wilco]

I think they should merge the divisions so there are 8 teams in each division. You'd only play once against each other team in your division, which I guess would be hard to swallow for some of the rivalries, but it would definitely be more fair. And it would make it easier to expand the league when the opportunity comes up (not that the owners want that).

 

[SmoothieX]

Leave the divisions as is, but reseed the playoffs so the team with the higher winning percentage hosts the game.

The appeases both camps, right?

It preserves the concept of division play and keeps the NFC Wests of the world relevant into December, but also recognizes that the second place team in a superior division may be better than the winner of a weak division like the PAC-10, er...NFC West.

 

[Skywalker]

I'd rather see divisions just go away, but they should at least change the seeding so that a 7-9 team with one of the best home crowds in the NFL doesn't get an advantage over an 11-5 team simply because they play in a worse division.

Either way, changes definitely need to be made.

 

[Daedalus12]

Make a new rule that requires a minimum number of wins (set it at 9) in order to qualify the playoffs unless less than 6 teams have at least that number of wins.

 

[BillJ]

You just need to go to a 'Best 6' format for each conference, with the divisions remaining intact (with head-to-head then conference record being the main tie-breaker). I don't really give a damn if a division that doesn't have a .500 team remains relevant in December.

Or... you can go 'Best 12' and retire the NFC vs. AFC format that has been in place for the last 40+ years (with head-to-head then strength of schedule being the main tie-breaker). The conferences would still exist, just wouldn't mean anything outside the regular season.

 

[Sheep]

Leave the divisions as is, but reseed the playoffs so the team with the higher winning percentage hosts the game.

The appeases both camps, right?

It preserves the concept of division play and keeps the NFC Wests of the world relevant into December, but also recognizes that the second place team in a superior division may be better than the winner of a weak division like the PAC-10, er...NFC West.

I vote for this strategy. A 7-9 team winning an NFL division is a fluke and should be treated as such. It's not like this happens every year or even remotely often.

My only question is by how many dozen points New Orleans' high powered offense will be favored over Seattle.

 

[BillJ]

I vote for this strategy. A 7-9 team winning an NFL division is a fluke and should be treated as such. It's not like this happens every year or even remotely often.

But teams with better records are often left out of the playoffs for 'division winners'. Two years ago the 8-8 San Diego Chargers, the 'AFC West Champion', made the playoffs while the 11-5 New England Patriots sat home.

 

[Pegaritaville]

Leave the divisions as is, but reseed the playoffs so the team with the higher winning percentage hosts the game.

The appeases both camps, right?

It preserves the concept of division play and keeps the NFC Wests of the world relevant into December, but also recognizes that the second place team in a superior division may be better than the winner of a weak division like the PAC-10, er...NFC West.

That's still not really fair to teams that are in strong divisions. A team in a weak division will have the advantage of playing weak teams twice while a team in a strong division will have the disadvantage of having to play strong teams twice.

I say leave things as they are. Yeah, it can be unfair and sometimes you'll have teams like Seattle luck their way to a playoff spot despite being lousy, but there really isn't an easy solution. The fairest way would be to have each team play every other team in their conference, but that would lessen rivalries.

 

[erastus25]

I'd add another playoff team so that only the top team gets a bye in the first round. Makes winning the conference more important, adds more late season intrigue and gives us 2 more playoff games. Everyone wins.

 

[Starbreaker]

Teams should make it a priority to win their division, then. This is unlikely to ever happen again, and we all know the Seahawks are gonna get pummeled this weekend. Whoop-de-doo, you're a 10-6 team but got destroyed by the division winner twice, that's your own fault.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I like division competitions and, without them, there's always concerns of uneven schedules. I'd still suggest re-seeding so Wild Card teams can get homefield if the division winner is actually that bad.

 

[Davros]

The playoffs are fine. The only change I could really support would be adding another widcard round at the beginning.

 

[Starbreaker]

There's no need for 14 teams to make the playoffs. That almost makes the regular season pointless.

 

[Davros]

There's no need for 14 teams to make the playoffs. That almost makes the regular season pointless.

It's a better solution than getting rid of the divisions. But then again I voted there is no need for change.
At least the NFL isn't the absurd mess the BCS is.

 

[Marten]

As long as there are less games than other teams, some injustice is unavoidable.

 

[erastus25]

There's no need for 14 teams to make the playoffs. That almost makes the regular season pointless.

I don't agree. It helps alleviate the concern of a divisional qualifier having a far worse record than a non-qualifying wild card and it gives the top teams a better reason to keep playing hard. There are still 18 teams that don't make it so it's not like we have an NBA/NHL situation. We've also seen several 6 seeds do very very well in the playoffs so we have no reason to believe the 7 seeds aren't similarly qualified.

 

[nevermore]

Leave the divisions as is, but reseed the playoffs so the team with the higher winning percentage hosts the game.

The appeases both camps, right?

This gets my vote. Winning in the division should count for something, but not everything.

I vote for this strategy. A 7-9 team winning an NFL division is a fluke and should be treated as such. It's not like this happens every year or even remotely often.

But teams with better records are often left out of the playoffs for 'division winners'. Two years ago the 8-8 San Diego Chargers, the 'AFC West Champion', made the playoffs while the 11-5 New England Patriots sat home.

True, but division play creates rivalries and forces teams to build to compete with the other teams in the division, which encourages diversity in team structure and strategy, making cross-division games more interesting match-ups. It also makes the good teams in the division better overall, resulting in better seasons. I wouldn't want to give that up just for easier play-off seeding. I say this as a fan of a team that competes in a division with another perennial play-off team and which has often gotten the fuzzy end of that lollipop in the seedings.

 

[BillJ]

Leave the divisions as is, but reseed the playoffs so the team with the higher winning percentage hosts the game.

The appeases both camps, right?

This gets my vote. Winning in the division should count for something, but not everything.

I vote for this strategy. A 7-9 team winning an NFL division is a fluke and should be treated as such. It's not like this happens every year or even remotely often.

But teams with better records are often left out of the playoffs for 'division winners'. Two years ago the 8-8 San Diego Chargers, the 'AFC West Champion', made the playoffs while the 11-5 New England Patriots sat home.

True, but division play creates rivalries and forces teams to build to compete with the other teams in the division, which encourages diversity in team structure and strategy, making cross-division games more interesting match-ups. It also makes the good teams in the division better overall, resulting in better seasons. I wouldn't want to give that up just for easier play-off seeding. I say this as a fan of a team that competes in a division with another perennial play-off team and which has often gotten the fuzzy end of that lollipop in the seedings.

There's no need to eliminate divisions... just the automatic playoff berth that accompanies winning a division.

 

[ToddPence]

Previous to this year - a list of teams who made the playoffs while teams with better records stayed home (just to show that what happened this year is nothing new).


1970
Made playoffs: Bengals (8-6)
Stayed home: Giants (9-5), Rams (9-4-1), Cardinals (8-5-1)

1977
Made playoffs: Vikings (9-5), Bears (9-5)
Stayed home: Dolphins (10-4)

1978
Made playoffs: Vikings (8-7-1)
Stayed home: Seahawks (9-7), Chargers (9-7), Raiders (9-7)

1979
Made playoffs: Rams (9-7)
Stayed home: Redskins (10-6)

1980
Made playoffs: Vikings (9-7)
Stayed home: Patriots (10-6)

1981
Made playoffs: Buccaneers (9-7)
Stayed home: Broncos (10-6)

1985
Made playoffs: Browns (8-8)
Stayed home: Broncos (11-5), Redskins (10-6)

1988
Made playoffs: Seahawks (9-7)
Stayed home: Saints (10-6)

1989
Made playoffs: Bills (9-7), Browns (9-6-1), Steelers (9-7), Oilers (9-7)
Stayed home: Redskins (10-6), Packers (10-6)

2007
Made playoffs: Buccaneers (9-7)
Stayed home: Browns (10-6)

2008
Made playoffs: Chargers (8-8)
Stayed home: Patriots (11-5), Jets (9-7), Cowboys (9-7), Bears (9-7), Buccaneers (9-7)

TRIVIA NOTE: For the Seattle Seahawks, this year marks the fifth time the franchise has won a division title with less than ten wins. The other four squads had 9-7 records. Two of those titles came when the club was based in the AFC West.