Reseeding the Playoffs (and other Competition Committee proposals)

[55CrushEm]

Reseeding the playoffs: Traditionalists like the idea of highlighting division races. Win your division and you get a playoff home game. What concerned the commissioner over the past couple of seasons is how division winners rested players in December after clinching.

Goodell is all for having a competitive 17-week season. After reviewing Goodell's idea, the competition committee voted 5-3 in favor of a reseeding plan. The plan still would reward the top two seeds with bye weeks and second-round home games. The change would involve seeds Nos. 3-6.

Under the proposal, a wild-card team can get a home game if it has a better record than the division winners. If a tie-breaker is needed, the division winner with a same record would get the nod over the wild-card. Twice in the past three years, the Jacksonville Jaguars had a better record than some AFC division winners but had to play on the road in the playoffs. There is no doubt that this change would create more competitive games in Weeks 16 and 17.

Playoff home games are critical and coaches won't have the luxury of resting players because they will be watching the scoreboard against good wild-card teams to try to finish the seasons with better records. This might be a hard plan to pass, though. Schedule is everything in the NFL, and a wild-card team with an easy schedule will have a distinct advantage over champions in tough divisions.

Take the NFC East, for example. Four teams finished with records of 8-8 or better, and the New York Giants won the Super Bowl. Based on last year's records, all the teams in the NFC East face .520 schedules or tougher in 2008. The teams in the NFC South have comparably have easy schedules, .469 or easier. The four teams in a tough division could form a voting block to stop change.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=3313655

[Beantown Bronco]

This is a really tough one. Good, convincing arguments can be made both ways.

Though I think what the Giants did last year will go a long ways towards getting teams to change their approach with regard to weeks 16 and 17. A policy change may not be necessary.

Fantasy Football leagues that have their playoffs and SBs right up to week 17 should really be thanking the Giants IMO.

[missingnumber7]

If you want a home game...win your division. Nuf said.

[rugbythug]

not broken/don't fix

[Bronco Jamus]

If you want a home game...win your division. Nuf said.

I agree. Did we like it when we finished better than Pittsburg in 1997? No, but the Broncos went into their place and beat them.

[Northman]

I like the idea. Make them play.

[Wes Mantooth]

I like this rule. You know the sunday ticket should be cheaper on week 17 with the current rule because that week is so bad

[Kaylore]

Schedule is everything in the NFL, and a wild-card team with an easy schedule will have a distinct advantage over champions in tough divisions.

"The door swings both ways." (Ghostbusters)

Average teams that feast on their crappy division get home games over wild card teams with better records that happen to have studs in their division. The best teams should receive greater advantage. Good teams should not be penalized for having a team better than them in their division. Your seed should reflect your wins and strength of division.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Instead of ****ing with seeds and the playoff format, just make a new rule - no team is permitted to bench X number of healthy starters in Weeks 15, 16 and 17.

Of course then you have everyone loading up their injury reports, so that might not work.

[Bronco Yoda]

I like the change.

[Punisher]

a wild-card team can get a home game if it has a better record than the division winners

Bad move if a team wins there division they deserve a home playoff game even tho they don't have a better record than non division winners...Now whats the reason for winning a Division ??? A pat on the back

[Atwater His Ass]

I used to be 100% against this change, but I'm starting to warm to the idea. You shouldn't be penalized by playing in a tough division (JAX) and you shouldn't be rewarded for playing in a weak divsion (SEA).

I like how this idea still maintains the integrity of the top 2 seeds as well.

[Bronco Yoda]

I used to be 100% against this change, but I'm starting to warm to the idea. You shouldn't be penalized by playing in a tough division (JAX) and you shouldn't be rewarded for playing in a weak divsion (SEA).

I like how this idea still maintains the integrity of the top 2 seeds as well.

EXACTLY

[montrose]

Divisions/Conferences/Etc. just seem to be becoming a pain in the arse in every sport these days. I understand tradition, but you'd think these sports would want the best teams creating the best matchups in their playoffs. It just floors me that a 50-win western conference NBA team may miss the playoffs while at least one sub-.500 eastern conference team is likely to make it. The same goes for football. Again I understand the tradition of it, and there would be a great deal of work that would have to go into re-scheduling to create fair schedules, but how cool would it be to seed the playoffs according to overall record instead of conference in division. It would create a lot of playoff matchups that weren't likely seen in the regular season while helping to ensure the best possible matchup for the Super Bowl. It'll never happen, but you know the NFL would drool over a NE vs. Indy SB.

[Kaylore]

Bad move if a team wins there division they deserve a home playoff game even tho they don't have a better record than non division winners...Now whats the reason for winning a Division ??? A pat on the back

Bragging rights. It's all about the number wins anyway. How many garbage teams have done just enough to win their sorry division only to get bounced the first round? How many times has a solid team been forced on the road because they have a juggernaut in their division and get a crappier seed than a garbage team in a garbage division?

The biggest advantage is weeks 16 and 17 won't be like preseason football. Better for fantasy players too.

[RhymesayersDU]

I am all for the best records having home games. Some of you guys think that divisions will become meaningless, and I absolutely disagree.

Look, in most normal years, each division winner will have 10+ wins anyways, and this rule will be irrelevant. Hell, probably 11+. So it's a legit team who deserves a home game. And IMO, everything works out, and we don't even talk about the rule.

But those weird years, where 8-8 wins a division, that 8-8 team does not deserve a home game in the first place. And the playoff competition will be improved.

I mean let's be real here. Divisions will still matter. Every game you play will matter, ESPECIALLY in division/conference.

[55CrushEm]

I am all for the best records having home games. Some of you guys think that divisions will become meaningless, and I absolutely disagree.

Look, in most normal years, each division winner will have 10+ wins anyways, and this rule will be irrelevant. Hell, probably 11+. So it's a legit team who deserves a home game. And IMO, everything works out, and we don't even talk about the rule.

But those weird years, where 8-8 wins a division, that 8-8 team does not deserve a home game in the first place. And the playoff competition will be improved.

I mean let's be real here. Divisions will still matter. Every game you play will matter, ESPECIALLY in division/conference.

Exactly. The division will ALWAYS matter because it means you're a lock for the playoffs.....period. Even though, under the new rule, an 8-8 division winner would NOT get a home playoff game (usually)....they would still probabaly bounce a "third" potential 10-6 or 9-7 wildcard team out BECAUASE THEY WON THEIR DIVISION.

So to reiterate your point (I think)......winning a division does NOT become meaningless because of this rule.

[snowtrx]

Award the best teams not the division winners. It's almost impossible for a team to get screwed because of a brutally tough division inpacting a teams record. They mentioned the NFC East last year but Dallas' #1 seed wouldnt have changed. The brutally tough divisions always have a team win a #1 or #2 seed anyways. And why mention the Giants (10-6) as if it would have negativly impacted them? Didnt they prove they deserved to play Tampa Bay at home, instead of going to the weaker teams (9-7) home simply because they where given their division.

Think about it, the NFL gave the Bucs an undeserved opportunity to get lucky at home against the champs and rob us fans of one of the best SB's ever!

You want a home playoff game.....then have a top four record in your conferance!

No one outside of a division cares who won anyways, so that division champion banner means the same thing. That your the best in your division and are in the playoffs.

[snowtrx]

Divisions/Conferences/Etc. just seem to be becoming a pain in the arse in every sport these days.

I'm with you 1000%. Give me the best possible match ups in the latest rounds possible over an NFC Champion or Eastern Conference Champion anyday! Last years NBA championship was Rnd 2 in the West. Two years ago the SB was the AFC Championship game. Duck That!

[Florida_Bronco]

not broken/don't fix

I agree.

[MechanicalBull]

Is good ol Carl still trying to get a 30 team playoff system so the Chiefs have a shot?

[Bronco Jamus]

If the wildcard team is so much better than they should be able to beat their "inferior" home placed opponent.

[Bronco Jamus]

I'm with you 1000%. Give me the best possible match ups in the latest rounds possible over an NFC Champion or Eastern Conference Champion anyday! Last years NBA championship was Rnd 2 in the West. Two years ago the SB was the AFC Championship game. Duck That!

The best teams in the east are just as good if not better than the west.

[Bronco Billy]

I'm fine either way. I just want to MAKE the playoffs at this point! I do tend to side more for the best records having home games - you can get some pretty boring games the last few weeks.

[snowtrx]

The best teams in the east are just as good if not better than the west.

Yes they are, and thats another reason a change would be more exciting and fair. Boston shouldnt be rewarded with a gimmie first round (no business in the playoffs below .500 ATL) and a one trick pony in the second round. They will be in the semi-finals before they play a real basketball team. Meanwhile the Wests top seed will play nothing but 50 win clubs from the begining. With the current format the East playoffs are 99.9% useless in the first round. Just skip it, nothing to see there.

I would simply prefer a scenerio that would give the two best teams the opportunity to meet in the championship round every year. Not the semi-finals and not like last years NBA finals, that took place in the quarter-finals.

[ohiobronco2]

I thought that this would be about a suggestion by Carl to let every team make the post season and have a NCAA tournament style playoff. Anyways I don't know how I really feel about this. I think that it goes both ways. If you play in a really tough division and win that division, but have a lesser record than a team (Wild Card) that plays in an easy division, I don't know if you should be punished because of that. On the other hand, I hate the fact that the Patriots essentially get 7 bye weeks a year because they get to play three teams twice that high school powder puff teams could beat. I know the Patriots dominated all of football last year, I'm just saying that if our Broncos had switched divisions with the Patriots last year we would have been a playoff team, because of how weak those other teams are.

[bowtown]

I thought that this would be about a suggestion by Carl to let every team make the post season and have a NCAA tournament style playoff.

Actually i think CP was pushing for a new rule in which every team, regardless of record, would play against themselves in a series of "feel good" Super Bowls, and would all be declared World Champions at the end of each season.

[Hogan11]

not broken/don't fix

I agree as well...leave it alone.

[chanesaw]

I wouldn't want the playoffs re-seeded.

One rule change that I think would be great, but I have never heard proposed, is to allow coaches to use their entire 53 man roster on gameday. It seems stupid to me to have a 53 man roster and only be able to use 45 players.

[missingnumber7]

I wouldn't want the playoffs re-seeded.

One rule change that I think would be great, but I have never heard proposed, is to allow coaches to use their entire 53 man roster on gameday. It seems stupid to me to have a 53 man roster and only be able to use 45 players.

I'd like to see the emergency QB rule changed. I don't like the fact that once you put in said 3rd QB...aka emergency QB...that no one else can play unless he gets hurt. What does this effect? Is this the anti spurrier qb change rule?