- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,863
- Reaction score
- 753
A real playoff system would be best. When you just pick two (or now four) teams based on how you think they stack up there will always be disputes.
Agreed.
So do you think the NFL should go the college route? How many great Pats-Colts Super Bowls would there have been? Or some combination of Giants/49ers/Redskins/Cowboys games in the 80s or early 90s? I mean, you say you want the top two teams. The second best team in the AFC should not be ignored if the guys on BSPN think they are better than the best team in the NFC, right?
Any playoff system has half the teams on one side of the bracket and the other half on the other side. So by definition there are a number of teams that you're not going to be playing. So you're question is solely a question of how to seed.
Personally, I think it's self-obvious that when you have a "tournament" of two teams, you want the best two teams in the tournament.
As far as the system used most everywhere, including the NFL, I like it. I'm not a fan of seeding teams 1-32 in the NFL before the playoffs not because that may not be the fairest (a strong argument can be made that it is) but because other factors strongly outweigh the "fairness" issue. Splitting teams into divisions and conferences greatly improves rivalries and is useful/important from an historical perspective. Having AFC and NFC Championships is great from my perspective.