Eric Winston wants to see playoff seeding changed...

[Scooby-Doo]

The only part of this that is tolerable is reseeding the conferences by record. Division winners are guaranteed a playoff spot. Seeing an 8 or 9 win team get a home playoff game against an 11 or or 12 win team does happen quite a bit.

I get the "just win your division" argument, but not all divisions are created equal.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

The only part of this that is tolerable is reseeding the conferences by record. Division winners are guaranteed a playoff spot. Seeing an 8 or 9 win team get a home playoff game against an 11 or or 12 win team does happen quite a bit.

I get the "just win your division" argument, but not all divisions are created equal.

I agree give the Division winners a spot in playoffs. Seed them all by record, but to help to get it to pass. Let the 1st tie breaker be for division winners.
So if two teams are 9-7 (10-6 or whatever) The division winner is seeded ahead of the WC team.
If the wildcard team is 10-6 & the Division winner is 9-7 then the division winner is ass out. They travel on wild card weekend.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

I agree give the Division winners a spot in playoffs. Seed them all by record, but to help to get it to pass. Let the 1st tie breaker be for division winners.
So if two teams are 9-7 (10-6 or whatever) The division winner is seeded ahead of the WC team.
If the wildcard team is 10-6 & the Division winner is 9-7 then the division winner is ass out. They travel on wild card weekend.

I like it. Didn't think about a tie.

 

[handicappers]

Division winners get top four seeds. and that's final.

 

[PatsFan2003]

If you think teams not playing hard at the end of the season is bad now, add more playoff sports.

 

[PhilSimms11]

If you think teams not playing hard at the end of the season is bad now, add more playoff sports.

They'd play harder if they knew 11 wins would make them a 3-seed as opposed to 10 wins dropping them to a 6.

 

[Southieinnc]

I agree with it all except adding a 3rd wildcard.

Division winners get in. 4

Two best teams after that record wise from each conference get in. 2

However, I believe it should be based on conference record not overall record. All playoff teams for each conference is slotted based on conference record (tie breakers being head to head, then total points for minus points against in conference games). So while your overall record gets you into t he playoffs in those final two spots, your conference record for all teams in the playoffs is based on your conference record is what slots you.

It is not right that a division winner at 8-8 should be able to host a game against a team that was 12-4.

Now, will that 8-8 winners conference record be worse than the 12-4? Maybe the 8-8 team lost all 4 of their NFC games, but the 12-4 team won all of theirs. That means both teams were 8-4 in conference, and the 8-8 team actually holds the tie breaker with total point margin within conference games.

So now the 8-8 team is hosting the playoff game, but it is deemed more reasonable at this point, because they actually have the same conference record and own the tie breaker since neither team played each other during the year.

Can you repeat that please?????

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Can you repeat that please?????

What part do you need explained?

 

[PatsFan2003]

They'd play harder if they knew 11 wins would make them a 3-seed as opposed to 10 wins dropping them to a 6.

At the bottom it doesn't matter as much although there is home field. The "rest" factor may become more important.

 

[Judge Fudge]

I think that Seeding is overrated. It doesn't judge a team heart and will.

Take a look at the Stanley cup playoffs. How many #1 and #2 seeds made it past the first round?????

 

[PhilSimms11]

I agree give the Division winners a spot in playoffs. Seed them all by record, but to help to get it to pass. Let the 1st tie breaker be for division winners.
So if two teams are 9-7 (10-6 or whatever) The division winner is seeded ahead of the WC team.
If the wildcard team is 10-6 & the Division winner is 9-7 then the division winner is ass out. They travel on wild card weekend.

Respectfully disagree.
(1)Overall record.
(2)Head-to-head.
(3)Conference record.
(4)Division winner.

I believe head-to-head should be the first tiebreaker. Last season, SEA (10-6) d. DAL (10-6) in the regular season. That would make SEA the 4-seed and DAL the 5-seed. If they hadn't played then I'd look at conference record. Going by last season, DAL would be the higher seed over SEA by a 9-3 to 8-4 conference record. If that were deadlocked then I'd give the higher seed to the division winner which was DAL. Having said all of this, if the NFL chose to make the first tiebreaker go to division winners I could live with it. It wouldn't be the way I'd go, but I could compromise.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Having said all of this, if the NFL chose to make the first tiebreaker go to division winners I could live with it. It wouldn't be the way I'd go, but I could compromise.

You crack me up some times. Don't think the NFL gives a shit about what random fans think, so no compromise needed. Let us know when they reach out to you for this"compromise" OK?

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

I'd keep it exactly as is with two simple changes:

1. Record trumps having won a division in the playoffs in terms of seeding once the playoffs start - Win the division and get in, but the teams with the better records at that point get the higher seeds period, wildcard or not.

2. Get rid of the 1st round playoff bye weeks - They give way too big of an advantage to the top 2 seeds in each conference. Getting the home field advantages based on seeding should be a good enough reward for earning the higher seeds. Anyone who claims they want to see more parity in the NFL should easily be on board with this idea.


Huge no to expanding it to 14 teams. We've already had 7-8-1 and 7-9 teams make the playoffs as things currently stand. Expand that to 14 teams, and the concept of 6-10 teams making the playoffs would go from the realm of nearly impossible to not completely unfathomable at all.

 

[Manster7588]

Respectfully disagree.
(1)Overall record.
(2)Head-to-head.
(3)Conference record.
(4)Division winner.

I believe head-to-head should be the first tiebreaker. Last season, SEA (10-6) d. DAL (10-6) in the regular season. That would make SEA the 4-seed and DAL the 5-seed. If they hadn't played then I'd look at conference record. Going by last season, DAL would be the higher seed over SEA by a 9-3 to 8-4 conference record. If that were deadlocked then I'd give the higher seed to the division winner which was DAL. Having said all of this, if the NFL chose to make the first tiebreaker go to division winners I could live with it. It wouldn't be the way I'd go, but I could compromise.

Since the Dallas/Seattle game seems to be your 2018 craw, let me point out two items you are over looking.
1. Seattle played an easier schedule.
2. The Dal/Sea game was in Seattle.

So you trying to reward a team who just happened to play a certain game at home.

Here's the bottom line, the NFL playoffs are not broken, there's no fixing needed.

 

[Manster7588]

I'd keep it exactly as is with two simple changes:

1. Record trumps having won a division in the playoffs in terms of seeding once the playoffs start - Win the division and get in, but the teams with the better records at that point get the higher seeds period, wildcard or not.

2. Get rid of the 1st round playoff bye weeks - They give way too big of an advantage to the top 2 seeds in each conference. Getting the home field advantages based on seeding should be a good enough reward for earning the higher seeds. Anyone who claims they want to see more parity in the NFL should easily be on board with this idea.


Huge no to expanding it to 14 teams. We've already had 7-8-1 and 7-9 teams make the playoffs as things currently stand. Expand that to 14 teams, and the concept of 6-10 teams making the playoffs would go from the realm of nearly impossible to not completely unfathomable at all.

Are you adding 4 teams (2 per conference) or deleting wildcards?

 

[PhilSimms11]

Since the Dallas/Seattle game seems to be your 2018 craw, let me point out two items you are over looking.
1. Seattle played an easier schedule.
2. The Dal/Sea game was in Seattle.
So you trying to reward a team who just happened to play a certain game at home.

Seattle played an easier schedule.
What is your definition of easier schedule?
Seattle:
Combined wins of opponents: 123
Playoff teams: 6
Teams with 10+ wins: 6 (Bears, Chargers, Chiefs, Rams (2))

Dallas:
Combined wins of opponents: 125
Playoff teams: 6
Teams with 10+ wins: 4 (Colts, Saints, Texans)

The Dal/Sea game was in Seattle. So you trying to reward a team who just happened to play a certain game at home.
So, who should've had HFA in the playoffs last year between the Rams (13-3) and Saints (13-3)? The Saints won the game HTH (45-35), but it was played in New Orleans.

New Orleans:
Combined wins of opponents: 122
Playoff teams: 4
Teams with 10+ wins: 3 (Cowboys, Ravens)

LA Rams:
Combined wins of opponents: 122
Playoff teams: 7
Teams with 10+ wins: 6 (Bears, Chargers, Chiefs, Seahawks (2))

 

[Manster7588]

Seattle played an easier schedule.
What is your definition of easier schedule?
Seattle:
Combined wins of opponents: 123
Playoff teams: 6
Teams with 10+ wins: 6 (Bears, Chargers, Chiefs, Rams (2))

Dallas:
Combined wins of opponents: 125
Playoff teams: 6
Teams with 10+ wins: 4 (Colts, Saints, Texans)

The Dal/Sea game was in Seattle.
So, who should've had HFA in the playoffs last year between the Rams (13-3) and Saints (13-3)? The Saints won the game HTH (45-35), but it was played in New Orleans.

New Orleans:
Combined wins of opponents: 122
Playoff teams: 4
Teams with 10+ wins: 3 (Cowboys, Ravens)

LA Rams:
Combined wins of opponents: 122
Playoff teams: 7
Teams with 10+ wins: 6 (Bears, Chargers, Chiefs, Seahawks (2))

Strength of Schedule https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...ve-it-easiest-raiders-face-roughest-ride/amp/

As for the Saints and Rams they used current tie breakers for division winners, in a system that isn't broken.

Do you break your working water pipes just so you can fix them?

Don't fix what isn't broken.

 

[PhilSimms11]

Strength of Schedule https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...ve-it-easiest-raiders-face-roughest-ride/amp/

As for the Saints and Rams they used current tie breakers for division winners, in a system that isn't broken.

Do you break your working water pipes just so you can fix them?

Don't fix what isn't broken.

I'm not sure what formula they are using. I'm simply combining wins and losses. You can check my math if you like, but this is what I have...
Cowboys (125-131, .488). They have 128-126-2 (.504)--14th. CLE, GB, MIN, and PIT all had a tie last season. DAL played neither of those teams.

Seahawks (123-131-2, .484). They have 121-132-3 (.478)--25th. SEA played GB and MIN combining for 2 ties. They did not play CLE or PIT.

Strength of schedule is not that important (this is the NFL; not college), but regarding DAL and SEA I believe it's closer than they'd lead you to believe. People see the 14th vs 25th and think WOW, Dallas had a top half schedule and SEA played a bunch of bitches. It's simply not true...especially when somebody can't add. Now, if my math is wrong I'll take it back. No big deal.

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

Are you adding 4 teams (2 per conference) or deleting wildcards?

No additional teams. The only changes I am advocating is that division winners don't automatically trump wildcard teams with superior records in overall seeding for home advantage, and getting rid of Wildcard Weekend/bye weeks for the top 2 seeds in each conference. Winning a division should, in terms of home advantage, should be behind head-to-head regular season competition as a tie breaker for home advantage.

 

[Manster7588]

No additional teams. The only changes I am advocating is that division winners don't automatically trump wildcard teams with superior records in overall seeding for home advantage, and getting rid of Wildcard Weekend/bye weeks for the top 2 seeds in each conference. Winning a division should, in terms of home advantage, should be behind head-to-head regular season competition as a tie breaker for home advantage.

So who gets the byes?