1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

proposed change to NFL playoff system. .

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Jersey Dolfan, Nov 24, 2014.

  1. Jersey Dolfan

    Jersey Dolfan Active Member

    196
    138
    43
    Sep 9, 2012
    Looking at the putrid NFC south records, and being that the NFL counts league wide losses in playoff standings, I believe there is one common sense change that should take place:

    All division winners should automatically get a playoff spot, UNLESS, there is another team in conference with a better record that is not a division winner.

    IMO, in college only conference record matters for conference standings, so it makes more sense,BC the only real constant is the teams u play in conference, since OC games vary greatly.

    but in the NFL, you can be a horrible team, but just by lucky virtue of being in a horrible division, get into the playoffs over much better teams who competed in the same league as you. This doesn't hurt good or decent teams in a crappy division, BC if they truly are good, they will beat up on their division and have a good record.

    I think this has to happen, as after the restructure into 4 divisions per conference, the playoff spots seem to miss the best teams in a number of seasons.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team DeVante Club Member

    43,945
    47,505
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I disagree. Years like this when a team with a bad record will win a division are rare. More likely, if you make changes, you'll end up hurting a good but not great winner of a really tough division. We're having a bizarre year with one division where every team is bad, and more than the usual number of teams with just a putrid record. If a lot of teams have a lot of losses, those wins of course have to go somewhere too, and you end up having a lot of teams bunched up who look to be playoff calibre. Some will be left out.

    This is a once in twenty or more year weird scenerio. Don't overreact.
     
    Boik14 and Puka-head like this.
  3. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,185
    32,693
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    There is only one change I would be in favor.

    That you need at least an 8-8 record to make the playoffs. If the division winner has less than a .500 record, then their spot is treated as another wild card spot.

    Though wouldn't it be crazy if a 6-10 team wins the Superbowl? Heck a 5-11 could make the playoffs.
     
    Ronnie Bass and ElNino like this.
  4. Jt0323

    Jt0323 Fins Up! Luxury Box

    12,967
    7,293
    113
    Dec 7, 2007
    Las Vegas
    just imagine if someone gets in 6-10 or 5-11, wins the super bowl, they would be 10-10 or 9-11. crazy, would never happen imo but crazy that it could
     
  5. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,802
    12,035
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with that scenario at all, because the best team would ultimately win. If somebody catches fire in the playoffs (like the Giants in recent years) we definitely don't hold it against them for having average seasons....they're the champs either way.
     
  6. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,392
    14,745
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    The only change I would be in favor of is getting rid of the wildcard altogether. If you can't win your division you shouldn't be in the playoffs
     
  7. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,185
    32,693
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    That would be boring
     
    brandon27 and xphinfanx like this.
  8. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic Twuaddle or bust Club Member

    30,342
    18,781
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    considering wildcard teams have won the superbowl, not sure that holds any water.
    I would favor just not giving division winners automatic home field. Let record determine where the game is played.
     
    Stitches likes this.
  9. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,650
    4,553
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Seeded tourney, best 12 teams get in. Divisions are more for scheduling consistency and rivalry than they should be for playoff determining. Sorry, there is nothing about "winning" a crap division that should let a team get in automatically. This would actually benefit the good teams in tough conferences - like us this year, or the NFC/AFC West divs. Last year you would have seen a team like the Cards make it. Additionally, you would not see any more of this crap where a superior record team has to go on the road to play in the first round.

    March Madness is perhaps the most fun playoff tourney out there, NCAAF is going that route this year. Do it.
     
  10. ElNino

    ElNino Well-Known Member

    1,535
    255
    83
    Aug 5, 2013
    Norfolk VA
    It would, similar to how baseball did it in the past. Once the divisions were locked up, the end of the season was pointless. Definitely keep the wild cards - the last couple weeks of the NFL season are great and the wildcard plays a big role.

    Also, I had the same idea with no under .500 teams in the playoffs - agree with you there. A 9-7 division winner is fine, maybe even getting a home game over a 10-6 team, but 7-9? Stay home and let a better team make the dance.
     
  11. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team DeVante Club Member

    43,945
    47,505
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    Hate this. Our division sucks and does nothing but harm us. To then take away the benefit when we eventually win it? BS.
     
  12. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I like it the way it is. There's a good mix of reward for teams that played great throughout the year and hope for teams that got hot at the right time. Only thing different I'd do, is give it a week off in between the end of the season and the start of post. Give some teams a chance to heal and be full strength.
     
    Ohio Fanatic and Boik14 like this.
  13. Dolphins1Beatles

    Dolphins1Beatles Ziggy Stardust

    4,749
    1,940
    113
    Oct 9, 2009
    New York
    I don't think an 11 win wild card team should host a 10 win division winner. What about the AFC North. They have 6 games this year against: NFC North, Titans, Jaguars. 6 easy wins there.

    I think if a division winner finishes 8-8 or worse, then they should have to go on the road to the wild card team.
     
  14. Clark Kent

    Clark Kent Fighter of the Nightman

    8,560
    4,133
    113
    May 9, 2008
    Want to fix the playoff system?

    Get rid of divisions. Every team in the AFC plays every other team in the AFC once. And an NFC wild card game added to create a 16 game season (the NFL will never do 15 game seasons, obviously). The NFL could designate a specific week for AFC and NFC teams to go head to head and advertise it like inter league play.

    This would ensure equal competition among the conferences. No cupcake schedules for some teams and murderers row schedule's for others. This is the ONLY way to have truly fair competition. It's a fact that teams with difficult schedule's very rarely make the playoffs. The system the NFL currently employs is one of the most unbalanced and unfair systems in sports.
     
    Stitches, xphinfanx and Boik14 like this.
  15. RGF

    RGF THE FINSTER Club Member

    5,613
    2,753
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    NY
    Been saying that for years.
     
  16. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That's not a horrible idea.
     
    Clark Kent and Stitches like this.
  17. Boik14

    Boik14 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    73,684
    34,642
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    New York
    The only thing I would say to some who want teams with losing records to either be not allowed in or forced to travel is you obviously didn't watch New Orleans go to Seattle a few years ago with a 12-4 or 11-5 record and get plowed by Lynch and co. It's very rare that a team with a losing record makes the playoffs but what happens when a team with a good record is just a product of a soft schedule? The way they have it now is fine IMO. Fin D and Clark Kent made good suggestions IMO, otherwise if it ain't broke...
     
  18. DeDolfan

    DeDolfan Premium Member Luxury Box

    19,406
    10,985
    0
    Nov 23, 2007
    Rehoboth Beach
    Along the same line, suppose one division has all teams with a 13-3 record, split with all teams in the div. Which one misses the playoffs? Just a random thought.................
     
  19. Stitches

    Stitches ThePhin's Biggest Killjoy Luxury Box

    51,646
    28,856
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Katy, TX
    Yea, home field shouldn't be based on division winners getting it automatically. Seems silly for a 9-7 division winner to host a 10-6 wild card.
     
  20. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team DeVante Club Member

    43,945
    47,505
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    What about the fairly common occurance of a team getting to 9-7 via a brutal schedule, while another gets 10 or 11 wins by beating up 7 or 8 cupcakes? A team's record isn't the end all of how good they are.

    Look at Miami this year. of our 11 games, 8 have been against winning teams. Numerous other teams are the exact opposite.
     
  21. Stitches

    Stitches ThePhin's Biggest Killjoy Luxury Box

    51,646
    28,856
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Katy, TX
    No it isn't, yet that is exactly how draft order is determined. Worst record gets first pick, then 2nd, then 3rd, etc. Only for tie-breakers does SOS get factored in. Otherwise seedings are strictly bu W-L's.

    If we finish 9-7 but played 12 games against teams with winning records (for example), we're not getting in the playoffs over a 10-6 team that got to play the AFC and NFC south for 8 games. So why shouldn't home games be determined by the same method?

    I mean what if we had a brutal schedule (like we do imo) and finish 11-5, yet behind the Pats who are 12-4 (or 13-3, whatever). You think because we didn't win our division we should give up a home game to the Colts or AFC North winner if they are 10-6?
     
  22. Hellion

    Hellion Crash Club Member

    1,800
    798
    113
    Dec 4, 2007
    Here and there
    This is a debate i have had with a few friends..they think a division winner with a poor record shouldn't get in the playoffs. My opinion is this, if that's what they want.

    Get rid of the division's period because they mean nothing then. Make it 16 team conferences and add more games from the other conference to replace the second division games.Then seed the playoffs from the top 6-8 in each conference.

    I hate the idea of division winners not making the playoffs because of a poor record. What if a 10-6 division winner doesn't get in because of this system? The divisions are there because it creates rivalries that promote bigger promotions and big game atmosphere.

    There is a reason baseball went to divisions instead of two conferences.

    I say leave it alone. or make it so the division winner with a poor record doesn't host a playoff game. But to eliminate them all together is silly.
     
  23. Jersey Dolfan

    Jersey Dolfan Active Member

    196
    138
    43
    Sep 9, 2012
    I can go along with division winners at less than 8-8, so that a winning division winner does not get left out. However, i agree that division rivalries are fun etc - but they are also to an extent not meaningful enough under our current system - In college football, every conference game is the same atmosphere and that is b/c you play each team once, and the ONLY record that counts toward a conference championship is in conference play. In the NFL you could literally sweet 2/3 of your division opponents, but not even be close to winning the division, even against a team you may have swept. For instance, if we sweep NE this season (not saying we do, just saying) I dont love that kind of system. I say if overall NFL record determines in division standings, then don't let a crappy division team with less than a .500 record host a game or even be in the playoffs.
     
    Clark Kent likes this.
  24. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,650
    25,564
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    Needs more boobies
     
  25. Aquafin

    Aquafin New Member

    4,736
    304
    0
    Jun 16, 2011
    the poor house
    Depth ?

    with all the injuries we have had on the oline will we be adding veteran players for depth ? is Dion Sims still the starting tight end , so who is our number 2 tightend?

    I assume that we will add olinemen n the draft so what is the biggest concern going forward ?

    what will likely be our need if we have another injury or two ? I am just asking because we seem to have more injuries this season. if you had to list our biggest needs what are they ?
     
  26. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    Aren't the NFC South's out of conference games against the AFC North this year? I find that interesting.
     
  27. Clark Kent

    Clark Kent Fighter of the Nightman

    8,560
    4,133
    113
    May 9, 2008
    College football doesn't suffer from lack of divisions. Divisions only serve one purpose. To create parody. And it does so by awarding teams easier schedules. See the NFC south as an example, where the division winner has gone from worst to first every year since it's inception. And the big game rivalries will still exist. If divisions were abolished tomorrow, would that make NYG vs. Dallas any less appealing? It's not as if fans will forget who to hate. And the winner take all approach creates tense and big game atmospheres better than divisions, IMO.
     
    Hellion likes this.
  28. Hellion

    Hellion Crash Club Member

    1,800
    798
    113
    Dec 4, 2007
    Here and there
    I think for a few seasons it would still have the same type of rivalry but it would fade. specially if the teams are only playing once a year or due to scheduling not for a few years.On this MB alone it is brought up a lot about how Miami is the only other team to win the division in the last 14 seasons.There are bragging rights and when u play a team twice a year that create a strong rivalry. In a way it gives fans of teams that didn't win the SB the right to say their team one a divisional championship. To me it's the NFL's way of keeping the fan base (Mainly casual) into the sport.

    Other sports have followed. Like NASCAR championship series, it used to go by points alone and that determined the season champ. Terry Labonte won the 95 championship without winning a race. A few years ago they changed it so the top 10 finishers in points go to a "playoff" type system.

    If going to a non divisional style alignment and conference only there wouldn't be any reason to play the same team twice in one year unless meeting in the playoff because old rivalries would die off and no need for the second game because there isn't a division on the line.. I can see regional ones remaining like GB and DET. or Cleve, Cincy. and it could create new ones like Houston, Dallas, Pitt, Philly. but not nearly as strong as divisional opponents are.

    How often has this happened that a division winner had a losing record?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–11_NFL_playoffs

    So is it that big of a deal that it happens at this rate? Shouldn't we wait until we have more of a pattern of this before making decisions to changed the current format?
     
  29. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    I agree. After the completion of the 2011 regular season, the Giants had the worst record of any of the teams which made the playoffs in the NFC that year. Their 9-7 record was worse than the two wildcard teams which had 10-6 records, yet the Giants won their division and they ended up playing the best football in the playoffs and went on to win the SB against the Patriots.

    The divisions change from year to year in regards to how many competitive teams they have. In fact in 2010, the Seahawks won their division with a 7-9 record in what was considered at the time, the weakest division in the NFL. Just a couple of years later, the NFC West is now considered to be the toughest division in the NFL.

    I have no problem with a division winner making the playoffs, even if they don't have a winning record during the regular season. They may not be better than some teams which don't make the playoffs, but the league is set up based on divisions and unless that changes, the winner of each division should continue to earn a spot in the playoffs, IMO.

    The only way I would be in favor of a change is if the NFL decides to do away with the divisions entirely. Each team in the AFC and the NFC would then play the other 15 teams in their conference each year, along with one game against a team from the other conference.

    The top six teams in each conference would then make the playoffs and it would be a fairer system because every team in each conference would have played every other team in their own conference during the regular season.

    The top two teams in each conference would still receive a bye in week one of the playoffs and the 3rd and 4th place teams would continue to have the home field advantage against the 5th and 6th seeds.

    To me this would be the fairest way to pick the top six teams in each conference. Unfortunately I don't see the NFL ever doing away with the divisions in each conference, so as long as there are divisions, I really don't see any reason to change how playoff teams are selected.
     
  30. Jersey Dolfan

    Jersey Dolfan Active Member

    196
    138
    43
    Sep 9, 2012
    I like the idea of this conference system, in fact I love it. I actually think the 2 games a season vs rivals takes more away from the rivalry then adds to it. I. College you only get one crack at your rivals each year, and home games every 2 years, that makes the game that much note crazy and bursting at the seems with enthusiasm. The NFL could schedule games between the biggest traditional rivals at times during the season that would promote this kind of like rivalry week in college. Further, the cross conference rival every year would be a real cool game BC you'd only get that team every 16 years. The Superbowl would be even more exicitng like back in the days when AFC vs NFC meant something. Plus, we all know there are rivalries that are not based on division but on playoff rivalries. So broncos/pata for instance could play every year, plus teams could still meet all the time in the playoffs for a second time that year if they are perennial contenders. Best idea I've heard in a while Not to mention, playoffs would be more than fair BC everyone would have common opponents except for one. Then the true winners would shake out in the end no one gets 2 easy games or two hard games just by virtue of division.
     

Share This Page