NFL Playoff Format

[People's Champ]

A lot has been made of the playoff format in recent weeks with the possibility of a 7-9 team winning their division and hosting a playoff game. Should the 49ers win their division, it would be at 7-9 (first losing team to win their division in NFL history), and there is a strong possibility thy would be hosting the 12 win Saints in the Wild Card round. Doesn't sound too fair, does it?

This scenario has lead to many writers, fans wondering how to fix the format. Here are some of the suggestions:

1). Don't allow a losing team in. The West is bad, and if a 9 loss team won it and got it, it would be a huge disgrace to the NFL, especially when there might be some 9 or 10 win teams that wouldn't get to play because of this division winner getting in automatically.

2). Seed teams off records, not division winners. Fine, a 9 loss team is in. Does that mean they have to get a home game, especially when the team they are facing is much better than they are (both in record and on the field)? No. Seed teams off of record. If the 49ers get in, they would be the 6th seed and have to play on the road, against say the Saints or Eagles.

Now, I know I may not have explained it the best way, but I'm sure you get the concept. Now let me state that while I added in number 1, I know that it will not happen. The reason I put that in bold is because I don't want people arguing with me that its not going to happen. I already know that, but put it in as I've heard a few mention that. The most likely scenario is number 2. And its being said that it might even be discussed after this season.

Where do you stand on the issue of the playoff format? Does it need to be changed, and if so why and how would you change it?

Now I'm going to answer my own question and say NO, there is no need for change. A couple of issues get raised when you decide to change it. First, emphasis or reward for winning your division is gone because now it would be based off records.this is a problem for baseball, which is why they will be adding a 2nd wild card team. Second is that this has never happened. If the 49ers do it, they would be the 1st in history. So why change it up because of one instance with one division? Should an 11-win wild card team host a 10-win division winner because they have a one game better record than the other team? Doesn't seem logical, again, because of the whole reward-for-winning-your-division thing.

Thoughts?

 

[Megatron]

The playoff format should only have one slight change. I think division winners should be allowed to host a playoff game, as long as they don't finish under .500. >.500 playoff teams happen once in a blue moon as it is (I think there's only been 2 .500 division winners anyways) but I don't think mediocrity should be rewarded. So if the 49ers were to finish as the division winners then they wouldn't get a home game since they couldn't finish under .500. But an 8-8 team should be able to, though. That's about the only change I would go for, as under .500 division winners are as rare as it is.

 

[Davi323]

I would only change one rule. Division winners, regardless of record, still make playoffs...but the scheduling for home and away is determined by overall record. The fact is, what is going to happen in the NFC West this year has never, ever happened before. It isn't as if this is a huge problem that has been plaguing the NFL for decades. Because it hasn't been a persistent problem, I am not convinced a major change is really necessary. This isn't the BCS, where issues happen almost on a yearly basis, this is one season in NFL history.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I'm just fine with the way it is. I don't even mind that there is the possibility of a 7-9 team coming out of the NFC West hosting a home game. If you're a great team, you should be able to win at home and on the road. Let's assume things stay the way they are and the #5 seed (most likely New Orleans) goes on the road to face Seattle, St. Louis, or San Francisco. If New Orleans can win that game, more power to them. If they don't, then shit happens. I'm not in favor of Davi323's method of reseeding based on overall record because there have plenty of instances where wild card teams have had better records than divison winners.

 

[Big Sexy]

The division winners will always be in the playoffs regardless of record. That is a rule that will never change because if it did then the NFL would basically be saying that the divisions are irrelevant.

As far as a division winning team not getting a home game I don't see that changing either nor do I think it should. Obviously this year the NFC West is bad and the winner doesn't deserve a home game, but there are some years where a division is can be so tough that it's hard to get a great record. Back in 2002 the AFC East had every team with 8 or 9 wins. That's a much tougher division then one that may have an 11-5 team, 10-6 team, 5-11 team, and 1-15 team. A 10-6 team in a below average division should not get a home game over a 9-7 division winner in a division where every team has 7-9 wins.

 

[justinsayne]

Just leave it as is, I don't really see a problem with the way things are set up now, all this does is remind people how important it really is to win your division, wildcard spots are there to give the two best teams who fail to win their division a playoff spot, teams with winning records that fail to make the playoffs this year will look at this season and will be reminded that the only real way to guarantee yourself a playoff spot is to win the division

 

[Theo Mays]

Do not touch the NFL playoffs. I don't care that the NFC West is having a down year (hell the Chargers won the AFC West with an 8-8 record and played well in the playoffs), the NFL playoffs are near perfect. It is probably the best playoff structure in all of professional sports and I don't think a damn thing should change. Just because we are likely to see a division winner with a losing record doesn't mean it should change. The NFC West is having a bad season, but one year shouldn't make a difference on how we view the playoff system.

 

[LSN80]

I dont care if your division winner gets 6 wins on the season, they should make the playoffs. To have the top 6 records make the playoffs would render the divisions and conferences meaningless altogether other then the fact that you know you'll be seeing the same 3 teams twice every single year. As for the playoffs, the seeding should be done based upon record rather then divisonal winners. Its not only the NFC North this yeas, its also the AFC South where the division winner will be hosting a team with a better record. The argument can be made that the better team should be able to win on the road against its lesser opponent. Im inclined to argue that they shouldn't be put into the situation of having put together a better body of work over 16 games and falling because they played on the road. While I feel football and hockey have the best playoff structures in professional sports, the one flaw in football is division winners automatically getting a home game even if their record is worse then the team that they're playing. The same logic applies for hockey as well.

 

[justinsayne]

If a 12 win team has to go on the road and face a 7 win team that's a Division winner(which could likely happen in the NFC this year) than if the 12 win team is truly as good as their record shows, they really shouldn't have any problem beating a 7 win team

Playoffs are the 6 best battling it out to determine who is the best of the best, and that means winning in whatever situation you are put into, the division champs are rewarded with a playoff spot and home game, the best 2 division winners are rewarded with a bye as well, and the best record in the conference is rewarded with home field throughout, to me that seems pretty fair and about as perfect as it's gonna get

 

[Leeds Guy]

Yeah it shouldn't matter. If the 49ers finish 7-9 they will finish 5-1 against the rest of the NFC West and quite frankly a team that goes 5-1 against their divisional rivals deserves to go to the playoffs. Yes the NFC West is weak but surely that makes it more important for whoever plays the winners to beat them. It would be very petty if the Playoffs were tinkered with to disallow a team with a losing record a chance to go to the Superbowl.

 

[M. Winters]

I don't think it should change at all. You get all this hooplah about the NFC West, it's a down year, so what? Next year there will probably be a 10 game winner in that division and no one will mention changing the playoffs at all. It's just one of those years, no one complained about the Chargers winning the division at 8-8 a couple years ago because they were a more flashy football team. One of these NFC West teams is going to win their division and they deserve to host a playoff game regardless of record.

 

[The Brain]

There really isn’t a reason to change anything. If you’re going to make a rule that says a sub .500 team can’t make the playoffs you may as well get rid of divisions all together. I could buy into an argument that says just take the top six teams. I wouldn’t like it, but it is more reasonable than putting the .500 restriction on the playoffs. What if The Rams were 10-6 and there was an 11-5 team left out? What would you do then? It either has to be division winners get in regardless of record or get rid of divisions and take the six best records. You can’t pick and choose each year. As mentioned above this season is a rarity. The system has worked fine for many years before. There’s no need to change things because of one fluke year.