Wild Card Structure

JKool · 01-05-2005, 02:46 AM

UK_Who, thanks for the bow. I might not have noticed the change in status otherwise.

Ok, you guys have made some good points. I\'ll have to think a bit more.

My idea was merely this - still only 12 teams make the playoffs (so SF is still out). The Wild Cards are awarded to the next four best records (and births are granted to the top team in each division). The main problem that has been pointed out with this is that it would be difficult to sort out who will play who once the playoffs start - since there may be too many from one conference to have them play to a conference championship before playing for the SB. That does appear to be a problem.

The more I think about it, why not just dump the conference structure altogether? At that point, you could allow first round byes to the top four teams, and the others play each other on the basis of seeding (based on number of wins and a variety of tie breaker clauses). What is the problem with that?

Euph, the problem with the current system is that teams with better records are left out of the playoffs while teams with worse records make it in on the basis of nothing more than which conference they play in.

Also, you\'ll have to admit that many SBs suck compared to the conference championships. This demonstrates that the current system does not allow the two best teams to face off (it is merely the best teams from each conference). That is a problem, since the SB should be played for by the best two teams period IMO.

01-05-2005, 02:46 AM	#11
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Wild Card Structure UK_Who, thanks for the bow. I might not have noticed the change in status otherwise. Ok, you guys have made some good points. I\'ll have to think a bit more. My idea was merely this - still only 12 teams make the playoffs (so SF is still out). The Wild Cards are awarded to the next four best records (and births are granted to the top team in each division). The main problem that has been pointed out with this is that it would be difficult to sort out who will play who once the playoffs start - since there may be too many from one conference to have them play to a conference championship before playing for the SB. That does appear to be a problem. The more I think about it, why not just dump the conference structure altogether? At that point, you could allow first round byes to the top four teams, and the others play each other on the basis of seeding (based on number of wins and a variety of tie breaker clauses). What is the problem with that? Euph, the problem with the current system is that teams with better records are left out of the playoffs while teams with worse records make it in on the basis of nothing more than which conference they play in. Also, you\'ll have to admit that many SBs suck compared to the conference championships. This demonstrates that the current system does not allow the two best teams to face off (it is merely the best teams from each conference). That is a problem, since the SB should be played for by the best two teams period IMO.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks