The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Since 1990 (when it was still three divisions in each conference with three wildcard teams for each conference) there have been 12 playoff teams.
Three years ago, the league went to the four divisions per conference, which meant that there would be one more division champ, and one less wildcard as a result.
The owner of the Kansas City Chiefs is pushing for a wildcard to be added to each conference. His reasoning is that there are entirely too many 10-6 teams who will not make the postseason...and I guess his Chiefs regularly fall around that mark.

So, what do you think ? Will adding a wildcard water the playoffs down by pushing the Super Bowl a week further into February ? Will there be too many 8-8 teams making it in ?

I've heard an interesting idea suggested that they should get rid of the divisions, and just have the best 6 from each conference go. And, for the schedule, every team plays all the teams in their conference plus one team from the other conference. It's and interesting idea, but totally kills the "rivalry" division games.

I don't think they should expand the playoffs any further. One of the things that makes football interesting is that it is hard to get ot the postseason, unlike, say, hockey.

tcwest10 wrote:So, what do you think ? Will adding a wildcard water the playoffs down by pushing the Super Bowl a week further into February ? Will there be too many 8-8 teams making it in ?

There are a few 10-6 teams that will be on the outside looking in this year, not the case last year.
Add another wild card and then you seven in each Conference.

How do you break down the playoffs???

3 byes won't be right for that fourth Conference Champ that plays in round one. That will be the snag....

Adding TWO teams to the playoff format would eliminate that Snag I mentioned earlier...

That brings us back to the question at hand...

Answer: Maybe not so much 8-8 teams making the playoffs, but it would water is down.
If you added 1 team per Conf. this year...
That team in Texas and KC would be in because the Skins would have clinched with Minny and Atl losing last week, KC would have backed in by virtue of the Charger lost last week.

Only way to work it would be to give Indy and the Hawks a bye in round 1. All this would have been determined by the end of week 16

1niksder wrote:3 byes won't be right for that fourth Conference Champ that plays in round one. That will be the snag....

Nah, there would only be one. There would be three first-round games in each conference -- 2 v 7, 3 v 6 and 4 v 5.

I think 6 out of 15 teams in each conference is about as ideal as you can have. The NBA and NHL have way too many and MLB's 4 is about all they can have unless you want World Series games in November.

I say no. Like Aikwoman said, it would take away the importance of the regular season.

RedskinsFreak wrote:..I think 6 out of 15 teams in each conference is about as ideal as you can have..

Me too! But you know what? The "new" deal of 6 teams from each conference of 16 teams is even better.
Let's try that for a while before we add anymore playoff teams!

Stop tweaking the NFL. Its the most popular sport because its entertaining week in and week out. Baseball bores me because you can lose 1000 games in a row and stil win a championship /sarcasm but you get my point. Keep it, leave it alone before you morons screw it up.

Only when each division has five teams, meaning expansion into 4 markets in each conference, should they add another wild card for each conference.