NFL playoff structure is about to be changed. Under the current CBA proposal, seven teams from each conference will make the playoffs, with only bye per conference, sources tell ESPN. It would go into effect this upcoming season. More coming on https://t.co/rDZaVFhcDQ.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
If this happens, you’ll see so many more trades in the draft. In that new format, you can’t have 5 or 6 draft picks. With 2 extra games, you need to be accruing capitol for depth on your team bc you will have more injuries.
In a 16 game season, only 7 Chiefs played every game. Basically your back ups will be more important than ever.
They’re going to need to increase the size of rosters and active players on game day. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
If this happens, you’ll see so many more trades in the draft. In that new format, you can’t have 5 or 6 draft picks. With 2 extra games, you need to be accruing capitol for depth on your team bc you will have more injuries.
In a 16 game season, only 7 Chiefs played every game. Basically your back ups will be more important than ever.
2 extra games?
We’re only talking one more here. And in that case, I don’t see them changing their approach a whole lot for that. [Reply]
should they do away with divisions and just do 2 conferences and have 2 byes during the season?
each team plays everyone in their respective conference, then take the top 8 records from each conference, seed each conference teams , then go about that playoffs that way? top see from each gets a bye? (if they're going to do this stupid 7 teams / 1 bye bs).
I'm reaching here....trying to make the 7 team format seem more attractive than it is. (isn't) [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Chiefs will be a playoff team every year. It’s not statistically likely for us to get a bye every year. Only one team would.
Have to count that extra WC game
That’s not extra unless they are the 2 seed. [Reply]
Just raise ticket prices and concession prices by 1/8th and leave things as they are.
People will pay the higher prices to make up for the loss of revenue from the extra games. [Reply]
Originally Posted by treeguy27:
Just raise ticket prices and concession prices by 1/8th and leave things as they are.
People will pay the higher prices to make up for the loss of revenue from the extra games.
You think just raising concessions is going to offset the extra $10 BILLION in revenue over the length of the deal? Not even $300 beers can make up that kind of money.
Last I heard ticket sales at all NFL games was about 20% of revenue. Could be wrong on the % but I'm not wrong that TV money is why all this exists.
If the players want the $5 BILLION in extra pay(they fully know the additional risks to them and their careers), then we as fans should be okay with the plan. [Reply]
Originally Posted by : Pro: This Fixes a Loophole ...
Here’s my favorite thing about the new proposal: If this goes into effect, no NFL team can receive a bye over a team with a better record ever again.
In 2018, the Patriots went 11-5 and received a no. 2 seed over the 12-4 Chargers. That’s because the top four seeds in a conference are reserved for division winners, and the Chargers finished behind the 13-3 Chiefs in the AFC West. That’s how the second-best team in the AFC got the no. 5 seed. Those Chargers lost in the divisional round to a rested Pats team that was playing at home despite having an inferior record.
Under the new system, this couldn’t happen. While it was possible for a team without the second-best record in a conference to get the no. 2 seed, it’s impossible for a team without a conference’s best record to get the no. 1 seed. From now on, there would be more equity with regard to byes.
Of course, under this new format, the 2018 Chargers still would not have gotten a no. 2 seed—they’d still have been the no. 5 seed, and still likely would’ve had to spend the playoffs on the road. But at least they wouldn’t have gotten screwed out of a bye.
Con: … While Adding an Even Bigger Loophole
MLB teams play 162 games. NBA and NHL teams play 82 games. Premier League teams play 38 games. These schedules may seem unrelated, but they share one commonality: They feature an even number of games.
This is true of basically every pro sports league in existence. Name one!
It’s the case everywhere from Italy’s Lega Basket Serie A (30) to the NBA’s G League (50) to the East Coast Hockey League (72) to the Cape Cod Baseball League (44). There’s a good reason for this: The most inviolable rule of sports schedule-making is ensuring that all teams play an equal number of home and road games, and to have an equal number of home and road games, a team must play an even number of games. (Some college football conferences, like the Big Ten, play nine conference games. But would you expect anything else from a league called the Big Ten that actually has 14 teams?)
The NFL is going to break this rule. There is no way that teams can play an equal number of home and road games if their schedule is 17 games long. There must be nine of one and eight of another. And honestly, that’s a huge deal. If the MLB season was 161 games long—with some teams having 81 home games and others having 80—it would be unfair, but also a drop in a bucket. The NFL season is compact, and any difference between teams’ schedules has an outsize impact. If this proposal gets passed, half of NFL teams will play 12 percent more home games than the other half!
NFL owners seem to view this as an inventory problem. If the league adopts a 17-game regular season with three preseason games, they want to ensure that the teams with eight home games during the regular season will have two home games during the preseason for a grand total of 10 home dates. That’s because NFL owners charge the same price for meaningless preseason tickets as they do for regular-season tickets by forcing fans to buy preseason tickets as part of season-ticket packages.
However, the bigger problem here seems to be that the NFL is creating a competitive disadvantage for half the teams in the league. My favorite thing about this proposal is that it half-fixes a loophole that happens once in a blue moon. Yet it also introduces a new loophole that would affect every team every season. That doesn’t sound like a great proposal.
Originally Posted by BWillie:
I would rather have 8 teams make it, and keep the 2 byes. That is still stupid too, but not as stupid.
I'd rather have 18 games instead of 17 games to make the home and away equal for all teams.
Still, stay with what works in this case.
The problem is, expanding to 8 teams still doesn’t allow you to have the 2 byes. That would create 3 WC games which of course would give you 3 winner to play the 2 bye teams. You’d have to go all the way to 14 teams to get an even number for the 2nd round. [Reply]