Playoff Seeding is Nonsense (3 Viewers)

[fantasycurse42]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

 

[Smack Tripper]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

The only change I would make would be a division winner has to be over .500 to host

 

[Insein]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

No. Win your division

 

[BassNBrew]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

Nothing.

 

[beef]

All playoff games played in other countries on Tuesdays and Wednesdays.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

No you’re not alone. Division winners plus the 3 wild cards get in and then should be seeded according to win % with tie going to division champs.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

the answer lies in the fact that all teams in a conference don't play each other so there is no solution....its just gonna be that way .....you know the way it works so win your division games...I mean this is part of the reason why last week DET didn't really have anything to play for.....you know the set up ...plan accordingly...

for $$$ purposes the NFL almost has it crushed with the current format......

18 games....and two bye weeks per team.....and buying streaming services that don't even exist yet is coming soon to a theater near you though...

 

[IHEARTFF]

We would get LAR at Min and Hou at LAC if records determined home field.

 

[IHEARTFF]

We would get LAR at Min and Hou at LAC if records determined home field.

Actually not sure about the 2/3 seeds but the 4/5 game would be GB at Washington.

 

[MAC_32]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

Back to 6 teams, #7 seed is 1-7 since expansion and only 2 of the games have been close. 4 of the 8 one seeds have made it to the super bowl since expansion. I'm all for an advantage, but think it was better when there was 2 as the runner up still had to win in the 1 seeds house to make it to the final dance.

The NFL fixed something that wasn't broken.

 

[TheWinz]

The #7 seeds should get the byes, and the teams with the worst records should get home field advantage. Would make the games closer at least.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

It's fine as it is. Green Bay only lost one game outside their division, but that wasn't good enough. The division matters. Some divisions are tough and others are easy, and it flips every few years.

You want a home game? Win your division. Take care of business or go on the road.

 

[Snotbubbles]

I'd like to see the NFL add another team so no team gets a BYE. I think HFA is enough of an advantage.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

 

[steelcityman]

Ole Miss and Alabama should be in over the Bucs and Steelers.

 

[Anarchy99]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

 

[Rubi]

I like it the way it is
There's incentive to win your division
There's incentive to get the #1 seed for the bye
Makes for great debate and tv ratings
The games are played in a three day window
Yet The NFL will dominate the sports news cycle all week
And the topic of this thread will one of the stories

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

That's great. I'd prefer to go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I'd like to see the NFL add another team so no team gets a BYE. I think HFA is enough of an advantage.

Posted this in another thread: How do you fit eight games in a single weekend? Three on Sat/Sun, one on MNF, and then …? Friday night? Double up MNF? Play two games simultaneously?

I’m sure the league would love the extra revenue, but I’m not sure how they pull it off logistically

 

[FairWarning]

One thing I would change with the format is to do away with the Monday night playoff game.

 

[King of the Jungle]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

I agree with this, in particular the the top two teams getting a bye. The NFL could have a play-in game with the 6th and 7th seeds to keep the revenue coming.

 

[Snotbubbles]

I'd like to see the NFL add another team so no team gets a BYE. I think HFA is enough of an advantage.

Posted this in another thread: How do you fit eight games in a single weekend? Three on Sat/Sun, one on MNF, and then …? Friday night? Double up MNF? Play two games simultaneously?

I’m sure the league would love the extra revenue, but I’m not sure how they pull it off logistically

One Friday night, one Monday night, 3 on Saturday/Sunday. Perfect weekend.

 

[Monkian]

I'd like to see the NFL add another team so no team gets a BYE. I think HFA is enough of an advantage.

Posted this in another thread: How do you fit eight games in a single weekend? Three on Sat/Sun, one on MNF, and then …? Friday night? Double up MNF? Play two games simultaneously?

I’m sure the league would love the extra revenue, but I’m not sure how they pull it off logistically

Overseas games are 9am Eastern, so why not a fourth Sunday game on Wild Card Weekend?

 

[bcat01]

Need to do away with the bye. If we truly want to see the best team win the Super Bowl shouldn't they all start on an even playing field?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

The Super Bowl would be played on a Saturday.

 

[Lehigh98]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

It adds the most important thing to the NFL owners... $$$.

 

[Rubi]

I'd like to see the NFL add another team so no team gets a BYE. I think HFA is enough of an advantage.

Posted this in another thread: How do you fit eight games in a single weekend? Three on Sat/Sun, one on MNF, and then …? Friday night? Double up MNF? Play two games simultaneously?

I’m sure the league would love the extra revenue, but I’m not sure how they pull it off logistically

It's The NFL
They'd make it work
Sat-3
Sun-3
Mon-2(Maybe 7:00 & 9:00)

 

[Rubi]

The Super Bowl would be played on a Saturday.

No! I like calling in sick on Monday

 

[ComfortablyNumb]

BTW, the Rams beat Minnesota 30-20 in week 8.

 

[-OZ-]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense

Yes. It really isn’t “nonsense”. You might disagree with the current setup but there’s a logic to it.
I prefer it. Divisions should mean something. Now we watch while the Texans and Rams get blown out.

 

[BassNBrew]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

Nevermind...see below.

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

Bingo.

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

That's great. I'd prefer to go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference.

I'd prefer you send me your 401k monies, don't think that is gonna happen.

 

[jobarules]

Ive been complaining about this for years. Very dumb

 

[Capella]

Need to do away with the bye. If we truly want to see the best team win the Super Bowl shouldn't they all start on an even playing field?

They did, in week 1. Then the one seeds earned their bye.

 

[BassNBrew]

Prime Video is paying an estimated $120 million for exclusive rights to an NFL playoff game after the 2024 season.

Final answer.

 

[-OZ-]

How do you fit eight games in a single weekend? Three on Sat/Sun, one on MNF, and then …? Friday night? Double up MNF? Play two games simultaneously?

Simultaneously is an option. Or just roll with 4 each Saturday and Sunday.
Central time- 12, 2:30, 5, 7:30. Slightly overlap but I’m okay with that.

Need to do away with the bye. If we truly want to see the best team win the Super Bowl shouldn't they all start on an even playing field?

They start every August on an even playing field.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

How do you fit eight games in a single weekend? Three on Sat/Sun, one on MNF, and then …? Friday night? Double up MNF? Play two games simultaneously?

Simultaneously is an option. Or just roll with 4 each Saturday and Sunday.
Central time- 12, 2:30, 5, 7:30. Slightly overlap but I’m okay with that.

Need to do away with the bye. If we truly want to see the best team win the Super Bowl shouldn't they all start on an even playing field?

They start every August on an even playing field.

I love that I said the scheduling would be difficult, and like five of you responded with solutions, yet everyone proposed something different

For the record, I think Friday Night makes the most sense. They could turn it into a whole "Friday Night Lights" kind of event the way they've made "Black Friday football" a thing now. There is some element of unfairness if two playoff teams have to play with up to three fewer rest days than others, though I would assume they'd make sure the Friday game and MNF game featured different conferences.

But mostly, I agree with @Rubi that we should never bet against the NFL figuring out a solution that allows them to make more money

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

Nevermind...see below.

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

Bingo.

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

That's great. I'd prefer to go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference.

I'd prefer you send me your 401k monies, don't think that is gonna happen.

I'm not the NFL. My preferences are those of a viewer, not a profit-maximizing firm.

I totally understand why the NFL likes the playoffs this way. I understand why they added a 17th game to the schedule. I understand why they play games in London, and why we have TNF. Just because I understand it doesn't mean I have to like it, and I'm just saying that I preferred it the old way.

 

[Anarchy99]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

Nevermind...see below.

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

Bingo.

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

The league would strongly disagree with you for financial reasons. Two more televised playoff games bring in tens of millions of dollars. Having an extra playoff spot also keeps fans of the borderline playoff teams engaged until the final week of the season (keeping ratings in those markets high).

That's great. I'd prefer to go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference.

I'd prefer you send me your 401k monies, don't think that is gonna happen.

I'm not the NFL. My preferences are those of a viewer, not a profit-maximizing firm.

I totally understand why the NFL likes the playoffs this way. I understand why they added a 17th game to the schedule. I understand why they play games in London, and why we have TNF. Just because I understand it doesn't mean I have to like it, and I'm just saying that I preferred it the old way.

I liked it when defenders could play defense and not get flagged for roughing the passer on a textbook form tackle of a quarterback. I liked it when games weren't decided by late game decisions by referees (ok, less frequently than they are now). I liked it when a catch was a catch and not an exercise in super-duper slow motion where it takes 10 minutes to decide what possession is. I liked the old ways, too, but we are where we are (for better or for worse).

 

[NickRocks]

The NFL would figure out a way that makes the most $$ and attempts to limit unfair scheduling (mostly the $$).

 

[Joe Bryant]

Put me down as thinking it's great as is.

Yes, it's a wild swing for Minnesota from a potential #1 to a #5. But it's clear and I think fair. Sometimes divisions are loaded.

I was thinking last night how awesome it is compared to the beauty pageant subjective way college does it.

Of course, it helps when the league is so consistent and has parity. And the relatively even distribution of players from the draft and then also salary cap. But I love how the NFL does it.

 

[efactor]

I'd go back to the six-team format with two byes in each conference. The seventh playoff team doesn't really add anything IMO, and I liked the symmetry of the older system.

This

It was a really good format but the NFL had to add another team in order to generate more fan interest in the last couple weeks of the season and create another playoff game. 7th team cheapens the playoffs.

 

[eighsse2]

I am fine with how it is, but as Ivan said above, I'd prefer to go back to six teams. I'd also prefer a pure bracket rather than the "#1 plays lowest seed" thing. Neither one of those is a big deal to me, though, and it likewise wouldn't be a big deal to me if they went to seeding in order of record. It's all kinda splitting hairs to me. As long as everyone knows what the rules are, it's all fair, all of these options are just preference things.

 

[packdog]

back in the day when the jags and panthers sprang into existence and division realignment was to take place i heard the perfect solution but it would never be implemented cause the league makes more money the way it is and they like rivalries. but the best and fairest solution is to kill divisions. just two big conferences. every one plays every team in their conference once and alternate home/away each year. the one (now two) out of conference games are matched up by pervious year finish. fair for everyone. but you might never get the out of conference matchups we get every few years ever

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Old enough to remember Brady & the Bucs making the playoffs at 8-9, and the 2009 or 2010 (forget which) Seahawks making the playoffs at 7-9, when the NFC-W was hot garbage.

Not sure what the fix would be - win the division, make the ‘offs. That’s just how it works.

The seeding is what it is. If the Vikings didn’t wanna play the Rams they shoulda beaten the Lions last night.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

back in the day when the jags and panthers sprang into existence and division realignment was to take place i heard the perfect solution but it would never be implemented cause the league makes more money the way it is and they like rivalries. but the best and fairest solution is to kill divisions. just two big conferences. every one plays every team in their conference once and alternate home/away each year. the one (now two) out of conference games are matched up by pervious year finish. fair for everyone. but you might never get the out of conference matchups we get every few years ever

It’s an interesting idea.

Divisional Rivalries would cease to be though, and a lot of what makes the NFL compelling along with it.

 

[General Malaise]

back in the day when the jags and panthers sprang into existence and division realignment was to take place i heard the perfect solution but it would never be implemented cause the league makes more money the way it is and they like rivalries. but the best and fairest solution is to kill divisions. just two big conferences. every one plays every team in their conference once and alternate home/away each year. the one (now two) out of conference games are matched up by pervious year finish. fair for everyone. but you might never get the out of conference matchups we get every few years ever

It’s an interesting idea.

Divisional Rivalries would cease to be though, and a lot of what makes the NFL compelling along with it.

But we've had teams move divisions before. I don't see any complaints about the Cowboys/Cardinals rivalry dying out 20 years ago or whatever. Hell, we've had teams move conferences - Seahawks developed newer, better rivalries this way. The NFL will be fine. It's always fine.

Division disparity is a problem and it needs to be fixed. Teams with lesser records shouldn't be hosting playoff games against teams with better records. Full stop.

 

[refacer]

It's fine as it is. Green Bay only lost one game outside their division, but that wasn't good enough. The division matters. Some divisions are tough and others are easy, and it flips every few years.

You want a home game? Win your division. Take care of business or go on the road.

exactly, maybe have your team better prepared for a game with so much on the line.

 

[BassNBrew]

back in the day when the jags and panthers sprang into existence and division realignment was to take place i heard the perfect solution but it would never be implemented cause the league makes more money the way it is and they like rivalries. but the best and fairest solution is to kill divisions. just two big conferences. every one plays every team in their conference once and alternate home/away each year. the one (now two) out of conference games are matched up by pervious year finish. fair for everyone. but you might never get the out of conference matchups we get every few years ever

It’s an interesting idea.

Divisional Rivalries would cease to be though, and a lot of what makes the NFL compelling along with it.

But we've had teams move divisions before. I don't see any complaints about the Cowboys/Cardinals rivalry dying out 20 years ago or whatever. Hell, we've had teams move conferences - Seahawks developed newer, better rivalries this way. The NFL will be fine. It's always fine.

Division disparity is a problem and it needs to be fixed. Teams with lesser records shouldn't be hosting playoff games against teams with better records. Full stop.

I think you're confusing rivalry with annual curb stomping.

 

[Deamon]

Am I alone thinking it’s complete nonsense that a 14-3 team will have to be away at the 10-7 Rams?

If you could change how teams are seeded, what would you change?

Change nothing. Makes for better games (@Rams will be closer than @Minny). And makes division rivalries worth a lot more. If you go to pseudo divisions like the NBA basically has, there's zero division rival stuff.

Win your division if you want to host the game. Otherwise go on the road, and if you're a dominant enough team, go beat them big.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

back in the day when the jags and panthers sprang into existence and division realignment was to take place i heard the perfect solution but it would never be implemented cause the league makes more money the way it is and they like rivalries. but the best and fairest solution is to kill divisions. just two big conferences. every one plays every team in their conference once and alternate home/away each year. the one (now two) out of conference games are matched up by pervious year finish. fair for everyone. but you might never get the out of conference matchups we get every few years ever

It’s an interesting idea.

Divisional Rivalries would cease to be though, and a lot of what makes the NFL compelling along with it.

But we've had teams move divisions before. I don't see any complaints about the Cowboys/Cardinals rivalry dying out 20 years ago or whatever. Hell, we've had teams move conferences - Seahawks developed newer, better rivalries this way. The NFL will be fine. It's always fine.

Division disparity is a problem and it needs to be fixed. Teams with lesser records shouldn't be hosting playoff games against teams with better records. Full stop.

I’m still irritated that the 49ers play the Seahawks 2x a year & don’t face the saints.

I hated that move, and will always think of Seattle as an AFC team & rival to the Raiders. I’ve never seen them as a rival to SF, and likely never will.

Just because you haven’t seen an affect doesn’t mean it’s not there.