Wild Card Structure
 

Heya guys.

I'm wondering what you think about this:

The Wild Card structure should change such that it is NOT two wild cards from each conference, but merely four wild cards of the best remaining non-division winners.

This would eliminate the problem of teams with a better record not making the playoffs because they are in the better conference. E.g. 9-7 teams in the AFC not making it while an 8-8 team from the NFC does make it.

What say you?

Wild Card Structure
 

Hmmmm...now we\'re getting into some BCS type ****.

Wild Card Structure
 

Well dberce, I agree that the BCS is a bit of a mess.

However, my point was just that if you didn\'t use the conferences (of course, divisions would still matter) for anything when deciding the Wild Card teams, you\'d be more likely to get the teams that have the greatest chance of winning into the playoffs (and the teams most deserving, given their win-loss record, would make the playoffs - rather than a bunch of bums who control their own fate and lose making the playoffs over teams with a better record).

Since teams play inter-conference games, unlike in baseball, this doesn\'t appear to me to be a problem on the face of it.

Wild Card Structure
 

:D :D :D :D :D :D Still not a bad idea, but it wont happen

Wild Card Structure
 

Then you\'d simply have to take the 16 best teams. I don\'t like that. I like conference lines - it works real well the way it is, if you ask me. I can\'t remember a time when I thought the Super Bowl champs did earn it, or that someone got really snuffed. If it ain\'t broke....

Wild Card Structure
 

TMQ(Tuesday Morning QB) proposed this very thing a few weeks ago on NFL.com. Very interesting idea.

Wild Card Structure
 

Divisional play makes it the case that the division champs should go - they are the best of four teams based on six games (a reliable sample). However, I don\'t see what work the conferences are doing in determining which teams are most deserving - since there are inter-divisional and inter-conference games.

I agree that judging merely on the basis of playoffs that I can\'t think of a SB winner that I didn\'t think deserved it.

However, I frequently think that there are teams that didn\'t make the playoffs that did deserve it AND teams that make the playoffs and then are easily eliminated who didn\'t deserve to be in the playoffs in the first place (since there are better teams in the other conference who have been sent packing because of the structure).

Thus, I think it is \"broke\".

Wild Card Structure
 

So, would this mean conferences are completely thrown out the window when the playoffs begin? I mean, could two AFC teams face each other in the Super Bowl?

Or if you\'re just talking wild cards, what happens to the lopsided conference\'s teams? For example, if there are three AFC teams and one NFC team, does one of the AFC teams get thrown into the NFC\'s playoff bracket? Or would one conference somehow get more wild cards?

I\'m not sure I totally get it, but I don\'t think I like it either way...

Wild Card Structure
 

I don\'t think there is anything wrong with the system that is in place. You really don\'t want to dillute the playoffs by having to many teams in it... or you could have everyone in the playoffs - single game elimination and you seed them to the way they finished the season. That way SF could still win it all.

Wild Card Structure
 

Hi JKool (Veteran) :bowing to Veteran status:
:yourock:

Er........ Good post but No.

I say the system aint broke. An extreme scenario of your idea, would be zero NFC wildcard teams and 8 AFC wildcard teams.

Supposing an AFC didivison all their inter-conference games against a very weak NFC division. Heck, that\'s 4 wins before you can say \"Bob\'s your uncle\".

If you retained the traditional Superbowl of AFC Champs v NFC Chump; then the AFC wildcard teams would be playing zillions, sorry, a couple of extra games before even getting to the Divisional Playoff games.

Somewhere you would need to factor in strength of schedule. How about multiplying your wins by a factor representing the strength of your opponent. You could then say ABC qualified ahead of XYZ by a factor of 0.09452437. And then factor in a + or - points allowance for playing away or at home.

Maybe- all teams should play each twice; home and away. The World Champions would then be who got most wins on a 62 game schedule; counting number of ties if 2 teams had the same number of wins or should it be looking at head-to-head; etc ad nauseum until we just toss a coin or perhaps placing the teams in alphabetic order.

:pinkele:

Hey JKool; I am only having a bit of fun.

I still have a lot of mental energy from the damn Brien missed field goal, the Vikes super-flunk, the fall before the rise of the Saints....... :boohoo:

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.

Wild Card Structure
 

JKool,

While logically you are right. In practice this would be less fan-friendly. I think that part of the magic of the superbowl was sown when the 2 conferences inaugerated it. Granted there is alot more teams than 40 years ago, but by and large the rivalries have persisted.

I for one delighted in the NFC dominance of the eighties and early nineties. It was validating that our conference was so dominant. I am sure there are alot of fans of AFC teams that enjoy the current turnaround. Why take away all the fun ?

Keep the conferences succint & special

Wild Card Structure
 

i think u have to keep it the way it is. i like it like this and wouldnt want to see it changed