Nfl Owners Meetings

[FerrariFan87]

Personally, I love the new proposal for playoff seeding in the NFL whereby the top 2 division winners with the best records will get the #1 and #2 seeds respectively and then after that, the last 4 spots will go to the teams with the best records, with no regard to winning the division. I love it because it isn't fair when say, the Colts go 14-2 and the Jags go 12-4, but the Chargers win their division at 10-6 and get a higher seed than the Jags who are in the division with the Colts. I hope this proposal goes through because this only adds to the importance of each regular season game... your thoughts on changing the way the playoff teams are seeded?

[Sub-Zero]

so does this mean the only incentive for the other two division winners that have a worse record than the wildcards, is making the playoffs?

[Black&Purple]

If the top 2 division winners with the best records get seeds 1 and 2 that, and the other 4 go to teams based on record, then that means EVERY playoff spot is by record then? Am I mis-reading that? If that's the case what is the point of divisions than? I personally like that idea, because it's unfair there are some divisions that are weak season after season whereas the AFC North, and NFC East are extremely competitive every season. This would mean the Patriots can't win their division and get into the playoffs every season because their division isn't usually one of the most difficult. Personally, I am all for it.

[neepo13]

so does this mean the only incentive for the other two division winners that have a worse record than the wildcards, is making the playoffs?

Yes, which if you ask me is a good enough prize because the alternative is being left at home. Anything extra should demand more work and its not fair to teams that play in hard divisions and could easily be the winner of one of the weaker divisions to have to play all road games just because they play in a strong division. Your basically penalizing them for being in a good division which is not their fault.

[FerrariFan87]

Yes, which if you ask me is a good enough prize because the alternative is being left at home. Anything extra should demand more work and its not fair to teams that play in hard divisions and could easily be the winner of one of the weaker divisions to have to play all road games just because they play in a strong division. Your basically penalizing them for being in a good division which is not their fault.

Exactly

[ragnorok99]

Plus, unless I'm understanding this incorrectly, the "worst" 2 division winners could still try to get better matchups in the first 1 or 2 games.

I like this proposal. It was a joke that the 10-6 Giants had to go on the road to face a 9-7 Tampa team that had been coasting for a couple of weeks.

Divisions would still have meaning for scheduling purposes, plus the top 2 division winners thing.

[Raven07]

that sounds about right....there may be some slight alterations in some or few things here and there. i tink that overall, the NFL will continue to build upon and/or work on this schedule deal until what they see as "Best Fit".

[ravensfan1996]

First off all, all 4 Division winners still make the playoffs. Only thing is they arent guaranteed a home game with this new proposal. They are trying to get teams at the end of the year to keep playing even if they already wrapped up the division.

I dont like it myself. You win your division you should get a home game. It shows you are the best of your division and still takes alot to win it. There are still going to be games at the end of the season where teams can pull their starters....this wont fix it. just cus you are 9-7 doesnt mean you aren as good as a 10-6 team, your division could be alot harder division to win games and thus a lower record then a 10-6 easy division or easier schedule. just my opinion. i like it the way it that it is.

[ragnorok99]

I dont like it myself. You win your division you should get a home game. It shows you are the best of your division and still takes alot to win it. There are still going to be games at the end of the season where teams can pull their starters....this wont fix it. just cus you are 9-7 doesnt mean you aren as good as a 10-6 team, your division could be alot harder division to win games and thus a lower record then a 10-6 easy division or easier schedule. just my opinion. i like it the way it that it is.

Well, the 9-7 team I brought up won (arguably) the weakest division in the NFL, then got killed by a 10-6 team from the strongest division in the NFC.

If you win the division at 9-7 without tiebreakers, that means every other team in the division is .500 or worse, which in turn means they're getting beat up by teams from other, better divisions.

The Bucs could have won their division at 8-8. The other teams were so bad that the Bucs could have forfeited the last 3 regular season games and still had a home game in the playoffs. As it stands, they began resting starters, because Gruden felt there was no incentive for them to play.

It's lame, in my opinion, for teams to be able to take games off during the regular season, ESPECIALLY when you have teams like the Titans, Giants, and Redskins who had to scratch and claw their way into the playoffs with similar or better records than the Bucs--and then the NFL still gave the slacker team a home game.

So, I disagree that division winners should automatically receive a home game. The new system isn't perfect, either, but I believe it would encourage teams to keep playing to the end of the season.

[Raven07]

plus a team could win in their division no doubt about that part of it all and might have the best record in their division, like you said before. But in which, when they go up against other teams from other divsions whom are bigger and/or stronger than the particular "other team" they have a healthy dose of reality as such the saying "being prepared" is the best you can do.

[neepo13]

First off all, all 4 Division winners still make the playoffs. Only thing is they arent guaranteed a home game with this new proposal. They are trying to get teams at the end of the year to keep playing even if they already wrapped up the division.

I dont like it myself. You win your division you should get a home game. It shows you are the best of your division and still takes alot to win it. There are still going to be games at the end of the season where teams can pull their starters....this wont fix it. just cus you are 9-7 doesnt mean you aren as good as a 10-6 team, your division could be alot harder division to win games and thus a lower record then a 10-6 easy division or easier schedule. just my opinion. i like it the way it that it is.

The fact that you are representing your division in the playoffs shows that you are the best in your division, otherwise you would be sitting at home. Also, if you are a 9-7 team as a division winner it more then likely means you play in an easy division and if you are a 10-6 wild card team, there is atleast one more team in your division that is atleast 10-6. A division that has two teams that go atleast 10-6 is not easy by any stretch of the imagination. Why should teams like the Giants have to play all road playoff games just because they play in a hard division and the NFC south and west suck? Its not fair to the fans and its not fair to the teams. Some wildcard team has to go to Seattle every year to play a playoff game just because no one else in the NFC west can seem to win that division. Seattle has horrible weather and the Seahawks have one of the biggest home field advantages I have ever seen. Notice, the Seahawks can never win on the road in the playoffs. I think at the end of the day, this assures that you have the BEST two teams in each confrence playing in the title games.

[purple_pride]

i think they should add more teams to the playoffs

[Raven07]

that could be a sided sword to some degree here....in one aspect of it....that would be great to have happen because it would prolong the NFL season and it would keep the fans drawn in more and more/ but then again on the other hand....the down side (at least i think) is that, there would be more injury type problems and alot more players not being fully "ready" for the start of the next season and/or Training camp or OTA's.

[purple_pride]

yeah but you have teams in the AFC with winning records NOT making the playoffs. yeah you went 10-6 but how would they have played in the post season?? you cant really say you had a good season if you dont make the playoffss even if you went 10-6. theres a good chance you wont go 10-6 next year. (browns)

[Raven07]

which ultimately means that, in certain aspects of football...the AFC is alot harder than that of the NFC.....we just see, to have alot tougher divisions and opponents. which combine/colaborate together to form the AFC.....meanwhile it just seems like the NFC its relatively "easy" with that one team "ever once and a while" making a hard fought push.

[neepo13]

Looks like it didnt pass. Oh,well. They did end the force out rule. I wish they would have had a vote on being able to decline any penalty. That really screwed us over in the Pats game because if we would have been able to decline that false start penalty on 4th down, when we had them stopped. It would have been turn over on downs and 3 kneel downs end the game. Instead of giving them another shot and Brady running for the first down.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-n...p&type=lgns

[FerrariFan87]

Looks like it didnt pass. Oh,well. They did end the force out rule. I wish they would have had a vote on being able to decline any penalty. That really screwed us over in the Pats game because if we would have been able to decline that false start penalty on 4th down, when we had them stopped. It would have been turn over on downs and 3 kneel downs end the game. Instead of giving them another shot and Brady running for the first down.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-n...p&type=lgns

yeah, it would have been nice to have seen that tweak to the playoff seeding come to be, but oh well

[theFRANCHISE]

Some wildcard team has to go to Seattle every year to play a playoff game just because no one else in the NFC west can seem to win that division. Seattle has horrible weather and the Seahawks have one of the biggest home field advantages I have ever seen. Notice, the Seahawks can never win on the road in the playoffs.

That argument won me over right there.

I truly believe that, as much as Seattle would like to say they get no respect for being in the Pacific Northwest, the Seahawks are still an overrated team in my opinion, given how handily they've won their division against lesser opponents for years.

However, I can still see the argument being made that not guaranteeing a home game somewhat diminishes the importance of the division title.

At the end of the day, though, even THAT argument is shot, because the best teams will play hard and just try to keep WINNING, period, regardless of the playoff ramifications.

[ragnorok99]

They did end the force out rule.

Well, at least they got rid of that nonsense. I never understood the point of punishing a DB (or WR, on INTs) for doing the smart thing.

[FerrariFan87]

The other great rule being instituted is that certain field goals and extra points may be subject to instant replay! I guess you can call it the "Phil Dawson Rule"...

[Raven07]

yea, i think that a big reason as to why the new rule about Field Goals...is partly if not all...due to the Browns vs Ravens Game...i think that, it was that game in which told everyone "hey something needs to be done if it happens again" type deal.....and thus is precisely why it was brought up at the meeting...sure there were other example that contributed to the whole talk/issue, but the i think the main spark of it all was that particular game at the end.

[theFRANCHISE]

The other great rule being instituted is that certain field goals and extra points may be subject to instant replay! I guess you can call it the "Phil Dawson Rule"...

yea, i think that a big reason as to why the new rule about Field Goals...is partly if not all...due to the Browns vs Ravens Game...

And I can't believe I was there to witness "history" (if you wanna call it that)...stupid Post From the Pressbox Contest...

(j/k, j/k!...lol)

[Raven07]

it was that game between the Browns and Ravens in which really sparked all the hype and all the talk about this and that about field goals either being called "good" or "no Good"....i think that by allowing Replays for Field goals and/or otherwise.....it helps out the officals and makes their job a little bit easier with certain things. now, thats not (by any means) saying that its right or wrong.....just saying that it makes everyone's job a little bit easier during that particular process.