Playoff Re-seeding

[RiverDog]

There's been a lot of discussion about how the playoff brackets are formulated. Currently, at the end of the regular season, the seedings are established by assigning the 4 division champs with Seeds 1-4, with the two wild card teams getting Seeds 5 and 6. I would leave that part of the process the same. It would keep intact the importance placed on winning your division, as doing so guarantees at least one home game.

But going into the second round, I'd have all 4 of the remaining teams re-seeded according to their regular season results. For example, let's assume SF beats GB and Philly beats New Orleans. Under the current system, the Niners would be the lowest remaining seed and would travel to Seattle and the Eagles would travel to Carolina. Under the system I am suggesting, the Niners would get the #3 seed and Philly #4. This would send Philly to Seattle and SF to Carolina.

What would be more dramatic would be in a scenario like what nearly happened to us this season. Suppose for a second we lost the Rams game. Under the current system, that would have dropped us all the way to the #5 seed with almost no hope of hosting a playoff game. Under the re-seeding scenario (assuming we won the wild card game), our 12-4 record would equal Carolina's and since we beat them head-to-head, would be awarded the #2 seed and would host a game in the second round.

Whatcha think?

[Irish Greg 2.0]

I definitely think they need to re-structure how they do the playoffs.

I'm just glad they won't do anything until after this season. I'm loving the fact the 12-4 Niners have to play the 8-7-1 Packers in -30 degree weather this weekend, just to earn the right to have another tough road game next weekend.

[NorthHawk]

It's one of those things that sounds obvious when you first look at it.
I'm not sure it takes into account the varying strengths of schedule.
If it was a balanced schedule then it would make sense, but with the varying degrees of strength of schedule some deserving teams would probably end up not having home games just like we see today. Then people would be talking about going back to the old system.

[RiverDog]

I definitely think they need to re-structure how they do the playoffs.

I'm just glad they won't do anything until after this season. I'm loving the fact the 12-4 Niners have to play the 8-7-1 Packers in -30 degree weather this weekend, just to earn the right to have another tough road game next weekend.

Under my plan, the Niners would still have to go to Green Bay. It wouldn't be until after the first round that re-seeding would take effect.

They might expand the playoffs at the same time they come up with some sort of re-seeding process.

[Distant Relative]

There's been a lot of discussion about how the playoff brackets are formulated. Currently, at the end of the regular season, the seedings are established by assigning the 4 division champs with Seeds 1-4, with the two wild card teams getting Seeds 5 and 6. I would leave that part of the process the same. It would keep intact the importance placed on winning your division, as doing so guarantees at least one home game.

But going into the second round, I'd have all 4 of the remaining teams re-seeded according to their regular season results. For example, let's assume SF beats GB and Philly beats New Orleans. Under the current system, the Niners would be the lowest remaining seed and would travel to Seattle and the Eagles would travel to Carolina. Under the system I am suggesting, the Niners would get the #3 seed and Philly #4. This would send Philly to Seattle and SF to Carolina.

What would be more dramatic would be in a scenario like what nearly happened to us this season. Suppose for a second we lost the Rams game. Under the current system, that would have dropped us all the way to the #5 seed with almost no hope of hosting a playoff game. Under the re-seeding scenario (assuming we won the wild card game), our 12-4 record would equal Carolina's and since we beat them head-to-head, would be awarded the #2 seed and would host a game in the second round.

Whatcha think?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... -by-record

[HumanCockroach]

I personally hate the idea of re seeding playoffs. True there are some teams that are "better" that get "punished" , but there are quite a few teams that would benefit, from poor divisions, lackluster schedules, and lucky bounces far more often IMHO. If a team is truly "better" they should indeed be able to win on the road, if they can't, IMO they aren't as superior as people portray them to be. More SB champions in the last 10 years have HAD to play on the road to accomplish it, so I feel no remorse or sympathy for those that do. Every team has a chance to win the SB that makes it into the playoffs, pretending like it can't be done from a WC spot is not accurate in the least.

Add in the thought that a team that couldn't win the division they are in becoming a 2 seed after the first round and you are treading the silly line ( or IMHO dancing on the other side of it, with a goofy hat, and spotted pants on).....

I grasp the desire from fans, but hope they stay true to the importance of winning the division first.

[Eaglehawk]

There's been a lot of discussion about how the playoff brackets are formulated. Currently, at the end of the regular season, the seedings are established by assigning the 4 division champs with Seeds 1-4, with the two wild card teams getting Seeds 5 and 6. I would leave that part of the process the same. It would keep intact the importance placed on winning your division, as doing so guarantees at least one home game.

But going into the second round, I'd have all 4 of the remaining teams re-seeded according to their regular season results. For example, let's assume SF beats GB and Philly beats New Orleans. Under the current system, the Niners would be the lowest remaining seed and would travel to Seattle and the Eagles would travel to Carolina. Under the system I am suggesting, the Niners would get the #3 seed and Philly #4. This would send Philly to Seattle and SF to Carolina.

What would be more dramatic would be in a scenario like what nearly happened to us this season. Suppose for a second we lost the Rams game. Under the current system, that would have dropped us all the way to the #5 seed with almost no hope of hosting a playoff game. Under the re-seeding scenario (assuming we won the wild card game), our 12-4 record would equal Carolina's and since we beat them head-to-head, would be awarded the #2 seed and would host a game in the second round.

Whatcha think?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... -by-record

DR thanks for the link.

I am a doubter like Northhawk and HC. Not really enthused by the idea. Strength of schedule is huge.
And I do hope that the Saints win on the road for once to change that little streak of theirs.

My deal, if you want to be number one seed, just earn it. You win you win. You lose you lose. Why reseed the lower guys? This is partially why guys like Tampa Bay can win the SB one year and never be heard from again. But it is what makes football, football.

I agree with IG that it ain't perfect. But why mess with a system that is 10 percent messed up? It doesn't look like a broke system. So if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Eaglehawk]

Another reason they want to change the rules based on what happened to the hawks with their 7-9 record winning their division and getting a home game.
The rules will make it less important to win your division since the team with the best record will host.

Nah. I'm not buying it.

[c_hawkbob]

I don't think they need to change anything. Where's the fun in taking away everyone's favorite b****? Most times it's nothing more than sweating the small stuff to satisfy the stat geeks' OCD.

Except maybe 11-5 ... maybe more than 10 wins aughta be an automatic playoff qualifier. Just displace the 6 seed, even if you have to seed 'em in the other conference to make it happen ...

Or maybe not. Years from now it'll probably be better for Cards fans to be able to say they coulda won it all in 13 than to have to explain a first round exit.

[Hawktawk]

I don't think they need to change anything. Where's the fun in taking away everyone's favorite b****? Most times it's nothing more than sweating the small stuff to satisfy the stat geeks' OCD.

Except maybe 11-5 ... maybe more than 10 wins aughta be an automatic playoff qualifier. Just displace the 6 seed, even if you have to seed 'em in the other conference to make it happen ...

Or maybe not. Years from now it'll probably be better for Cards fans to be able to say they coulda won it all in 13 than to have to explain a first round exit.

\
Bingo Bob! Leave it be league. The way the NFC West is stacked the winner could be 9-7 the next 5 years. And look at the situation in Green Bay where thay had to hang on with a backup QB for 2 months. The premium on division winners should be kept. But that doesnt mean Goodell will leave it alone. Hes like a G$%damn politician who doesnt thiink hes doing his job if he isnt passing a new law.

[curmudgeon]

Win your division and you are in. Leave it be NFL. Goodell's constant tinkering will be the ruination of the best league in the world.......

[Zorn76]

Not a fan of re-seeding.
And with some WC teams winning SB's lately, I doubt the league changes anything anyway.

[burrrton]

Not sure if anyone has discussed this option, but:

What would the drawback(s) be if division winners still got automatic slots, but seeding was still determined by record? I think effectively it would simply mean division champs get in but don't necessarily get a home game.

Seems like best of both worlds, or am I missing something?

[savvyman]

Or how about two divisions?

1. The NFC
2. The AFC

Each team would play every other team in their conference once (15 games) and one game against a team in the other conference (for 16 Total).

At the end of the 16 game season - the top six (or even 8) finishers go on to play each other in the playoffs - the winner of each conference playoffs will then play in the Superbowl.

This format would eliminate all strength of schedules biases and also eliminate teams going to the playoffs with worse records then other teams (such as the cardinals) with better records.