NFL to Potentially Examine Changing Playoff Seeding Structure for 2025 Season

[DaMos Supreme]

I forget what year it was, but wasn't there a time circa 99 when the AFC North (AFC Central at the time) was:

Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Jaxsonville
Tennessee

Such a wild division to think about in todays terms

99’ - 01’, I believe

 

[b. woods]

I'm shocked Goodell is considering this. NFL is real hard-headed in changing rules, it took forever to change the dumb OT rule of both teams not possessing the ball.

But I think how it is right now is fine, there are always outlier years.

Also, the 2002 realignment is one of the best things they have ever done, maintaining the rivalries. I remember when people online would always propose a new realignment just because they didn't like that Dallas is NFC East or Indianapolis is AFC South

 

[Whips-n-Chains]

99’ - 01’, I believe

Yep, and Colts were in the AFC east too.

shyt would make no sense to someone that became a fan in the last 15 years

 

[reserved_one]

fukk winning your division have a better record than your opponent period. Wining your division got you a guaranteed playoff spot and that's enough. You should be rewarded for winning more games period. Having a better record than your opponent should always mean something.

I disagree. If that’s the case then the NFL should just throw the divisions into the bushes which would do damage imo. Divisional rivalry games>>>>>>>

 

[phillycavsfan]

So a 14-3 team playing a 10-7 team isn't gonna be a blowout because the 10-7 team is at home?

Why is your argument that records shouldn't matter in a single playoff round? The best record should always mean something in the entire playoffs. You win more games that needs to count for something.

You could win a division with a losing record.

I really don't see why this is a problem. Maybe because I don't watch nearly as much NFL outside the NFC East as I do inside the division.

 

[RubioTheCruel]

100000% happening...they not gonna stay at an uneven # of 17 for long.

8 playoff teams. 18 game season. All teams play wild card weekend. Two bye weeks; Super Bowl weekend is President's Day weekend.

This has been the plan since Tagliabue was still commissioner. It'll happen within 10-15 years.

 

[concise]

And most of that history involves division play making up half your schedule and winning your division was all but necessary to make the playoffs. Neither of those things are true anymore and guess what? People still care about those rivalries

Winning the division getting a playoff game is a good enough reward. Until 2002 with the realignment a wild card team got a home playoff game (the 1999 titans and 2000 ravens were wild cards at 13-3 and 12-4).

yea, 95 to 99, it was symmetric for everyone 8 divisional games + 8 out of division games ...

nfc west and afc central played 6 for years before the jaguars and panthers came because they were 4 team divisions

Before the switch to 4 divisions per conference, the best wild card team used to get a home game, best I could see is some kind of compromise to let them go as high as a 3 or 4 seed because there is no way some 2nd placed team should be getting a 2 seed.

Reducing the importance of division games would be extremely short-sighted. The best games year in year out are rivalry division games.

Reducing the importance of division games already happened now that they are 6/17, as opposed to 1/2 like they used to be.

I forget what year it was, but wasn't there a time circa 99 when the AFC North (AFC Central at the time) was:

Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Jaxsonville
Tennessee

Such a wild division to think about in todays terms

Then I remember the Cardinals being in the NFC East, and the Bucs in the AFC North/Central...weren't the damn Seahawks an AFC team back then too

99’ - 01’, I believe

Yes. Those teams played 10 divisional games those seasons and because the Browns were a weak expansion team, the AFC Central division champions had home field in the AFC each year.

1999 Jaguars (SB Runner up Titans were 2nd place in the division and only team to beat them, 2x in regular season, plus 1 more in the playoffs)
2000 Ravens (SB Champions)
2001 Steelers (lost to the SB Champion Patriots)


Seahawks in the AFC West made sense

Cardinals were in the NFC East because they were in St Louis when the merger happened, nobody felt like moving them to another division

Colts were in the AFC East because they were in Baltimore when the merger happened, no realignment there either

Ravens were in the Central because they were originally in Houston

Bucs in the NFC Central was always great comedy because they were a bad team for so long, but even more so when they played in the cold

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

I really don't see why this is a problem. Maybe because I don't watch nearly as much NFL outside the NFC East as I do inside the division.

Because you want a good product on the field for the playoffs and a system that has no guardrails to prevent good teams from missing the playoffs while teams that finish below .500 host playoff games should be revised.

 

[concise]

Because you want a good product on the field for the playoffs and a system that has no guardrails to prevent good teams from missing the playoffs while teams that finish below .500 host playoff games should be revised.

With 7 teams in each conference, there are no good teams missing the playoffs anymore.

 

[winb83]

I really don't see why this is a problem. Maybe because I don't watch nearly as much NFL outside the NFC East as I do inside the division.

In reality who wants to see a team with a losing record in the playoffs to begin with? The playoffs are about raising the bar and filtering out the trash teams.

I disagree. If that’s the case then the NFL should just throw the divisions into the bushes which would do damage imo. Divisional rivalry games>>>>>>>

So your argument is that if you don't get a guaranteed home playoff game and just a guaranteed playoff spot for winning divisions are meaningless?

It's not like we're saying top 7 NFC teams regardless of division get in you still get a playoff spot for winning your division you just have to have a better record than a wildcard team to get the home game. A team's win loss record is the standard they should be judged against other teams in the playoffs.

 

[murksiderock]

Theoretically a team could win a division with a losing record and still get a home playoff game?

Don't have to theorize. It's already happened a few times before. Most notably, the 2010 Seahawks were 7-9 and BEAT the 11-5 Saints. They earned that home game by winning their division and the Saints being 4 games better was obviously fool's gold because they lost to a below .500 team...

Keep the shyt as is, win your division you get the home game. All these divisions have down years where the division sucks and the winner only had 7, 8, 9 wins. Its happened to every single division; it happens. Dont go tweaking a system that doesnt need to be fixed...

If Minnesota loses tonight to a team with 4 fewer wins, that means the Vikings were Pretenders all along---->just like the 2010 Saints. Great teams beat the teams they are supposed to beat!

20 game season with 10 playoff teams is ok. A division winner going on the road is sacrilege.

Don't be making up shyt, NFL fans don't want no 20 game season and definitely don't want an 8 to 10 team playoff don't do that bruh

Winning the division getting a playoff game is a good enough reward. Until 2002 with the realignment a wild card team got a home playoff game (the 1999 titans and 2000 ravens were wild cards at 13-3 and 12-4). We’ve had too much of this happen over the years where a team who plays in a bad division gets a home playoff game while 2-3 teams from another make the playoffs and 1-2 of them face teams on the road they had better records than during the year.

Pre-'02 Realignment there were only 3 divisions in each conference...

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

Don't have to theorize. It's already happened a few times before. Most notably, the 2010 Seahawks were 7-9 and BEAT the 11-5 Saints. They earned that home game by winning their division and the Saints being 4 games better was obviously fool's gold because they lost to a below .500 team...

Keep the shyt as is, win your division you get the home game. All these divisions have down years where the division sucks and the winner only had 7, 8, 9 wins. Its happened to every single division; it happens. Dont go tweaking a system that doesnt need to be fixed...

If Minnesota loses tonight to a team with 4 fewer wins, that means the Vikings were Pretenders all along---->just like the 2010 Saints. Great teams beat the teams they are supposed to beat!

Don't be making up shyt, NFL fans don't want no 20 game season and definitely don't want an 8 to 10 team playoff don't do that bruh

Pre-'02 Realignment there were only 3 divisions in each conference...

I’m aware and that’s my point. Nobody threw a fit over a wild card team getting a home playoff game back then and there’s no reason to be so bent on allowing mediocre or even bad teams to host playoff games over teams with better record just because the division champion team had the good fortune of not having any good teams in the division with them.

 

[murksiderock]

Nobody is gonna be less invested in Boys/Giants or Steelers/Ravens because whoever wins that division is not guaranteed a home playoff game. People are watching the regular and playoffs become more and more of a joke and its all good as long as teams that win shytty divisions can host playoff games .

In the NFL playoffs, they've become more of a joke with this 7-seed money grab. The 7 has no chance, they are losing 90% of their games since this new format started, and the only one that won a game ('23 Pack) lost in the Divisionals. And the 7's are losing by an average margin of 13.7 points per game...

This 7-seed money grab are getting blown out by 2 touchdowns on average. NFL is also fukking it up with the 17th game money grab. Football didn't need extra games...

I honestly prefer the older format with 12 teams, 4 getting a bye week with the remaining 8 playing on wild card weekend.

This current format I’m cool with but I don’t think it’s right if you win your division and have to go play on the road because your opponent couldn’t win theirs even though they won more games. I think the current format balances it all out.

Washington didn’t need home field advantage to beat Tampa as we saw last night. The NFL needs to sit down somewhere and stop being reactionary.

!!

The Rams lost to the Lions and have a worse record. They won a less competitive division so they should be rewarded when 3 NFC North teams made the playoffs and the Rams were the only NFC West team to even make the playoffs. The divisions are not equal therefore shouldn't be an equalizer.

Bruh every single division goes thru down and up cycles, it's football nature. There are times when a division has two to three 11-win+ teams, like this year's NFC North (3), NFC East (2) and AFC West (2), and there are times. And there are times a division sucks and the division winner is in that 7 to 9 win range (probably never get a 7-win division winner again with the 17-game format, but there will be an 8-9, below .500 division winner)...

All 8 divisions go in cycles, every single one of them has down and up years. The system isn't broken, ain't no need to fix shyt...

 

[murksiderock]

What does the NFC South mean right now? Who can bumble their way into a first round exit? Good divisions will matter because they have good teams who rival each other. Mediocre divisions bumbling their way into a home playoff game is just baffling. There's a reason the NFL is revisiting this because it looks silly.

The NBA's don't matter because they play too many games and it waters down the product. Divisions matter in the NFL because each game is important.

In 2017, just 7 years/seasons ago, the NFC South had 11-5 Saints, 11-5 Panthers, and 10-6 Falcons. Arguably best division in football that year, and yet the Saints and Panthers had to play each other in Rd1...

To me, it's not about what a division means "right now" they all mean the same thing, they all go thru these ebbs and flows of up and down, bruh...

I agree with this perspective overall, especially when it concerns the playoffs, but the NFL is ultra greedy and know they practically have a monopoly in the USA when it comes to sports viewership. I’m not in favor of an 18 game season, but it’s matter of when and instead of if at this point….

As far as the overall season goes, I’ll go a step further and get rid of the weekly Thursday games as well. I would only reserve Thursday for season-openers and Thanksgiving games (keeping the traditional games but adding another game), but anything beyond that…nope

I think the NFL/Roger just feels an aurora of invincibility and believe fans will support the league unconditionally, as long as you have several great white QB’s, white owners, white coaches, and front office…and keep the wokeness to a minimal

Yeah the 18 game season is coming, it is what it is...

One thing someone should be cautioning Goodell on, is nothing great lasts forever. Baseball had this country in a visegrip for over 100 years, in terms of sports entertainment, it was the biggest show going...

With the litany of ways people comsume entertainment, and how many entertainment options there are, the NFL doesn't have 100 years to just dominate, people will pull away long before then. Especially if they continue toying with trying to take everything...

NFL fans aren't the ones asking for more games and more teams in the playoffs; to your point it's The League itself, it's owners, and the entities its in bed with, aka the advertisers and networks. The fans, in general, don't want an extended season that's gonna end in damn near March...

I think most of us are cool with holiday games and Thursday games, though like you, there are a good number of us who don't care for the Thursdays (plenty of players don't, either)...

The greed will cost The League in the long run if they dont check themselves. That long run may not be for another 10, 20, 30 years. Who knows, but everything that's up, comes down at some point. Especially if these extended seasons start affecting the quality of the game more visibly----->as one can already argue quality of the playoffs is already being affected with this 7th playoff team...

I forget what year it was, but wasn't there a time circa 99 when the AFC North (AFC Central at the time) was:

Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Jaxsonville
Tennessee

Such a wild division to think about in todays terms

Then I remember the Cardinals being in the NFC East, and the Bucs in the AFC North/Central...weren't the damn Seahawks an AFC team back then too

No the Bucs were only in the AFC West for one year, their inaugural season in 1976. Since Y2 they've always been NFC...

The Hawks started as NFC that same year ('76), but were AFC from 1977 thru 2001...

 

[murksiderock]

I really don't see why this is a problem. Maybe because I don't watch nearly as much NFL outside the NFC East as I do inside the division.

Nah you're right, it's not a problem. Because they all have down years with a division winner with a shytty record...

With 7 teams in each conference, there are no good teams missing the playoffs anymore.

The Hawks missed it this year at 10-7. 5 teams made the playoffs with the exact same record this year, so if those 5 teams are considered "good", then the Hawks should be too. They went 2-1 in 3 games vs other 10-win teams, too (1-1 vs LAR, beat Denver)...

Thats just a devil's advocate argument. I personally think the 7th playoff team has cost the quality of the playoffs, letting in undeserved teams. I know I sound like a broken record, but 7-seeds lose 90% of their games, by an average of 2 TDs, and the one 7-seed that won a game, lost in the very next round...

So the reverse of no good teams miss the playoffs anymore, is that mediocre teams are now getting into the playoffs. Houston won this weekend. But Denver and Pittsburgh got rolled. Tampa lost. And we'll see what the Rams do. Those are the 10-win teams...

Both 7-seeds (Denver and Green Bay) got destroyed. There's no reason whatsoever for a 7th seed...

I’m aware and that’s my point. Nobody threw a fit over a wild card team getting a home playoff game back then and there’s no reason to be so bent on allowing mediocre or even bad teams to host playoff games over teams with better record just because the division champion team had the good fortune of not having any good teams in the division with them.

Got ya, and I agree...