New year, new playoff structure?

By Lou DiPietro  |   Tuesday, December 30, 2008  |  Comments( 1 )

NFL Football News
Got something to say?

Log In above and share your thoughts on this topic with other fans!

This past week, the NFL announced that it will conduct a one-year test: The 2010 Pro Bowl will move to the site of Super Bowl XLIV (Miami) and be played on the Sunday between the conference title games and the league championship.

While there are sure to be issues because of the move, not the least of which being mass defections (would you want your players risking injury in a game that is by all accounts meaningless?), it’s a step in the right direction in terms of making the Pro Bowl relevant to more than the 84 players selected.

Well, if the NFL is seemingly interested in sprucing up the product a little bit, maybe it’s time to investigate another change -- increasing the number of playoff teams from 12 to 16.

I know that this argument is brought up every year, and it’s stronger or weaker depending on the records of teams that narrowly miss. Sadly, folks, it’s horribly relevant this year.

It’s a sad state of affairs, but we live in a country where mediocrity is the norm and being average is rewarded. When I was a kid, I was in a gifted program for bright children; instead of doing “normal” work, we were taken out of class two afternoons a week to do cool stuff like brain teasers, special projects (during Middle Ages studies, we made a catapult. . . . that shot backward) and play Oregon Trail.

Nowadays, no child is left behind, so that program doesn’t exist anymore because it ostracizes the non-gifted. Makes sense to me; I mean, a kid can draw a stick figure and win a ribbon in an art contest because everyone’s a winner these days. While that’s another rant for another day, let me ask you this: Do you think Bill Belichick feels like a winner right now? Would Matt Cassel be happy with a ribbon for effort?

I sure the heck hope not. The NFL is just a microcosm of the real world; somebody has to lose (well, most of the time, right, Donovan?), some are better than others and some are unfairly rewarded based on factors other than talent/ability/qualification while others lose out because of it.

So, yes, maybe it’s time that at least the NFL steps up and rewards teams for being good instead of being better than a bunch of also-rans.

After all, the four actual wild-card teams are road favorites this year, and does anyone outside of Maricopa County, Ariz., actually think the Cardinals have a shot in hell of even making the Super Bowl? I don’t know what their odds are, because that’s Os Davis’ department, but they can’t be good. Even if the Cards beat Atlanta -- which won two more games than Arizona, by the way -- they’d have to play at least one game on the Eastern time zone, where they were winless during the regular season. They were 0-4 against the other NFC playoff teams, getting embarrassed thrice in the process, and have a chance to make it a clean sweep this weekend against Atlanta.

The NFC West as a whole was a joke, honestly. Arizona won nine games and the other three teams had 13 combined victory. According to record, at least, they’re technically no “worse” than any NFC team that didn’t make the playoffs. But six of the Cards' nine wins came against those juggernauts in San Francisco, Seattle and St. Louis (they also beat Miami, Dallas and Buffalo, if you were wondering); moreover, they didn’t win a game east of the Mississippi and went 2-4 down the stretch -- including those three blowouts.

As for the other West, well, the Chargers, while a better team than their 8-8 record indicates, have no business hosting an Indianapolis team that won its eighth game in Week 13 and already even beat the Chargers in Qualcomm Stadium this year. While San Diego could’ve easily been 11-5 or better if not for a few last-minute heroics by fellows named Rosario, Hochuli and Vinatieri, fact is that the Bolts weren’t. Indy, meanwhile, won more games (10) in the AFC than San Diego did combined, and the Colts' reward is going to California solely because they play in the same division as the best team in the NFL -- Tennessee.

Funnily enough, had Indy won any of the four games it lost, it would be the top seed in the AFC -- yet the Colts are fifth because even though they beat Baltimore, San Diego, Tennessee, Minnesota, Pittsburgh and New England, they’re punished for one loss to your choice of Green Bay, Chicago or Jacksonville.

So, yes, those two teams -- again, both underdogs at home this week -- will be in the playoffs. Meanwhile, one year after being two minutes from perfection, the poor Patriots will be sitting on their couches after a season where they did better than anyone predicted. They lost their all-world QB before halftime Week 1, used a running back by committee and had so many issues at linebacker that they were signing guys off the street and inserting them into the starting lineup.

All they did was go 11-5 against a pretty tough schedule -- and don’t get to play in January because they’re geographically located east of the Rocky Mountains. The Pats’ 11-5 would’ve won three divisions other than their own, yet they’re ostensibly being punished for losing one game of your choice: Pittsburgh, Indianapolis or San Diego. See, Miami won the AFC East on the back of a conference record tiebreaker; both the Dolphins and New England were 4-2 in the division, so it comes down to one of those losses costing the Pats the division and a playoff spot. Who were Miami’s two placement games, you ask? One was Baltimore -- which they play this weekend -- but the other was Houston. Quite a drastic difference, no?

Now consider the playoffs with various formats. If the league went to 16 but kept the current location format, you’d get two AFC games people would actually kill to see again this weekend: New England at Pittsburgh and the Jets at Tennessee. Meanwhile, the NFC would have a pair of division rivalries: Tampa Bay at Carolina and Dallas at Chicago.

Eight games too much for those hefty TV contracts, which only have six time slots on the weekend? OK, well, even if we rewarded only the No. 1 seed with a bye, you’d still have Pats/Steelers and Bucs/Panthers to look forward to.

Maybe the NFL can even copy the NBA, whose division winners get in but records determine seeding and home court/field. With the current dozen, you’d have the same wild-card participants, but the games would be in Indianapolis, Baltimore and Atlanta (Minnesota would still host Philly).

And just for giggles, would you like to know what the playoffs would look like if the NFL just took the top six teams in each division regardless of record? The AFC would have Tennessee and Indy as the top seeds, with Baltimore hosting Miami and Pittsburgh hosting the Patriots. The NFC would be almost the same, with the only change being Tampa Bay (in place of Arizona) going to Atlanta.

Notice which teams you didn’t see in there? Arizona and San Diego. The Chargers would barely make an eight-team field based solely on record (they’d beat Denver and Houston on conference record tiebreaker to slot eighth), while Arizona would be anywhere between eighth or 10th in the NFC based on a strength of victory or schedule tiebreaker. I don’t have the necessary MIT degree to figure that out.

Makes you feel quite confident in their ability to win four games in a row, eh?

People may cry about too many teams in the playoffs, but in a league where an 8-8 club gets in over an 11-5 one, which scenario is really the crime?

Happy New Year, folks.
Got something to say?

Log In above and share your thoughts on this topic with other fans! (1)

About Lou DiPietro

Lou DiPietro is an accomplished freelance writer who is fascinated with all things sports. In addition to his duties at RealFootball365.com, Lou contributes to TheBleacherReport.com and Pro Wrestling Illustrated magazine, and has been featured on "The Sports Buffet with Matt West" on 1080-AM ESPN ...
read more
Article Tools Share!   |  RSS  |  Bleacher Report About Bleacher Report