NFL considering changes in playoff HFA, seeding

[Tunescribe]

There is no perfect answer because your way eliminates the division rivalries.
Also if you have a 15 game schedule where everyone plays everyone, you won't necessarily have a true champion. What if 3 teams tie at 12-3? How do you break the tie? No wins are better or worse than others because everyone played everyone.
Personally I think people are searching for something that can't exist.
The NFL has set up its rules saying that the best team is the one that wins when it matters most and wins the SB.
It does not want teams who struggle during parts of the season to not be allowed to participate in that determination, therefore 12 make the post season.
First you must be one of the 12 best, based on a clearly defined crtieria, then you must be the best of those 12 when its time to go earn that.
I have no problem at all with that.

I don't necessarily disagree, just throwing the idea out there for the sake of discussion. But to continue the argument, there would be ample tie-breakers available in case of identical records. And I have no problem with doing away with division rivalries in favor of playing a different team each week throughout the regular season.

The primary casualty of "my" suggestion is inter-conference games which I suppose would be a deal-breaker. But this could be somewhat compensated for by having all preseason games be inter-conference tilts.

 

[Patsrock]

I don't necessarily disagree, just throwing the idea out there for the sake of discussion. But to continue the argument, there would be ample tie-breakers available in case of identical records. And I have no problem with doing away with division rivalries in favor of playing a different team each week throughout the regular season.

The primary casualty of "my" suggestion is inter-conference games which I suppose would be a deal-breaker. But this could be somewhat compensated for by having all preseason games be inter-conference tilts.

It is also really tough scheduling

15 conference games 8 H 7 A for half the conf teams 7 H 8 A for the other half. Then they have to make sure they match up with the NFC for that one game so one team is not 9H 7A and vice versa

 

[brdmaverick]

I love the idea of reseeding......

1.) It preserves the 'win your division and you are in'.

2.) It eliminates road teams having better records than the home team.

3.) Makes it MORE fair for the #1 seed. After all, some here this year and past years have said they don't want the #1 seed b/c it gives a greater liklihood of playing the #5 seed (which times is the best team in wild card weekend) in the divisional round. [a fear we also had in 2011 until Tebow found a way to beat the Steelers]

 

[Ring 6]

I don't necessarily disagree, just throwing the idea out there for the sake of discussion. But to continue the argument, there would be ample tie-breakers available in case of identical records. And I have no problem with doing away with division rivalries in favor of playing a different team each week throughout the regular season.

The primary casualty of "my" suggestion is inter-conference games which I suppose would be a deal-breaker. But this could be somewhat compensated for by having all preseason games be inter-conference tilts.

How would you have tiebreakers if everyone played everyone once?
There is no valid justification for a tiebreaker, because every game is the same value as every other game.
You would have to use point differential and then this would turn into what the NCAA used to be with teams piling on when they are ahead late.

What tie breaker could you have?

 

[Ring 6]

I love the idea of reseeding......

1.) It preserves the 'win your division and you are in'.

2.) It eliminates road teams having better records than the home team.

3.) Makes it MORE fair for the #1 seed. After all, some here this year and past years have said they don't want the #1 seed b/c it gives a greater liklihood of playing the #5 seed (which times is the best team in wild card weekend) in the divisional round. [a fear we also had in 2011 until Tebow found a way to beat the Steelers]

What do you mean by reseeding?
We have reseeding now. The #1 plays the lowest remaining seed, not the winner of a specific game.

 

[Ring 6]

It is also really tough scheduling

15 conference games 8 H 7 A for half the conf teams 7 H 8 A for the other half. Then they have to make sure they match up with the NFC for that one game so one team is not 9H 7A and vice versa

Scheduling game 16 is easy. Interleague Sunday.
The problem is that you have now introduced a difference in strength of schedule which was the thing that was being eliminated by this plan.

 

[Sicilian]

How would you have tiebreakers if everyone played everyone once?
There is no valid justification for a tiebreaker, because every game is the same value as every other game.
You would have to use point differential and then this would turn into what the NCAA used to be with teams piling on when they are ahead late.

What tie breaker could you have?

If you've played everyone in your conference, wouldn't the only necessary tiebreaker be head to head? In the event you tied that team, you go to strength of victory, strength of schedule (which would basically be how good your opposite conference matchup was), and then to point differential. But the number of times you'd have to get past head-to-head would be probably once every twenty years.

 

[dales804]

The NFL works now. The only reason for this is more $ for the owners. Is there really anyone who doesn't like the way the NFL playoffs are done? Win your division and you're in the playoffs; outside of that make sure you win your conference games and you should be okay.

 

[Ring 6]

If you've played everyone in your conference, wouldn't the only necessary tiebreaker be head to head?

Arguably if you played the same schedule head to head isn't much of a tie breaker, but that is why I said 3 teams, assuming they split.

In the event you tied that team, you go to strength of victory,

Strength of victory is no good. That rewards a team for beating an 11-5 team and losing to a 2-14 as opposed to losing to a 11-5 and beating a 2-14.

strength of schedule (which would basically be how good your opposite conference matchup was),

This was based upon a 15 game schedule with no interconference games

and then to point differential.

which is a disaster

But the number of times you'd have to get past head-to-head would be probably once every twenty years.

I disagree. I think with everyone playing the same schedule there would be many multiple ties in record. If 3 teams tie and split with each other there is no fair way to break the tie. I understand there are ways but nonoe of them equate to an advantage or having been better.
Even the head to head. If you are 12-3 and beat me,that means you were 11-3 against the other same 14 teams that I was 12-2 against. I don't see that as a good tiebreaker.

 

[Ring 6]

The NFL works now. The only reason for this is more $ for the owners.

And players since they spl;it the revenue somewhere around 50/50

Is there really anyone who doesn't like the way the NFL playoffs are done? Win your division and you're in the playoffs; outside of that make sure you win your conference games and you should be okay.

Well there are many people in this thread that don't like the current system. I'm not one of them, but the opinion that the current system is bad, or at least very flawed seems to be more popular than that it is good.

 

[Tunescribe]

Scheduling game 16 is easy. Interleague Sunday.
The problem is that you have now introduced a difference in strength of schedule which was the thing that was being eliminated by this plan.

Instead of having them rotate, the inter-conference game could involve teams that finished in the same position in their respective conferences the year prior. One more-than-likely side benefit of this would be a regular-season rematch of the prior year's Super Bowl teams. But again, this system would severely limit inter-conference play (except for it being mandated during the preseason on a revolving basis, which would ensure the same number of home-away appearances we currently have in the regular season).

Another thing I like about this idea is the league wouldn't be as "homogenized" as it is now. You'd eventually see trends develop in styles of play differentiating the two conferences.

 

[dales804]

And players since they spl;it the revenue somewhere around 50/50


Well there are many people in this thread that don't like the current system. I'm not one of them, but the opinion that the current system is bad, or at least very flawed seems to be more popular than that it is good.

I understand the part about a WC team with a better record traveling to a division winner with a worse one. But the "reseeding" part doesn't make sense since they've been doing that for a while (#1 plays lowest remaining seed, #2 the highest). During the championship game round, whoever has the higher seed, hosts. I suppose you could get into a situation where a #4 seed with a worse record hosts a #6 in the championship round but I don't think that's ever happened.

 

[mgteich]

What I would prefer is that if you beat a higher ranked team, you get their seed.

What do you mean by reseeding?
We have reseeding now. The #1 plays the lowest remaining seed, not the winner of a specific game.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

Instead of having them rotate, the inter-conference game could involve teams that finished in the same position in their respective conferences the year prior. One more-than-likely side benefit of this would be a regular-season rematch of the prior year's Super Bowl teams. But again, this system would severely limit inter-conference play (except for it being mandated during the preseason on a revolving basis, which would ensure the same number of home-away appearances we currently have in the regular season).

Another thing I like about this idea is the league wouldn't be as "homogenized" as it is now. You'd eventually see trends develop in styles of play differentiating the two conferences.

So no conference games? Lets say Manning and Brady were in different conferences. They could play their entire career without being on the same field. I don't see why anything should change. Everybody plays every team every 4 years, and there's still 2 games to match up the best teams.