NFL to consider expanding the playoffs to 14 or 16

FirstDownFaulk · Joined: 25 Jul 2010 Posts: 2993 Location: New York

Like the great Deion Sanders once sang...."Must be the mooooneyyyy!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJWSm13LBh8
_________________
Stevan Ridley, Att: 225, Yds: 1010, Y/A: 4.0, TD:9

nugpimpen · Joined: 18 Feb 2006 Posts: 12129 Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Steelerspower · Joined: 13 Jun 2011 Posts: 6533

FirstDownFaulk · Joined: 25 Jul 2010 Posts: 2993 Location: New York

nugpimpen · Joined: 18 Feb 2006 Posts: 12129 Location: Cleveland, Ohio

mco65 · Joined: 04 Feb 2011 Posts: 534 Location: US

Expanding the NFL playoffs is actually over due. I know most of you probably don't remember but when the NFL expanded the playoffs from 10-12 teams in 1989, I heard the same arguments about watering down the playoffs and making more regular season games meaningless. Now, 20 years later those arguments seem silly as its the greatest format of all time.. I also remember when the NFL expanded from 8 - 10 teams in 1978 and you guessed it.. I heard the same arguments. too many teams, blah blah blah.. I don't remember when the NFL expanded from 4-8 in 1966 (actually this was 2-4 for the NFL and 2-4 for the AFL) I am not that old..

I don't have a problem with the NFL going from 12-16 teams. Sure you are gonna get a few teams in that have 8-8 records or a 7-9 record every year but that doesn't mean they are really bad teams.. You certainly NOT watering down the regular season.. more teams will have more games mean something at the end of the season by adding those 4 teams.. as it is now, more than half the league is simply playing out the schedule by week 14.. that wont be the case if they add 2 teams per conference.

Adding 2 playoff teams per conference and getting rid of the bye weeks for the top 2 seeds is a best idea, IMO.. The top seeds will be playing the 8th seed and theoretically this is simply a tune up and most fans would certainly love to see their favorite team win a playoff game...

Look at it this way.. assuming the Falcons get the top seed in the NFC, would Falcons fans rather wait a week to play the 4th, 5th or 6th seed or would they rather play that 1st weekend vs the 8th seed??? I know what Falcons fans from 2010 would say..

RavensTillIDie · Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:00 pm Post subject:

Plush · Joined: 24 Sep 2012 Posts: 665

Reward mediocrity? Seems people need a reality check. A solid team misses the playoffs every year, in both conferences. Your record isn always a good indicator of your talent or competitiveness, not every team plays each other. I also dislike the saying "you are what your record says you are". That's ridiculous, there are two near-perfect teams from the last 5 years that failed to win a championship...one got manhandled in the first round.

If these teams are mediocre, handle Your business and coast to the next round

I like the 14 team idea. Only one out of the vikings redskins cowboys and bucs will make the playoffs this year. Don't tell me these aren't competitive teams

lionslicer · Joined: 06 Nov 2010 Posts: 1759

16 teams? Go up to 24, make it easier on themselves when making the schedule.

8 division winners get a bye week, 16 wild card teams.
_________________
Kickers are people too

Ketchup · Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:46 pm Post subject:

Hate it. Simple as that.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!

incognito_man · Joined: 11 Jan 2007 Posts: 26371 Location: Madison

adding another wild card wouldn't be that big of a difference.

2 extra playoff games each year.
2 teams get byes rather than 4.

Still will almost always get teams at 9-7 or better for the final spot.

ChazStandard · Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:36 pm Post subject:

Imagine this scenario: your team goes 15-1, but instead of getting a bye week (which 1/2 seeds really deserve IMO) you have to prepare to play the 6/10 Also Rans who came third in a mediocre division.

So...you have to play a far inferior team and on the first snap your star QB goes down with a broken arm. Your goes in back-up loses a close game 24-21 and your season is over.

The Also-Rans go on to get their butts kicked 41-13 by the 12-4 Guys that your team beat by 10 points in the regular season.

Your QBs arms heals slowly and he's not back in time for the next season, your back-up gets you in an 0-4 hole that you don't quite get out of, missing the play-offs at 8-8 to the Also Rans who improved to 9-7.

Hellish idea.
_________________

incognito_man · Joined: 11 Jan 2007 Posts: 26371 Location: Madison

Here's how it would breakdown going back a few years:
2011
2 more teams: Eagles/Cowboys/Bears/Cardinals @ 8-8, Titans @ 9-7
4 more teams: one of above, Jets/Chargers/Raiders @ 8-8

2010
2 more teams: Bucs/Giants @ 10-6, Chargers @ 9-7
4 more teams: Bucs/Giants, Raiders/Jags @ 8-8

2009
2 more teams: Falcons @ 9-7, Texans/Steelers @ 9-7
4 more teams: Giants/Panthers/49ers @ 8-8, Texans/Steelers

2008
2 more teams: Cowboys/Bears/Bucs @ 9-7, Patriots @ 11-5
4 more teams: Cowboys/Bears/Bucs, Jets @ 9-7

2007
2 more teams: Eagles/Vikings/Cardinals @ 8-8, Browns @ 10-6
4 more teams: E/V/C, Texans @ 8-8

I wouldn't really have any issue with it. Would prefer they still let the best team in each conference have a bye, however. Expanding it to 14 teams will still almost always have teams @9-7 or better. And 9-7 teams win Super Bowls.

incognito_man · Joined: 11 Jan 2007 Posts: 26371 Location: Madison

1WngdAngel · Joined: 11 Jun 2008 Posts: 64 Location: Chicago, IL

First, anyone posting that this is all about money, etc. needs to slap themselves. The NFL is a business and it's Goodell's job to make it as financially successful as possible and entertaining any and all ideas to make more profit should not be a surprise to anyone.

Second, I'm not outright opposed to adding two wild card teams to each conference, but if this were to ever happen any talk of an 18-game regular season should die and vice-versa.