Possible NFL Playoff Expansion for 2020

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Is that a guess or has that been confirmed or proposed?
I like it better than other teams having an extra home game. But if the Packers can't travel to California, how are they going to do after a flight to New Delhi?

That is the premise of the 17 game proposal....and also why if agreed upon the earliest it would be instituted would be the 2021 or 2022 season.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'd be interested to see some stats going back some years on what type of records would have gotten in.

Teams and records that would have made the playoffs as the seventh seed over the past 10 seasons:

2019: Steelers (8-8), Rams (9-7)
2018: Steelers (9-6-1), Vikings (8-7-1)
2017: Ravens (9-7), Lions (9-7)
2016: Titans (9-7), Buccaneers (9-7)
2015: Jets (10-6), Falcons (8-8)
2014: Texans (9-7), Eagles (10-6)
2013: Steelers (8-8), Cardinals (10-6)
2012: Steelers (8-8), Bears (10-6)
2011: Titans (9-7), Bears (8-8)
2010: Chargers (9-7), Giants (10-6)

Taking a look at the numbers not a single team with a losing record would have made the playoffs over the past 10 seasons with the seventh seed in each conference clinching a spot. I wonder if the Steelers brought up the idea though.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

In case you guys were worried about us getting a bye after losing yesterday:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[PikeBadger]

Hate the idea. No more than 12. It’s watered down enough even at that number.

 

[El Guapo]

I agree to a point, but also see the perspective of March Madness. Everyone loves the Cinderella team. The greatest playoff run that I have ever personally seen was the 2007 NY Giants. They were the last seed in the NFC, and barely made it. While I was standing at Lambeau in negative temps, wearing seven layers of clothes, and holding an empty beer cup, I realized that I had just witnessed the improbable win.

Wasn't it 2010 when the Seahawks snuck in with a losing record and then knocked off the Saints with the beastmode run? Albeit few and far between, those are classic wins by the "watered down" teams.

 

[Heyjoe4]

so take even more importance off the early regular season games? Give teams that weren't prepared to start the season or are maybe taking advantage of injured teams later in the year benefit more? I think right now is a good balance between making all the games matter and playoffs.

I don't see any reason to make the first month of the season any less important than the last and preseason already lasts until October the way it is.

Certainly all the games are important, they each count for a W or a L. Especially this year, without OTAs, limited training camp, and no pre-season games, teams were probably still fighting off the rust in the first month (although I really didn't see a lot of it in the games I watched, a small sample size). And teams that make it to December in relatively good health are just gonna win more games, it's a battle of attrition, especially in the NFL.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I agree to a point, but also see the perspective of March Madness. Everyone loves the Cinderella team. The greatest playoff run that I have ever personally seen was the 2007 NY Giants. They were the last seed in the NFC, and barely made it. While I was standing at Lambeau in negative temps, wearing seven layers of clothes, and holding an empty beer cup, I realized that I had just witnessed the improbable win.

Wasn't it 2010 when the Seahawks snuck in with a losing record and then knocked off the Saints with the beastmode run? Albeit few and far between, those are classic wins by the "watered down" teams.

Ouch. That 2007 loss to the Giants at Lambeau still hurts. I can still see Tom Mcloughlin's red, frozen face. But the Giants won the SB twice with Eli, the most memorable was knocking off the then undefeated Pats. So yeah, watch out for the teams that "sneak in". Like the Packers in 2010, they can be dangerous and easily overlooked.

 

[Mondio]

I agree to a point, but also see the perspective of March Madness. Everyone loves the Cinderella team. The greatest playoff run that I have ever personally seen was the 2007 NY Giants. They were the last seed in the NFC, and barely made it. While I was standing at Lambeau in negative temps, wearing seven layers of clothes, and holding an empty beer cup, I realized that I had just witnessed the improbable win.

Wasn't it 2010 when the Seahawks snuck in with a losing record and then knocked off the Saints with the beastmode run? Albeit few and far between, those are classic wins by the "watered down" teams.

and there's the fact college basketball is mostly, who cares outside of the tournament. there are a few big games out of hundreds of them weekly. I think the NFL does well. Every week matters a lot. Also in college you have huge disparities between conferences and leagues and regions etc. I think the pro's have it balanced out pretty well in terms of divisions and conference play to to then determine a champion.

I think other ways are probably ok too, but I don't think they're better, they're just different. I do think it's rather hard to top what they have now. I guess though, NFL became popular thru the game experience I think. Now it's past that and it's all TV deals. anything to increase ratings which larger "tournament" would do at the end when all the games count. and to get those deals TV contracts are going to be tied to regular season so they'll be on all over the place. probably means more money, but I don't think it's better. I think regular season would suffer even more with playing it safe for the end knowing it's not going to take much to get in.

NCAA has over 350 schools eligible for the tournament and pick 68, 20% chance of making it.

NFL has 32 teams, go to 14 team playoffs? almost half the league gets to play another week. I don't like it. probably means more money i guess. I already don't like that the season doesn't start until OCT with the best in nov and december. we'll see vets loafing thru seasons until the end when "it counts" i know i won't be a fan.

 

[Heyjoe4]

and there's the fact college basketball is mostly, who cares outside of the tournament. there are a few big games out of hundreds of them weekly. I think the NFL does well. Every week matters a lot. Also in college you have huge disparities between conferences and leagues and regions etc. I think the pro's have it balanced out pretty well in terms of divisions and conference play to to then determine a champion.

I think other ways are probably ok too, but I don't think they're better, they're just different. I do think it's rather hard to top what they have now. I guess though, NFL became popular thru the game experience I think. Now it's past that and it's all TV deals. anything to increase ratings which larger "tournament" would do at the end when all the games count. and to get those deals TV contracts are going to be tied to regular season so they'll be on all over the place. probably means more money, but I don't think it's better. I think regular season would suffer even more with playing it safe for the end knowing it's not going to take much to get in.

NCAA has over 350 schools eligible for the tournament and pick 68, 20% chance of making it.

NFL has 32 teams, go to 14 team playoffs? almost half the league gets to play another week. I don't like it. probably means more money i guess. I already don't like that the season doesn't start until OCT with the best in nov and december. we'll see vets loafing thru seasons until the end when "it counts" i know i won't be a fan.

I don't like the move to 14 teams in the playoffs. But that's the trend is sports. The NBA is the worst violator in my mind. I think half of all teams make the playoffs (or close to it). That doesn't reward good play during the season. But it lines the pockets of the owners, the broadcasters, and ultimately the players, so who cares about fairness?

 

[El Guapo]

NCAA has over 350 schools eligible for the tournament and pick 68, 20% chance of making it.

NFL has 32 teams, go to 14 team playoffs? almost half the league gets to play another week.

Good points. I guess when I boil it down, on wildcard weekend we are going to get to watch one more game. It may dilute things slightly, but I'll still park my butt on the couch for three more hours.

 

[rmontro]

The NBA is the worst violator in my mind. I think half of all teams make the playoffs (or close to it). That doesn't reward good play during the season. But it lines the pockets of the owners, the broadcasters, and ultimately the players, so who cares about fairness?

At the end of the day, it's a business that wants to make money. Well, until it went woke anyway.

 

[PikeBadger]

and there's the fact college basketball is mostly, who cares outside of the tournament. there are a few big games out of hundreds of them weekly. I think the NFL does well. Every week matters a lot. Also in college you have huge disparities between conferences and leagues and regions etc. I think the pro's have it balanced out pretty well in terms of divisions and conference play to to then determine a champion.

I think other ways are probably ok too, but I don't think they're better, they're just different. I do think it's rather hard to top what they have now. I guess though, NFL became popular thru the game experience I think. Now it's past that and it's all TV deals. anything to increase ratings which larger "tournament" would do at the end when all the games count. and to get those deals TV contracts are going to be tied to regular season so they'll be on all over the place. probably means more money, but I don't think it's better. I think regular season would suffer even more with playing it safe for the end knowing it's not going to take much to get in.

NCAA has over 350 schools eligible for the tournament and pick 68, 20% chance of making it.

NFL has 32 teams, go to 14 team playoffs? almost half the league gets to play another week. I don't like it. probably means more money i guess. I already don't like that the season doesn't start until OCT with the best in nov and december. we'll see vets loafing thru seasons until the end when "it counts" i know i won't be a fan.

NCAA basketball tournament is no doubt a great event but could be even better imo. And this coming year is the year to do it. Take the top 256 teams and place them in 4 geographical regions in pods of 4 teams. Takes only 1 extra week and eliminates the ridiculously pathetic conference tournaments with all their empty seats. Imagine the mayhem created by matchups likely to occur like Duke-NC, Kentucky -Louisville, Wisconsin-Marquette, Florida-Florida State and many more throughout the country in a loser go home scenario. It would be incredible! About 10 years I mapped it out in about 2 hours. I was floored by what I saw. Less travel, more money, better and intriguing matchups. They need to try it.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Hate the idea. No more than 12. It’s watered down enough even at that number.

You know that starting with this season 14 teams will make the playoffs, don't you???

 

[PikeBadger]

You know that starting with this season 14 teams will make the playoffs, don't you???

Yup and don’t like it.

 

[PikeBadger]

You know that starting with this season 14 teams will make the playoffs, don't you???

Yup and don’t like it.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

I think with the 9ers breakout we're all but assured a "Sweet 16" Tournament....but hey, at least it's more football right?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think with the 9ers breakout we're all but assured a "Sweet 16" Tournament....but hey, at least it's more football right?

I don't know why the league facing issues with COVID-19 should result in the playoffs being expanded to 16 teams. Actually it would make more sense to reduce the amount of postseason berths.

 

[Mondio]

a way to recoup some lost money

 

[Deleted member 6794]

a way to recoup some lost money

I don't think two more playoff games (most likely without or a limited amount of fans in the stand) would make a huge difference.

 

[Mondio]

I think 2 more games will generate more than 50 bucks in the pocket of someone. It will pocket money for players playing in the games. It will be more money in the pocket of the league, it will be more money in the pocket of those paying to air those games because they will be airing more ad spots. Plenty of people will be making more than a nominal amount of money by adding 2 games. Heck each player will pocket around 30K or more even if they lose per game.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't know why the league facing issues with COVID-19 should result in the playoffs being expanded to 16 teams. Actually it would make more sense to reduce the amount of postseason berths.

Just guessing here, but I think that was initiated due to the fear that some teams would have games cancelled and be excluded from the playoffs because they were percentage points behind a team that played a full 16 games. I guess its up for debate if a 10-2 team is better than a 13-3 team or a 9-1 team is better than a 13-3 team, etc.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think 2 more games will generate more than 50 bucks in the pocket of someone. It will pocket money for players playing in the games. It will be more money in the pocket of the league, it will be more money in the pocket of those paying to air those games because they will be airing more ad spots. Plenty of people will be making more than a nominal amount of money by adding 2 games. Heck each player will pocket around 30K or more even if they lose per game.

We're talking about peanuts here considering the overall revenue the NFL generates in a normal season though.

Just guessing here, but I think that was initiated due to the fear that some teams would have games cancelled and be excluded from the playoffs because they were percentage points behind a team that played a full 16 games. I guess its up for debate if a 10-2 team is better than a 13-3 team or a 9-1 team is better than a 13-3 team, etc.

That could still happen with eight teams in each conference making the playoffs.

 

[Mondio]

well no kidding 2 games isn't going to equal what a 260+ game season does. But that's not really what's being compared. I bet if you took ticket sales, which is what they're losing, 2 playoff games would put a noticeable dent in that lost revenue.

 

[Heyjoe4]

well no kidding 2 games isn't going to equal what a 260+ game season does. But that's not really what's being compared. I bet if you took ticket sales, which is what they're losing, 2 playoff games would put a noticeable dent in that lost revenue.

Agreed. An additional 2 playoff games is hardly peanuts. The TV revenue alone would be substantial. Yeah there won't be any ticket revenue this year. It's still a decent chunk of change.

What I don't like about the expanded NFL playoffs is that only one team per conference gets a bye. Seems to me that if a team has played well enough to be first or second out of sixteen during the course of a grueling season, they should get a week off. But that's a small gripe. I'm happy to see more football.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I bet if you took ticket sales, which is what they're losing, 2 playoff games would put a noticeable dent in that lost revenue.

According to a report I found from March the two playoff games already added would have resulted in $150 million of additional revenue for the NFL. That's approximately 1% of the league's total in 2019.

With fans not being allowed to attend this year I expect that number to be significantly lower.

Therefore adding another two postseason contests wouldn't result in any significant increase in total revenue.