Comments on: Goodell says playoffs could expand

By: radford7

radford7 — Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:20:17 +0000

This is a terrible idea, and sounds like they are just trying to make MO MONEY.

By: ussportsfanuk

ussportsfanuk — Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:01:44 +0000

Really don’t think this is a good idea. Too many teams getting in will reduce the quality of the Playoffs and mean more teams with poor records will get in. I’ve written about this on my blog and it shows how many more Wildcard teams make it to the Super Bowl even now than they used to, put extra teams in and that is only going to happen more.

By: scottpavek

scottpavek — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:47:56 +0000

I’m personally in favor of an expansion to a 14 team playoff field – it would be a change that’d reduce the risk of elite teams missing the playoffs (those occasional 11-5s) but wouldn’t alter the dynamic of darkhorse division team winners (see 7-9 Seahawks). Furthermore, this change could conceivably be implemented before an expansion to a 34 team field – which would roughly return us to the likes of a 14/32 playoff field.

Also, the league should reduce Thursday games for player safety, but expand the season to 17 games – no more 8-8 teams. And the kickoff SHOULD be replaced with a modified punt (no more kickoff specialists on either side, more emphasis on punt returners and gunners, slightly increased chance of onside kicks) but that’s another issue entirely.

The NFL is ready for some radical changes, just not the kind that we’re due for.

By: bobzilla1001

bobzilla1001 — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 13:31:55 +0000

dougy:
Obviously you are a casual fan; otherwise you’d be aware that the “best teams” don’t always win the Super Bowl.
The Giants of last season are a prime example. The Giants finished the 2011 regular season at 9-7. The Packers were 15-1. Do the math.
In that AFC, the 2011 Patriots qualified for the postseason with a 13-3 record. They defeated no team last season that finished the season with a winning record.
The two best teams in the NFL last season were the Packers and Ravens. However, neither of those two teams advanced to the Super Bowl.
Adding more teams to the postseason tournament will only REDUCE the odds of seeing the two best teams in Super Bowls.

By: superredskins

superredskins — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 06:37:32 +0000

I am a big NFL fan. I really like the NFL the way it is now. Especially the postseason is the most quality in all sports, and all the teams play hard every 16 regular season games to get every chance to qualify.

But if it is really necessary to expand post season, I think the following would be good version.

- 16 teams make playoffs. ( 4 division winners and 4 wild card teams each conference )
- Playoff week 1. Wild Card Round. All division winners got bye (division winner advantage + ensures quality play in regular season)
- Playoff week 2. Semi-divisional Round. Seed #3 and #4 hosts two wild card winners. Top two seed division winners on bye (top two seed advantage + ensures quality play in regular season)
- Playoff week 3. Divisional Round. Seed #1 and #2 hosts the two winners of previous round.
- Playoff week 4. Conference Championships.
- Super Bowl.

By: dougydougdoug

dougydougdoug — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 03:45:26 +0000

Most of you posting complaints here seem to be missing several things.

1) The Commissioner of the league works for the 32 owners. He answers to them, collectively. So for the love of God, stop talking about the guy as if he makes the rules. He’s simply the face of the league, as has been the case since the merger.

2) Clearly, as the ratings are higher than ever, the owners are making the right decisions, and are NOT diluting their brand. The opinions expressed here, simply support opinions which are contrary to the facts.

Personally, I like watching the NFL, and if there were two more regular season games, I’d be quite happy. Also, if they expanded the playoffs, great! Who doesn’t want there team to get in? In the end, the best team will still make it through, and the best team will win the SuperBowl.

By: mrjames21

mrjames21 — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 03:38:00 +0000

I’d be fine with adding 4 additional teams (to 16 total) if and only if, it is structured so that the top 4 seeds (re: Division winners) all get byes the first week. That way, it truly means something to win your division. Of course, those teams that are in other divisions who have better records than some division winners will protest, but they can suck it up. Win your division and reap the spoils. The bye may or may not help, but you can’t deny that it’ll be interesting.

By: dallascowboysdishingthereal

dallascowboysdishingthereal — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:23:53 +0000

Could accomplish the same thing with just 8 playoff teams instead of the current 12 by eliminating the wildcards.

No talk of that. Why? It’s the money!

By: CKL

CKL — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:21:14 +0000

I have no problem with businesses trying to change and grow and even gasp…trying to make more money. What I have a problem with is when they do it with a lack of common sense that leads to watering down their product. That’s what adding a team overseas and expanding the playoffs and adding regular season games would be.

By: hardrockfootballfanatic

hardrockfootballfanatic — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:52:43 +0000

If anything they ought to reduce the regular season to 14 games and keep the playoff teams at 12. The regular season has become largely a bore because the teams are so mediocre all you need to do is go 9-7 to have a shot at the playoffs. If you add more teams, you will have teams with losing records getting in.

By: truthhurts19

truthhurts19 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 07:06:12 +0000

Here’s an idea for 3 more postseason games. Instead of having a draft lottery, take the lowest 4 teams regardless of conference and have a tournament. The team with the worst record gets home field. The winner of the tournament gets the #1 pick.

By: jwag777

jwag777 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:41:30 +0000

Goodell has finally gone off his rocker. Expanding the number of playoff teams is ludicrous in itself. Who wants .500 or sub-.500 teams in the playoffs? But expanding to Europe (London)? Come on! The logistics would be a nightmare (6+ hour time difference from PST zone and England, etc.). And good luck finding any players to play there. No business having an NFL team overseas. Crazy….

By: anacherforester

anacherforester — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 05:08:45 +0000

More games means so much more money that’s it’s all but inevitable we’ll get 18 games and expanded playoffs. It’ll be as bad as the NBA where you have to completely blow your season not to have a puncher’s chance in the post-season. We’ll kvetch and complain and rant and rail and watch every single game possible.

It sickens me the owner’s can’t see how adding more games dilutes everything we fans love about the NFL. An 18 game season and expanded playoffs dramatically increases the likelihood players I so enjoy watching will be on IR or watching from the sideline

By: 2ndaryinsanity

2ndaryinsanity — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 04:35:47 +0000

This is a HORRIBLE idea! Just another example of Goodell being more interested in profits than player safety. He’s an egotistical hypocrite. I’m willing to bet at least 90% of REAL fans are opposed to this watering down of the play-off’s. The other 10% like this idea because it’s the only way their team could make the play-off’s. If Goodell gets his way, the NFL play-off’s will become a joke…just like the NBA. It’s bad enough we have to suffer through a million college bowl games, some of which have teams that are only .500
Thanks, but no thanks!

By: murraysons

murraysons — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 04:33:39 +0000

Dear Thanksdad Goodell,

Please stop messing with the national pastime.

Signed,

By: bdfun400

bdfun400 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 04:21:19 +0000

Yeah lets just make the regular season less important by allowing more teams into the playoffs… and while were at it lets reduce player safety by adding more games…

One positive, more playoff games will allow more opportunities for Rog to sling around more fines.

By: bkh405

bkh405 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 04:15:10 +0000

With the league getting tighter and tighter every year in terms of top to bottom talent, records will continue to go down and you’ll see more divisions like the NFC West and North where there are a bunch of teams with close records.

Expand playoffs for another couple teams, then give another bye based on points scored or divisional record. Everyone wins with expanded playoffs. I know I’d like to see another upset like a couple years back when the Squaks bumped the Saints.

By: dennis2488

dennis2488 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:54:01 +0000

nononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononono

By: bduncanscott

bduncanscott — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:48:27 +0000

FYI….NOBODY CARES WHAT GOODELL SAYS!
Unless he says he’s resigning as Commissioner, then the Heaven shall Rejoice!

By: ttgb2

ttgb2 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:45:17 +0000

As is? Terrible idea.

But if, as was hinted at, the NFL is looking at adding a bunch of expansion teams….

Well if we went from 32 teams to 36 teams, you’d basically have enough for another division, and it would make sense to add to the playoffs.

But god, half the teams in the playoffs? You remember how annoyed everyone was that the 7-9 Seahawks got in to the tournament? Get ready for a bunch of 5 win teams in the playoffs…

By: bamasleeper13

bamasleeper13 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:40:15 +0000

Has any previous commissioner EVER changed as much or tried to change as much about this game? I really can see how the commissioner wants to better the game and oversee the league but geeezzzz… Leave it alone, it is getting to where the fans won’t recognize it anymore. I understand safety but it is a rough sport. If you don’t want to get hurt don’t play! I guess they should tell the NASCAR guys you can’t go faster than 35mph!

By: steelersfanfromtheseventies

steelersfanfromtheseventies — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:30:02 +0000

whats next a best of three series per round?

cmon roger grab your collar give it a good yank and get your head back into the light.

By: johnnyb1976

johnnyb1976 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:28:38 +0000

Hello 7-9 or 6-10 playoff teams

By: csilojohnson

csilojohnson — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:27:49 +0000

Wow they just won’t quit with the dumb ideas. We already have atleast one team getting in every year at .500 or worse. Yayy subpar competition. I can see it now. Refs blow calls and 7-9 team plays in super bowl.

By: jordiway73

jordiway73 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:21:56 +0000

In 2010 the Seattle Seahawks won the NFC West with a 7-9 record, becoming the first NFL team to make the playoffs with a losing record in a full season.

So we need more teams in the playoffs with losing records?

By: halbert53

halbert53 — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:21:41 +0000

Lets just go ahead and have a 32 team playoff at the end of the regular season. # 1 AFC vs # 16 NFC, etc. NOT!!!

By: hoochbcs

hoochbcs — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:11:43 +0000

I love the idea of 14 but hate 16.

With 14 you reward the top teams in each conference for winning the regular season. Currently the gap between the 2 and 3 seeds is usually razor thin and sometimes settled by tiebreaker.

The 14 team option adds no additional weeks but makes the wild card chase a little more interesting.

16 would be awful.

By: silvercutlery

silvercutlery — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:09:39 +0000

Why don’t we have 32 teams make the playoffs?

And if you win one game during the regular season, you’re considered a Super Bowl champion?

Then every team would be a winner.

Think off all the revenue.

By: jrbdmb

jrbdmb — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:06:35 +0000

Expand to 16 teams and have the extra fours first round games played in London, Berlin, Tokyo, and Mexico City.

Woo-hoo, what fun that will be for Roger!

By: bluereign

bluereign — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:05:47 +0000

STOP. CHANGING. EVERYTHING.