TriplecHamp
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2009
- Messages
- 5,863
- Reaction score
- 381
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Having lived through a season (as a Fan) and having my team go 11-5 and miss the playoffs really sucks. But, if the alternative is to get more mediocre teams into the Post Season because of that outlier in the probability chain, then I can only claim that this is a terrible idea.
I understand, some #6 ranked teams have won the SB, but what makes them think the #7 will fair as well?
I've had this thought about an 8 team in each conference playoff. To get into the playoffs a team must either 1) win its division, or 2) have a season record equal to or better than any division winner, or 3) win a wild card game. The number of wild card game(s) would be a function of how many teams qualified in 1) and 2) above - could be a minimum of 0 and a max of 4. This past year in the AFC there were 5 teams that would have qualified. So there would have been 3 wild card games to fill the last 3 playoff spots. All wild card/playoff games would by season record seeding (conference record and strength of schedule tie breakers) with all home fields going to the top seeds. The wild card games would be the first week after the season ends and all 1) and 2) teams would have that week as a bye week. This essentially makes the season one week longer which can easily be handled by either dropping a pre-season game or starting the season labor day weekend.
I'm sure there are some refinements but I think this basic plan fairly puts an emphasis on winning the division, winning intra-conference games, and an overall winning record.
I've had this thought about an 8 team in each conference playoff. To get into the playoffs a team must either 1) win its division, or 2) have a season record equal to or better than any division winner, or 3) win a wild card game. The number of wild card game(s) would be a function of how many teams qualified in 1) and 2) above - could be a minimum of 0 and a max of 4. This past year in the AFC there were 5 teams that would have qualified. So there would have been 3 wild card games to fill the last 3 playoff spots. All wild card/playoff games would by season record seeding (conference record and strength of schedule tie breakers) with all home fields going to the top seeds. The wild card games would be the first week after the season ends and all 1) and 2) teams would have that week as a bye week. This essentially makes the season one week longer which can easily be handled by either dropping a pre-season game or starting the season labor day weekend.
I'm sure there are some refinements but I think this basic plan fairly puts an emphasis on winning the division, winning intra-conference games, and an overall winning record.
That is a poor analogy. A better analogy, though still far from perfect, would be a CEO to major investors. People who rise to the level of CEO or Commissioner of a major sports league are always very ambitious. Believing ambitious men simply carry out direct orders of their superiors is naive at best.
ohhhhhhhhh you're one of these "Goodell hates us but loves everyone else" people.That is a poor analogy. A better analogy, though still far from perfect, would be a CEO to major investors. People who rise to the level of CEO or Commissioner of a major sports league are always very ambitious. Believing ambitious men simply carry out direct orders of their superiors is naive at best.
It is possible that you are unaware of the leniency Goodell has shown vs some teams vs. the clear prejudice he has shown towards others. That said, such ignorance would mean you know almost nothing of Goodell's actions and history and should not be taking part in any such discussion, nevermind calling others out on the subject.
LOL..!!!! The above post is a great Yogi Berra-ism..!!Another awful rules change by an awful commissioner. This guy, unless something drastic happens, is going to be in office for a very, very long time. If crap like this keeps happening, he's going to completely ruin the game. People can only take so much when it comes to watering down and changing the game for the sake of greed.
What kind of ridiculous criticism is this? Of course he is allowed to lobby for or against certain ideas. It's called consensus building and compromise.Yes but this CEO's incentive bonus $ to grow revenue (see post #19) as always comes from his Board of Directors, the owners. Some owners are against this expansion, but Goodie has carte blanch to lobby against them.
I suppose this is true is you don't consider HFA in any given game a reward. Personally I think HFA in a playoff game is a big advantage, so I would sure much rather be #2 than #7. In fact, I'd much rather be #2 than #3.So, there is really no reward for getting the #2 seed. Okay.
Really? Everyone is going to get a trophy? I don't see anything in this new proposal that gives more Vince Lombardi Trophies than the current system, so I am not sure how you see this.They've already ruined hockey and basketball and are working on baseball, so why not.
Pretty soon everyone will get a trophy at the end of the year just like little kids now.
Everyone's a winner!
:bricks:
Really? Everyone is going to get a trophy? I don't see anything in this new proposal that gives more Vince Lombardi Trophies than the current system, so I am not sure how you see this.