JTC111
Viva la resistance!!!
I guess that begs the question: Do .500 teams ever deserve to make the playoffs and possibly win the SB?
IMO, never.
Report: NFL to add 7th team to playoffs in 2014
- Thread starter Nublar7
- Start date
I guess that begs the question: Do .500 teams ever deserve to make the playoffs and possibly win the SB?
IMO, never.
syborg
Rookie
But not that diluted from 2 seed v 6 seed.. and to be honest the 7 seed may be better than the 6th seed as you point out the Cards missed out while GB got in.. this could help alleviate that somewhat
---------- Post added at 09:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:14 AM ----------
Any more than a 7-9 division winner then? (Seahawks 2010)
JTC111
Viva la resistance!!!
And an 8th seed might be better than a 7th seed in some years, and a 9th seed might be better than an 8th seed.
That was the reason we added the first two wildcard spots. We can use the same reasoning to add a new WC spot every year.
truedolfan57
Active Roster
thanks for doing the leg work. will show these "the sky is falling" posters, that only 1/4 of the teams in the last 14 YEARS, would have been 8-8, while 21 teams in the last 14 years had the potential to make the playoffs, while having a winning record. I think if you would include an 8th seed, you'll see a ton more 8-8 teams, and probably some sub .500 teams. At that point, you can start calling for the sky is falling. At 7 seeds, people just don't know what they are talking about, without posts like this. Thanks again!
syborg
Rookie
Not if the play off pool hits 50% of the teams in the NFL - no you cannot.. there has to be a ceiling and I would say taking it up to 14/32 teams is it.
JTC111
Viva la resistance!!!
Why is the line 50%? Why not 40% or 60%?
I think this article on the subject is spot on.
Playoff expansion? Forget about it
There was no game this weekend in which a team looked overmatched -- no team in the playoff field that performed as though it didn't belong. The NFL should view this as a good thing. From a product-quality standpoint, it's better to risk leaving a strong team out of your playoff field than to invite weak ones into it.
Really ? 31 of the 32 highest rated programs this year were NFL games. I bet MLB and the NBA would love to have their product ruined.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
truedolfan57
Active Roster
I don't understand that. with adding another team, you still have those strong teams in the playoffs. and as it's been shown, you have a 3/4 chance over the last 14 years, that another strong team will make the playoffs. if a weak team gets in, they will be eliminated. if they aren't eliminated, then they must not have been that weak...
syborg
Rookie
I think if you went 50% then having half the NFL teams in a play off scenario really does begin to deflect and allow lesser quality teams from that year into the post season.. if they go to 14 teams that is about 40% or thereabouts of the NFL that seems to me to be fine.. begin going over that then you certainly do have 8-8 teams en masse getting in.
This is not the CFL with 8 teams and 6 of them making the post season..
JTC111
Viva la resistance!!!
Yes, you still have the strong teams in the playoffs, but you increase the chances that a weak team will get lucky and win the SB. I think the author of that article is absolutely correct when he said, "...it's better to risk leaving a strong team out of your playoff field than to invite weak ones into it." We all know that on any given day, even a great team can be beat by a weak team. Does that mean we should expand even more to allow for the possibility? The way teams qualify for the playoffs should eliminate that possibility. To not do so, detracts from what winning the SB means.
I'm also going to disagree with your conclusion that "...you have a 3/4 chance over the last 14 years, that another strong team will make the playoffs." That's only true if you consider a team that finishes 9-7 a "strong" team. I do not. I'm not calling for eliminating 9-7 teams from the playoffs, but those are the teams just barely getting in. The fewer 9-7 in the playoffs, the better. The playoffs should be about the cream of the crop being pitted against each other, not an opportunity for inferior teams to get lucky.
When the day comes that a couple of 8-8 teams meet in the SB, are you really going to look at the winner of that contest and think they were the best team in the league that year if a half dozen other teams had 11+ wins? I sure won't.
truedolfan57
Active Roster
i think if a weak team, who might win one playoff game or two, but fall short of the super bowl, are probably a weaker team. But if they happen to make it to the super bowl, and even win, then they in fact are not a weak team, as they were able to beat "the best" teams in the league that year.
also, I think there's just as much of a chance of 2 8-8 teams making the super bowl with 6 or 7 teams...which is a VERY small chance. lol
also, I think there's just as much of a chance of 2 8-8 teams making the super bowl with 6 or 7 teams...which is a VERY small chance. lol
dumb idea
Just like 35 bowl games are a complete joke.
Just like 35 bowl games are a complete joke.
Overkill is coming. The game is being adapted to and by those who watch soap operas.
JTC111
Viva la resistance!!!
We'll have to disagree then. Just as I'm not in favor of maintaining mediocrity on my favorite team, I'm not in favor of mediocrity in the playoffs. From a quality point of view, adding a 3rd wild card spot will simply add a mediocre team to the playoffs the vast majority of the time.
---------- Post added at 11:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 AM ----------
Everyone gets a trophy. Everyone gets to be a "playoff team."
truedolfan57
Active Roster
lucky for you guys, college will be moving to a playoff style next year.