Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Lloyd

Goodell considers expanding NFL playoffs

Recommended Posts

http://www.nfl.com/n...anding-playoffs

Roger Goodell outlines benefits of expanding playoffs

NEW YORK -- For the second time in four months, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell suggested that the league's competition committee will strongly consider expanding the playoff field.

Speaking at Friday's Super Bowl XLVIII press conference, Goodell said there are "a lot of benefits" to adding one team per conference, expanding the playoff field to 14 rather than 12.

"We think we can make the league more competitive, we think we can make the matchups more competitive towards the end of the season," Goodell said. "There'll be more excitement, more memorable moments for our fans. And that's something that attracts us, and we think we can do it properly from a competitive standpoint."

Goodell appears to be in favor of the idea, adding that it will "continue to get very serious consideration" from NFL owners.

The Commissioner stated in October that scheduling issues would prevent the playoff field from expanding before the 2015 season.

The NFL's willingness to embrace change in pursuit of increased excitement and fan satisfaction separates it from other major American sports leagues. If the expanded playoff is adopted, it will be under scrutiny for further changes down the line.

As Goodell told NFL Media's Rich Eisen, that sense of competitive evolution makes the NFL "unique."

So he wants a league where nearly half of the 32 teams can make the playoffs every year?

Seriously. What is this guy's game? Every idea out of this guy's mouth is blatantly based around increasing profits rather than increasing the quality of the game.

I got into football in the mid 90's, so some of you older guys gotta tell me - was Tabliabue this bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more money, period ... which is why a lot of owners will undoubtedly vote for it. But it's a horrible idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tagliabue was so non-descript, I can barely recall much besides his relationship with Gene Upshaw and, as has come to light recently, his obfuscation of the concussion issue, which started to be a concern when he was in office.

Pete Rozelle's term was much more dynamic, but the NFL was just emerging then as a viable sport on TV. Plus there was the AFL to contend with.

So each Commish has different circumstances to deal with, but Goodell's tenure thus far has been marked by more controversial topics than I can ever recall, because the very makeup of the game is being re-thought, and it's not sitting well with a lot of fans, obviously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally a commish who gets what the Real Fans wants. Like an 18 game season, more thursday night games, a team in London, and an expanded playoffs.

Roger Goodell... he speaks for the Fans!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with a lot of what he does, from a fan perspective, but it is also important to keep in mind that he doesn't work for the fans. He is, essentially, the CEO of the NFL and he works for the owners. He basically takes all the flak for carrying out the owners' bidding and, in return, he is well compensated and they get to avoid the bad press associated with unpopular decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Roger really wants to think outside the box they'll put another field sideways across the original fields. They can make the stadiums bigger and sell more tickets, more parking, and more over priced beers. Then they can play two games at the same time, and each city can have two teams doubling their chance at a championship. It'd be like an old country style figure 8 stock car race during the game. And then at the end of the regular season after every team has made the playoffs you could have four teams in the the Super Bowl at once with two winners. #winning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with a lot of what he does, from a fan perspective, but it is also important to keep in mind that he doesn't work for the fans. He is, essentially, the CEO of the NFL and he works for the owners. He basically takes all the flak for carrying out the owners' bidding and, in return, he is well compensated and they get to avoid the bad press associated with unpopular decisions.

I agree 100% about this. My criticism is how he plays all this off like he is the People's Champ. He constantly preaches about how these are things the Fans want. The fans want more playoff teams, the fans want a longer schedule. I don't care if he wants to go out there and say we want to go this way as a league - we think it'll improve the game. Whatever, I disagree but he's serving the owners and I can understand that. But don't pat yourself on the back like your doing some service to the fans as if we want this garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree 100% about this. My criticism is how he plays all this off like he is the People's Champ. He constantly preaches about how these are things the Fans want. The fans want more playoff teams, the fans want a longer schedule. I don't care if he wants to go out there and say we want to go this way as a league - we think it'll improve the game. Whatever, I disagree but he's serving the owners and I can understand that. But don't pat yourself on the back like your doing some service to the fans as if we want this garbage.

But, like any CEO, that's his job - to sell what the company wants to do to their consumers.

I mean, obviously, we all love football so we take it very personally. But it's really no different than Staples switching the color of your favorite notepad and then trying to advertise to you that you'll like the "new and improved" one, even when they only did it so that they can make more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, like any CEO, that's his job - to sell what the company wants to do to their consumers.

I mean, obviously, we all love football so we take it very personally. But it's really no different than Staples switching the color of your favorite notepad and then trying to advertise to you that you'll like the "new and improved" one, even when they only did it so that they can make more money.

There's a difference between saying you are going to love this and saying the fans demanded this. Using your example, Staples didn't change the notepad color and say all of our customers were demanding we change the color. They made a judgment call and then argued that we will be better.

I mean at the end of the day its semantics, but I find it arrogant and completely disingenous to say this is what the fans want when we all know its a lie. Just state the case for the change (Expanded playoffs will generate more interest, make finishing first a greater priority, etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I originally posted after the regular season ended, with a minor edit at: http://boards.philadelphiaeagles.com/topic/685125-if-we-had-seven-teams-in-each-conference-and-nba-style-postseason-seeding/

Now that the regular season is over, I'm sure there will again be cries to add an additional team to each conference in the postseason after a 10-6 Cardinals team did not make it while an 8-7-1 Packers team did. Given I can see this happening anyway (with the additional games most likely going to Disney as a Saturday afternoon doubleheader on ABC (to keep elected officials off the backs of the NFL) and NBC getting prime time games on Saturday and Sunday night), with NBA-style seeding used (only where teams have identical records does a division champ get preference over a wild card, and THEN ONLY if the wild card did not beat the division champ in the regular season):

AFC:

#1 Seed and first-round Bye: Broncos

First Round:

#7 Steelers (8-8) at #2 Patriots (12-4) (Sunday at 8:50 PM ET on NBC)

#6 Chargers (9-7)** at #3 Bengals (11-5) (Saturday at 4:15 PM ET on ABC)

#5 Chiefs (11-5)** at #4 Colts (11-5) (Sunday at 12:30 PM ET on CBS)

**-- If the Chiefs had been able to improve to the #3 seed by beating the Chargers, they likely would not have rested their starters and we could have then seen that game end differently and thus different seeding.

NFC:

#1 Seed and first-round Bye: Seahawks

First Round:

#7 Packers (8-7-1) at #2 Panthers (12-4) (Saturday at 12:30 PM ET on ABC)

#6 Cardinals (10-6) at #3 49ers (12-4) (Sunday at 4:15 PM ET on FOX)

#5 Eagles (10-6) at #4 Saints (11-5) (Saturday at 8:50 PM ET on NBC)

Eagles would still be playing the Saints in this format, but the game would have been in New Orleans instead of here and probably would have still been the Saturday prime time game (Eagles would win tiebreak over Cards for the #5 seed because of both winning the NFC East and their head-to-head win). Think NBC would have wanted Steelers-Pats for the Sunday night game because of the national followings of those two teams.

That's how I would have seen it happen if we had a seventh team in each conference in the postseason.

One adjustment I made here was the Chiefs being able to get the #3 seed because I had it wrong in the original post. Had they been able to get the #3 seed and won the game, the matchups would have been these in the AFC:

#7 Ravens at #2 Patriots

#6 Steelers at #3 Chiefs

#5 Colts at #4 Bengals

I suspect you will see a third wild card because that likely means a Saturday afternoon playoff doubleheader on ABC (as I think Disney would be asked to put it on ABC in order to keep certain elected officials happy) as noted with NBC getting Saturday and Sunday prime time games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More football? I aint complaining.

Yeah. Because you don't care about quality. You just want more of things.

"Two lesser teams squeak into the playoffs? That's more time to drink light beer and eat Pizza Hut!"

Don't worry. You're not alone. Folks like you are the reason that Wal Mart, McDonald's, and Applebees are well on their way to world domination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, like any CEO, that's his job - to sell what the company wants to do to their consumers.

I mean, obviously, we all love football so we take it very personally. But it's really no different than Staples switching the color of your favorite notepad and then trying to advertise to you that you'll like the "new and improved" one, even when they only did it so that they can make more money.

And yet we'll all buy it. Will any hardcore NFL fan NOT watch the 2 vs. 7 seed game in protest?

Honestly I don't think it's that big of a deal. When the NFL expanded to 12 playoff teams in 1990 there were 28 teams in the league. 42.85% of the league made the playoffs.

Now there are 32 teams and 37.5% of teams make the playoffs. Pushing it to 14 increases the number to 43.75%, which is basically the same as it was in the early 90s.

When you look at it that way, Goodell isn't doing anything historically unprecedented, he's just adjusting to the contemporary structure of the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's look at what it really is. Right now you have 2 teams in each Conference have byes. Why does the 2nd seat get a bye. 2 more teams makes it to where only the top #1 seed gets a bye. It's only 2 more games. That means that you have 1 more Saturday of Playoff Football. Personally I like this. And, why stop there. Let's take 2 of those meaningless preseason games and make them Regular season games. You keep the Hall of Fame game. Rotate it between all 16 teams in each Conference. That way only 2 teams play 3 preseason games a year. And those 2 extra regular season games. I'll use the Eagles as an example. You play your 6 Division games. You play 1 division from the AFC every year. That's 4 games. Then you play 1 division from the NFC every year. That's 4 more games. Then you still play the other 2 in Conference games. That is 16. Then you play your closest out of Conference rival every year. That leaves 1 extra game. All teams play 1 game either over seas, or in a neutral site. That is 18 games. Here is how I would do this. In years that the Eagles don't play the AFC North. The natural AFC Rival for the Eagles in the Steelers. You play them the 3 years that you don't play the AFC North. Other game. You pick another AFC team that is close. For the Eagles that would be the Jets. Same thing. And the years that you play either the AFC East, or AFC North. The Eagles would play San Diego, or maybe Indianapolis.

You still have 2 preseason games for every team, and the NFL still gets it's complete Hall of Fame weekend.

Neutral sites would be large 75,000+ seat stadiums that are in places that the NFL would never expand into. Like Birmingham Alabama, San Antonio Texas, Pasadena California, Portland Oregon, Columbus Ohio, Salt Lake City Utah just to name a few places that they could do this that would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's look at what it really is. Right now you have 2 teams in each Conference have byes. Why does the 2nd seat get a bye. 2 more teams makes it to where only the top #1 seed gets a bye. It's only 2 more games. That means that you have 1 more Saturday of Playoff Football. Personally I like this. And, why stop there. Let's take 2 of those meaningless preseason games and make them Regular season games.

You're not gonna want to hear this, but it's REALLY hard to read a giant wall of text when you don't break it up into paragraphs. I swear to you, I tried. I really did.

In regards to adding two regular season games - teams can barely keep a healthy roster through 16 games. There are consequences to adding more games. It's not just "Hey let's add more games because more games equals more fun." And there are also benefits of playing preseason games.

In regards to playoffs - As someone said earlier in the thread - if those two teams weren't good enough to make it into the playoffs before, why should they be now? And if we don't care about the quality of playoff teams anymore, then why stop at adding two? Why not four or six?

Is there a limit when you actually care about the quality of the teams in the playoff game as opposed to just having more football?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. Because you don't care about quality. You just want more of things.

"Two lesser teams squeak into the playoffs? That's more time to drink light beer and eat Pizza Hut!"

Don't worry. You're not alone. Folks like you are the reason that Wal Mart, McDonald's, and Applebees are well on their way to world domination.

Boohoo cry me a f'ing river.

Its simple, i hate waiting ages for football again. Especially eagles football.

Oh and i dont ever go to mcpukes Walmart of applebees.

Now go back to drinking your own piss, Bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boohoo cry me a f'ing river.

Its simple, i hate waiting ages for football again. Especially eagles football.

Oh and i dont ever go to mcpukes Walmart of applebees.

Now go back to drinking your own piss, Bear.

"Hates waiting," he says.

See. We've come full circle to the whole "McDonald's Generation" thing again. You want your football. You want more of it. You don't want to wait. And you don't care if getting more football, more quickly results in a lower quality product.

You see how I draw the comparison to McDonald's.

16 regular season games plus 12 teams in the playoffs...I just never had a problem with it. Isn't that why football is cool? Because it's not the sport with 82 games or 162. And sure, you're gonna say that you're only asking for 2 more playoff games, so it's no big deal. But now it's only two. In 5 years, you'll want 2 more. And so on.

Just saying....football's a good thing. And it's been a good thing for a while. Why screw it up? The NBA used to be a good thing too....20 years ago. Now look at it. Rotting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to playoffs - As someone said earlier in the thread - if those two teams weren't good enough to make it into the playoffs before, why should they be now?

There was a time when the best team from the East and the best team from the West faced off in the NFL Championship game. If you're argument is based solely on an appeal to tradition, then it's rather empty.

And if we don't care about the quality of playoff teams anymore, then why stop at adding two? Why not four or six?

This is what's known as a slippery slope. It's possible that the NFL would expand to 16 playoff teams, but I kind of doubt it, in large part because it becomes difficult to market that many playoff games. Several games would have to be played at the same time and I'm not sure the NFL wants that with the playoffs.

Is there a limit when you actually care about the quality of the teams in the playoff game as opposed to just having more football?

They already don't care about the quality of playoff teams (see division winners with 7 to 9 wins hosting 11 and 12 win teams) so that issue goes beyond adding a 7 seed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hates waiting," he says.

See. We've come full circle to the whole "McDonald's Generation" thing again. You want your football. You want more of it. You don't want to wait. And you don't care if getting more football, more quickly results in a lower quality product.

You see how I draw the comparison to McDonald's.

16 regular season games plus 12 teams in the playoffs...I just never had a problem with it. Isn't that why football is cool? Because it's not the sport with 82 games or 162. And sure, you're gonna say that you're only asking for 2 more playoff games, so it's no big deal. But now it's only two. In 5 years, you'll want 2 more. And so on.

Just saying....football's a good thing. And it's been a good thing for a while. Why screw it up? The NBA used to be a good thing too....20 years ago. Now look at it. Rotting.

You act as if you know for a fact that 2 more games will ruin the quality of the game.

I say you don't know shi. Quit your preaching and reaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You act as if you know for a fact that 2 more games will ruin the quality of the game.

I say you don't know shi. Quit your preaching and reaching.

Come on, buddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/n...anding-playoffs

So he wants a league where nearly half of the 32 teams can make the playoffs every year?

Seriously. What is this guy's game? Every idea out of this guy's mouth is blatantly based around increasing profits rather than increasing the quality of the game.

I got into football in the mid 90's, so some of you older guys gotta tell me - was Tabliabue this bad?

Tags kinda morphed into Goodell. You have to remember that Tags ushered in the salary cap era and modern day labor relations between the players and league that jump started these record profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hates waiting," he says.

See. We've come full circle to the whole "McDonald's Generation" thing again. You want your football. You want more of it. You don't want to wait. And you don't care if getting more football, more quickly results in a lower quality product.

You see how I draw the comparison to McDonald's.

16 regular season games plus 12 teams in the playoffs...I just never had a problem with it. Isn't that why football is cool? Because it's not the sport with 82 games or 162. And sure, you're gonna say that you're only asking for 2 more playoff games, so it's no big deal. But now it's only two. In 5 years, you'll want 2 more. And so on.

Just saying....football's a good thing. And it's been a good thing for a while. Why screw it up? The NBA used to be a good thing too....20 years ago. Now look at it. Rotting.

Right, because 18 games is comparable to 82.

It's not as if they're really "adding" games fully anyway if they're converting 2 of those from preseason to regular (or post) season play. I'd say you're reaching here a little...

However, my personal stance is that the playoff format is fine. I wouldn't add any teams or games to the format right away. Just add two more games to the regular season first, then later they can consider a postseason change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites