Herman Edwards famously said, "You play to win the game."
Bill Parcells said, "You are what your record says you are."
In the NFL, however, it isn't how much you win, it is which division you happen to be in. Sometimes your record says you should be a playoff team, but you aren't.
I was first annoyed by this in 1985. The 11-5 Broncos missed the playoffs whereas the 8-8 Browns got in, just because the Browns won their 4-team division.
As I write this, seven teams in the NFC are 7-6 or better, but the 6-7 Cowboys are in the driver's seat for a playoff spot. It seems likely either them or the Eagles will win the NFC East with a 8-8 record or worse, while the Rams or Bears could finish 9-7 or better and miss the playoffs.
This unjust outcome is fairly common; we've seen it six times in the previous 11 seasons.
One reason seems to be the NFL's insistence into sub-dividing its two conferences into four four-team divisions each. It appears to me this is in deference to tradition; for going on 100 years the Bears and Packers have played each other twice each season, each hosting a game. Many teams have been in the same division, playing each other twice each year, for 50, 60, or more seasons.
I'm wondering how important those rivalries really are, because dispensing with those divisions, and home-and-home divison games, would create a more sensible playoff system. Is it really important for, say, a Bengals season-ticket holder, to see the Steelers visit every year?
Here's my proposal: each team plays every other team in their conference once. That's 15 games. The 16th could be the team from the opposing conference that had finished in the corresponding place in the conference standings the year before (1st place plays 1st place, etc.). I propose this be the first game of the year, so the remaining games become essentially a round-robin race to the top.
I'd then reward the regular-season champion with the a first-round bye for the playoffs, and add a seventh team. This would:
Perhaps the NFL is considering its own popularity and thinking, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." My reform may be too radical. But I doubt anyone really agrees with mediocre to-poor-teams making the playoffs, even if they earn the spot according to current rules.
If you find value in James Leroy Wilson's articles, your support through Paypal is appreciated.
If you'd like to hire James, you may contact him at jamesleroywilson-at-gmail.com.
Bill Parcells said, "You are what your record says you are."
In the NFL, however, it isn't how much you win, it is which division you happen to be in. Sometimes your record says you should be a playoff team, but you aren't.
I was first annoyed by this in 1985. The 11-5 Broncos missed the playoffs whereas the 8-8 Browns got in, just because the Browns won their 4-team division.
As I write this, seven teams in the NFC are 7-6 or better, but the 6-7 Cowboys are in the driver's seat for a playoff spot. It seems likely either them or the Eagles will win the NFC East with a 8-8 record or worse, while the Rams or Bears could finish 9-7 or better and miss the playoffs.
This unjust outcome is fairly common; we've seen it six times in the previous 11 seasons.
- 2008 AFC: Patriots miss playoffs at 11-5; Chargers win division at 8-8;
- 2010 NFC: 10-6 Giants and 10-6 Bucs miss playoffs; Seahawks win divison at 7-9;
- 2011 AFC: 9-7 Titans miss playoffs; Broncos win division at 8-8.
- 2012 NFC; 10-6 Cardinals miss; Packers win division at 8-7-1
- 2014 NFC: 10-6 Eagles miss; Panthers win division at 7-8-1.
- 2015 AFC: 10-6 Steelers miss; Texans in playoffs at 9-7
One reason seems to be the NFL's insistence into sub-dividing its two conferences into four four-team divisions each. It appears to me this is in deference to tradition; for going on 100 years the Bears and Packers have played each other twice each season, each hosting a game. Many teams have been in the same division, playing each other twice each year, for 50, 60, or more seasons.
I'm wondering how important those rivalries really are, because dispensing with those divisions, and home-and-home divison games, would create a more sensible playoff system. Is it really important for, say, a Bengals season-ticket holder, to see the Steelers visit every year?
Here's my proposal: each team plays every other team in their conference once. That's 15 games. The 16th could be the team from the opposing conference that had finished in the corresponding place in the conference standings the year before (1st place plays 1st place, etc.). I propose this be the first game of the year, so the remaining games become essentially a round-robin race to the top.
I'd then reward the regular-season champion with the a first-round bye for the playoffs, and add a seventh team. This would:
- Create urgency at the top of the conference race
- Give more teams hope of securing a playoff spot
- Deny spots to teams with inferior records.
Because inter-conference play will be signicantly diminished, we could also see:
- The creation of separate awards for each conference, as is done for the leagues of Major League Baseball.
- A greater air of mystery surrounding the Super Bowl, as the relative strengths of the teams would be largely unknown.
- More intense rivalries against more teams.
Perhaps the NFL is considering its own popularity and thinking, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." My reform may be too radical. But I doubt anyone really agrees with mediocre to-poor-teams making the playoffs, even if they earn the spot according to current rules.
If you find value in James Leroy Wilson's articles, your support through Paypal is appreciated.
If you'd like to hire James, you may contact him at jamesleroywilson-at-gmail.com.
Comments
Post a Comment