Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Goodell wants to expand playoffs?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
119 replies to this topic

#37 SZ James (banned)

SZ James (banned)

  • Joined: 24-April 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 8,561
  • Reputation: 3,627
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:46 AM

^^^Is that what you're hoping to see eventually happen? A losing record team win it all?

In reality all it would mean is just more useless games and more revenue presumably. I don't feel like watching shïtty teams in the playoffs personally.

#38 Lumps

Lumps

    Jase is butthurt

  • Joined: 20-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,042
  • Reputation: 1,135
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:55 AM

At what point are you diluting the NFL? A losing team shouldn't be there because they could not win in the season, not because they might win now. That is afterall, the point of playing the season. All this is, is more money as already stated. That is the bigest impact this will have and the main priority. Zero benfits for the fan really. But you can't just keep adding playoff teams and regular season games without eventually diluting the meaning of either or. 14 games doesn't seem so bad but teams can already go 8-8 and make the playoffs in hte right division.

As a fan my concern isn't money or more football it is the quality of the game/season/post-season, which I don't see how it will be maintained doing things like this. Quality should be all of our concerns because we are the consumer, what else do you invest in that isn't your concern? At what point is there too many? Goodell will most likley have a number based on money, not quality. Why not 18? or 20?

#39 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: -28,748
  • Reputation: 8,000
Moderators

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:57 AM

^^^Is that what you're hoping to see eventually happen? A losing record team win it all?

In reality all it would mean is just more useless games and more revenue presumably. I don't feel like watching shïtty teams in the playoffs personally.

if a team can string together 4-5 wins in a row, defeating the best teams in the league in games that matter more than anything in the regular season...can it really be called a "losing" team?

sure makes for some more interesting games and stories i would think.

teams that can win it all, will win it all. teams that can't win, won't. it's really that simple. nothing would be diluted.

#40 Inimicus

Inimicus

    Life is better in a kayak

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 6,485
  • Reputation: 1,264
SUPPORTER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:01 AM

At what point are you diluting the NFL? A losing team shouldn't be there because they could not win in the season, not because they might win now. That is afterall, the point of playing the season. All this is, is more money as already stated. That is the bigest impact this will have and the main priority. Zero benfits for the fan really. But you can't just keep adding playoff teams and regular season games without eventually diluting the meaning of either or. 14 games doesn't seem so bad but teams can already go 8-8 and make the playoffs in hte right division.

As a fan my concern isn't money or more football it is the quality of the game/season/post-season, which I don't see how it will be maintained doing things like this. Quality should be all of our concerns because we are the consumer, what else do you invest in that isn't your concern? At what point is there too many? Goodell will most likley have a number based on money, not quality. Why not 18? or 20?



But you are not really adding any length to the season and compromising quality by adding one more team from each conference. Wildcard weekend is replaced by the first round. The net effect is one more team gets in and one less team gets a week off. Oh and the additional team to make the cut wont be an 8-8 team. This scheme would still allow an 8-8 division winner to get in but it would allow for the team that finished 3rd in their division with a 10-6 record to have a shot. The team that we all would agree should make it in over the 8-8 div winner.

#41 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: -28,748
  • Reputation: 8,000
Moderators

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:01 AM

At what point are you diluting the NFL? A losing team shouldn't be there because they could not win in the season, not because they might win now. That is afterall, the point of playing the season. All this is, is more money as already stated. That is the bigest impact this will have and the main priority. Zero benfits for the fan really. But you can't just keep adding playoff teams and regular season games without eventually diluting the meaning of either or. 14 games doesn't seem so bad but teams can already go 8-8 and make the playoffs in hte right division.

As a fan my concern isn't money or more football it is the quality of the game/season/post-season, which I don't see how it will be maintained doing things like this. Quality should be all of our concerns because we are the consumer, what else do you invest in that isn't your concern? At what point is there too many? Goodell will most likley have a number based on money, not quality. Why not 18? or 20?

more football and a chance for more fans to see their team have a chance at the lombardi isn't a benefit for the fan? really?

and i don't get this "diluting" stuff. how exactly is it diluting the playoffs or the game? more teams mean more competition. more competition means more fight. more fight means tougher to get to the top. if anything it just means that the team that will have won it all will have had to fight harder in the playoffs than ever before and isn't that what we want? to have the team that wins it all really have proved it?

#42 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 12-September 11
  • posts: 6,170
  • Reputation: 2,963
SUPPORTER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:02 AM

Cut 2 preseason games.


Go to 14 playoff teams.


Everybody is happy

#43 j2sgam

j2sgam

    cant beat the original...

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,129
  • Reputation: 604
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:02 AM

If it aint broke, dont fix it.... Too many changes, its fuggin the game all to hell. What was he proposin on new kickoffs? Just kick the fuggin ball, let the man try to return it. Let the game be played, saw where he is trying to do away with low blocks too. Huh??? Remeber when we used to watch football and not have to worry about keepin up with rule changes?

Its all about player safety, right? Fug Goodell...

#44 SZ James (banned)

SZ James (banned)

  • Joined: 24-April 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 8,561
  • Reputation: 3,627
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:04 AM

^^^My point was that it has zero chance of happening. Hoping for some losing record underdog to win it all is stupid. It would only result in a lot of pointless games.

Plus the hold mah dick moments won't be quite as lol-worthy if losing teams made it every year.

#45 Ken

Ken

    Triple Threat

  • Joined: 20-December 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,913
  • Reputation: 964
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:05 AM

There are enough teams in the playoffs IMO. Less teams make the regular season more competitive and interesting, especially down the stretch.

Usually you are what you are come playoff time, so if you missed out, you probably didn't deserve to make it.

#46 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: -28,748
  • Reputation: 8,000
Moderators

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:09 AM

But you are not really adding any length to the season and compromising quality by adding one more team from each conference. Wildcard weekend is replaced by the first round. The net effect is one more team gets in and one less team gets a week off. Oh and the additional team to make the cut wont be an 8-8 team. This scheme would still allow an 8-8 division winner to get in but it would allow for the team that finished 3rd in their division with a 10-6 record to have a shot. The team that we all would agree should make it in over the 8-8 div winner.

yep.

and to take it a bit further, the only 7-9 teams that make it to the playoffs are division winners.

ref: seattle in 2010. there were 2 teams in the NFC that year with 10-6 records who did not make the playoffs (giants and tampa). meanwhile the NFCW who had no teams at all with a winning record got to send one.

#47 SCP

SCP

    Crop Dusting Son of a Bitch

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 21,913
  • Reputation: 18,864
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:10 AM

Cut 2 preseason games.


Go to 14 playoff teams.


Everybody is happy


Amen. I hate paying full price for preseason games as part of my season tickets. Now, flip
That and add potential home playoff games? Sign me up.

#48 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: -28,748
  • Reputation: 8,000
Moderators

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:13 AM

If it aint broke, dont fix it.... Too many changes, its fuggin the game all to hell. What was he proposin on new kickoffs? Just kick the fuggin ball, let the man try to return it. Let the game be played, saw where he is trying to do away with low blocks too. Huh??? Remeber when we used to watch football and not have to worry about keepin up with rule changes?

Its all about player safety, right? Fug Goodell...

again a sign that people aren't paying attention...just going with the blind rage.

goodell isn't proposing the elimination of kickoffs. he stated that a coach, schiano, was proposing it and was using that as an example of the type of things that the league would look at when they go in for their post season meetings...just like they do every year. he wasn't advocating it. he was asked about things the league was looking at and he threw that out there.

and rule changes have ALWAYS been a part of the game. the game is constantly evolving and growing and it always has. get over it.