Thought that came to me in the shower about playoff reseeding

Originally posted by mayo49:

Were you playing with your wee wee while you were in the shower?

Originally posted by mkmasn:

Originally posted by DirtyP:
I think the current system is excellent

I agree. Football is not like baseball or basketball where you play a bunch of games and hope you make the right rotation and set the right lineups over the course. The better team should win those series'. Football is about being better that day. That's why a crappy team from a crappy division like the Seahawks or Cardinals can win the Superbowl.

you say that now....wait till a 10+ win Niners team (like in 1991) is kept outta the playoffs cos their 3rd in the NFC west or lose out on the wild-card berths, while a 9-7 or worse Giants or Cowboys team does go "just for winning" the NFC east.....

I think they can keep the divisions but the teams with the best records go to the post season. As for the idea of realigning to two geographical divisions wouldn't work. The NFL just doesn't play enough games over the season. 16 games just isn't enough. You would need at least triple that number for it to work and that just isn't going to happen with 53 man squads.

2008 Pats missing the playoffs was one of the biggest robberies in NFL history since the 1991 (10-6) 49ers missing out (Saints & Falcons were both running off of 'fluke' seasons that year).

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:

Originally posted by mkmasn:

Originally posted by DirtyP:
I think the current system is excellent

I agree. Football is not like baseball or basketball where you play a bunch of games and hope you make the right rotation and set the right lineups over the course. The better team should win those series'. Football is about being better that day. That's why a crappy team from a crappy division like the Seahawks or Cardinals can win the Superbowl.

you say that now....wait till a 10+ win Niners team (like in 1991) is kept outta the playoffs cos their 3rd in the NFC west or lose out on the wild-card berths, while a 9-7 or worse Giants or Cowboys team does go "just for winning" the NFC east.....

Yeah, but thats whats makes each game so intriguing to watch. The NFL is one sport where you pay attention to each play in every game on every Sunday, cause you know a single missnap can cost you the season. Sure it felt like s**t when the Niners were bounced out of a playoff chance in 1991, but it just made us fans all that more devoted to perfection.

Current system is fine. It makes some of the matchup (ala Dallas and GB) all that more exciting bc you know we dont get to see them every year.

no

Originally posted by kingairta:

I think they can keep the divisions but the teams with the best records go to the post season. As for the idea of realigning to two geographical divisions wouldn't work. The NFL just doesn't play enough games over the season. 16 games just isn't enough. You would need at least triple that number for it to work and that just isn't going to happen with 53 man squads.

No. You get a division of 4 excellent teams who get stuck playing against another 4 tram strong division who goes 9-7 and wins their division but misses the playoffs because 2 other teams get the pats schedule from last year.

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:

NFL should just follow the NBA example....two 16-team conferences where final record at the end of the season determines playoff seeding and artificial "divisional standings" have no bearing on the playoffs.

There are indeed divisions in the NBA, and if you win one, you're guaranteed a playoff spot. Therefore divisional standings do have a bearing on the playoffs.

Originally posted by kingairta:
I think they can keep the divisions but the teams with the best records go to the post season. As for the idea of realigning to two geographical divisions wouldn't work. The NFL just doesn't play enough games over the season. 16 games just isn't enough. You would need at least triple that number for it to work and that just isn't going to happen with 53 man squads.

already answered this....

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:
as far as season scheduling, just ditch 4-team divisions altogether and make each team within a conference play the other 15 teams in the same conference ONCE in a season and for the 16th game have an interconference matchup based on what order two corresponding teams finished in the West and East Conferences the previous season.

a theoretical schedule for this season in the above format would've been (based on the Niners finishing 13-3 last year, 2nd best in the West):

- 15 games (8 home, 7 away) against the rest of the "Western Conference"
- the 16th (and 8th road) game would be against the 2nd best team in the "Eastern Conference" from last year, Baltimore (this would again be a road game for the Niners since they lost to Baltimore last year)

Therefore a theoretical 2012 schedule would go like:

Wk 1) @ Green Bay
Wk 2) vs Detroit
Wk 3) @ Minnesota
Wk 4) @ Kansas City
Wk 5) vs Dallas
Wk 6) vs San Diego
Wk 7) vs Seattle
Wk 8) @ Baltimore *INTERCONFERENCE WEEK*
Wk 9) BYE
Wk 10) vs St Louis
Wk 11) vs Chicago
Wk 12) @ New Orleans
Wk 13) @ Tennessee
Wk 14) Oakland
Wk 15) @ Arizona
Wk 16) @Houston
Wk 17) Denver

Road games against Western Conference teams one season would be home games the following season and vice-versa (therefore rotating every other year)

another obvious advantage is decreased travel mileage and time-zone jetlag...

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
There are indeed divisions in the NBA, and if you win one, you're guaranteed a playoff spot. Therefore divisional standings do have a bearing on the playoffs.

an NBA team who wins say the Pacific Division may be guaranteed a playoff spot, but at the end of the season, that teams still gets seeded among the top 8 teams in the western conference based on overall record to determine playoff matchups....unfortunately this format (barely) prevented the Warriors from making the playoffs in 2008 since the rest of the West was so strong and had better records. W's would've probably been a top-3 seed in the East that season

9ers vs everybody else conference

AFL NFL google it, and then respect history and tradition.

BORING!

That isn't what I thought about in the shower this morning. THIS IS

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NFL_season

THIS MUST'VE SUCKED (for pats fans) : 11-5 patriots miss the playoffs altogether while the 8-8 chargers make the playoffs solely by virtue of "winning their division"

NFL should just follow the NBA example....two 16-team conferences where final record at the end of the season determines playoff seeding and artificial "divisional standings" have no bearing on the playoffs.

WESTERN CONFERENCE:

Arizona
Chicago
Dallas
Denver
Detroit (or Indianapolis)
Green Bay
Houston
Kansas City
Minnesota
New Orleans
Oakland
San Diego
San Francisco
Seattle
St. Louis
Tennessee

EASTERN CONFERENCE:

Atlanta
Baltimore
Buffalo
Carolina
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Indianapolis (or Detroit)
Jacksonville
Miami
New England
New York Giants
New York Jets
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Tampa Bay
Washington

The reason this doesn't work is because of the 16 game schedule. The NBA has 82 games so the can play an equal level of competition, this is just not possible with 16 games and 32 teams.