NECN: Goodell wants to change the post-season

Wants to make sure the last game or two actually matter for teams to win.

This is stupid as the Giants had no reason to try to beat the Patriots and yet the game was the most watched and shown on three channels (four in some areas) at once.

Of course this may have nothing to do with the Patriots, since they played hard even though they clinched the playoff spot many games early, but this will be lame if they increase the amount of total games to 20.

Did you enjoy watching the Indy Tenn crapfest that weekend too?

16-0 was the only reason that that was shown all over the place and certainly was not the norm.

The Giants-Pats game was an exception....

Remember the Cowboys game? or Indy? Many teams ddnt actively play to win the last game or few.....

It doesn't matter how many games he adds on, this practice will still be there. They will just tank the 20th game instead of the 16th.

All he can do is fine teams or maybe take away draft picks if they don't have starters play a certain amount of time.

PatSunday said:

Wants to make sure the last game or two actually matter for teams to win.

Click to expand...

Yeah I heard this too but there's really no way it could ever be implemented. I mean what are they going to do..? Take HFA away from a team who lost their last 2 games even if they had the best record in the conference..? It just can't happen. You can't force a team to play their starters.

PatSunday said:

Wants to make sure the last game or two actually matter for teams to win.

This is stupid as the Giants had no reason to try to beat the Patriots and yet the game was the most watched and shown on three channels (four in some areas) at once.

Of course this may have nothing to do with the Patriots, since they played hard even though they clinched the playoff spot many games early, but this will be lame if they increase the amount of total games to 20.

Click to expand...

This actually might help the Colts more than any other team. In 2 of the last 3 years, they waltzed into the playoffs, resting their starters in the last game, and promptly got bumped in the playoffs. Keep it the way it is Goodell, I like watching the Colts self destruct......

Obi-Wan said:

Yeah I heard this too but there's really no way it could ever be implemented. I mean what are they going to do..? Take HFA away from a team who lost their last 2 games even if they had the best record in the conference..? It just can't happen. You can't force a team to play their starters.

Click to expand...

The plan is to make it so a wild card team can have a higher seed than a division winner if they have a better record. So basically all that matters in seeding is your record, not winning a division.

Nordy said:

The plan is to make it so a wild card team can have a higher seed than a division winner if they have a better record. So basically all that matters in seeding is your record, not winning a division.

Click to expand...

Leave the postseason format the way it is. If you seed by W-L record, whats the point of winning the division????

They'll still have the 4 division winners + 2 wild cards. The only difference is that the two wild card teams won't automatically be the 5 and 6 seeds, they'd be higher if they have a better record than a division winner.

kirjtc2 said:

They'll still have the 4 division winners + 2 wild cards. The only difference is that the two wild card teams won't automatically be the 5 and 6 seeds, they'd be higher if they have a better record than a division winner.

Click to expand...

Honestly, what's the harm in this? It seems like a fairly modest change that rewards success, make more games meaningful and reduces the chances of a week 16 in which NO games mean anything (a nightmare scenario for the league and fans both).

patsfan209 said:

Leave the postseason format the way it is. If you seed by W-L record, whats the point of winning the division????

Click to expand...

The point of winning the division remains that you're guaranteed a playoff spot, even if 6 other teams have better records.

i still think that they ought to reward the two Conference regular season champions by giving them a "Penant" like baseball does.

They could also give them some money.

Take some dough from the playoff participants and reward the best records in the Conferences, and more for the best in the the League standings. Award a trophy for the overall best regular season record. That would help right there.

And also don't make the WCs, the auotmatic5th and 6th seeds.

And punish teams for playing too many substitutres in end-of-season games, in effect, treating the in-season games as exibitions.

Punish the dinglings like Dungy.

patchick said:

Honestly, what's the harm in this? It seems like a fairly modest change that rewards success, make more games meaningful and reduces the chances of a week 16 in which NO games mean anything (a nightmare scenario for the league and fans both).

Click to expand...

Teams don't play the same schedules. Seeding is now going to be determined by who played the NFC West vs. who played the NFC East under a format like this. It's yet another bad idea by someon who can't seem to leave 'well enough' alone.

patchick said:

The point of winning the division remains that you're guaranteed a playoff spot, even if 6 other teams have better records.

Click to expand...

To me, winning a division means you're guaranteed to be always seeded higher than a wild card team. I really hate to see the day the league actually allows a wildcard champ getting a 1st round bye over a division champion.

patsfan209 said:

To me, winning a division means you're guaranteed to be always seeded higher than a wild card team. I really hate to see the day the league actually allows a wildcard champ getting a 1st round bye over a division champion.

Click to expand...

Please explain to me how trying to win every single game of the season translates into 'not trying to win the division'?

Are you expecting teams to start trying to lose games just because being #1 in the division isn't as meaningful as it used to be?

I don't think half the people in this thread are really thinking this one through.

This makes almost every game important for almost every team, instead of "all games are important for 14 weeks and then who knows...".

Maybe they could do something as simple as having the teams play for a charity, so that the winning team gets to give that charity a hefty sum of money. That would motivate a lot of teams, I think.

patchick said:

Honestly, what's the harm in this? It seems like a fairly modest change that rewards success, make more games meaningful and reduces the chances of a week 16 in which NO games mean anything (a nightmare scenario for the league and fans both).

Click to expand...

I agree, I think it's a great idea.

If there's an 8-8 division winner and a 10-6 WC team, having the WC team a higher seed would be fine with me. If Goodell is thinking this because of what Dungy and Fisher concocted in that last game of the year, I do wish he'd say that.