Comments on: Roger Goodell Considering Changing NFL Playoff Seeding Structure

By: ronald mcdougal

ronald mcdougal — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:41:30 +0000

If you ask me, I think the playoff structures works find. I disagree with one thing. The number 1 and 2 teams don’t deserve a bye week. If fact my idea would be to have the number 1 and 2 teams play and the winner would play the lower seeding team from the wild card, which leaves the losers at a threat by playing the higher seeding team from the wild card. This way the number 1 team would have 2 home playoff games, and this would make all the teams fight until the very last second of the season. This way, we get 2 more playoff games without adding more teams. Also, it’s good to know that if your in the top 2 that your going to the divisional round. By the way, having the division winners have a home game makes things more interesting in the long run.

By: Time to Change the NFL Playoff Seeding Structure, Again | Larry Brown Sports

Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:48:40 +0000

[...] went over this last season when Roger Goodell said there would be some talks about revising the playoff seeding structure. The proposed revision would ensure that wild card teams with a better record would have home field [...]

By: Should We Change The Playoff Structure?

Should We Change The Playoff Structure? — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:26:53 +0000

[...] the playoffs next year.• Roger Goodell Considering Changing NFL Playoff SeedingStructure / LarryBrown Sports• Commiss Considers Playoff Shakeup / NYPost( Read More … ) or Buy Sports Memorabilia! [...]

By: mat

mat — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:08:35 +0000

my opinion in this topic is thats not really a good idea. a good idea would be to change the playoff system into 16 teams, instead of the 12 we see know. that gives a chance to this years vikings and browns who didnt make it to have a shot in the postseason. anyhow, the past 3 seasons (counting this years) a 1 or 2 seed who has had a one week bye, failed to win the superbowl, so the first 2 seeds in each conference dont deserve a free ride through the first round!

By: nick

nick — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 22:59:49 +0000

great idea, make games more exiting and challenging

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 04:52:02 +0000

Why not reward the teams with the best record? Why should a division winner from a sorry division that has a 9-7 record host a wild card team with a 10-6 record?

By: Michael Procton

Michael Procton — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 08:08:02 +0000

This seems silly to me…keep the reward for outperforming the teams you play most often. Yeah, this may hurt great division runner-ups, but it’s a cyclical issue, rather than one that comes up every year. If you want to host a game in the playoffs, learn to win those six games you have scheduled every year (as the Jags and Texans have finally started to gear themselves up to do in the afforementioned AFC South.)

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 22:35:10 +0000

In the AfC it would not have mattered for the Jags. They lost their division no matter what the Colts did. The team it impacted was the Browns. But you also must realize the wildcard teams need to win their first games. Its a tired point. Kust like when the NFC won 13 straight SuperBowls and the talk was to seed the entire playoffs.