Do you think NFL should expand the playoff system from 12 to 16?
153541
I dont think so because then half of the teams would be in the playoffs, it needs to be only the elite teams. However, i think we should have a second leauge alltogether.  Not nfl europe, arena football, or xfl but a second NFL.  Sorta like minor leauge but better.  It would take place during the offseason of NFL1.  It would do that well at first, but once people started to get to know the teams and players it would be great.  If people do good in NFL2 they could get drafted over to 1.  And if people suck in 1 they could go to 2 (not europe or arena leauge).  This would mean year round football!!!
875832
No way.  To win more than 6 games, they would have to go 5-3 or better in the second half....no chance!\n\nFor more on the Lions and the NFL, check this site out.  http://factipedia.com/sportsblogs/
774026
I don't think so because not all teams have the same strength of schedule. One team that plays 10 top-25 teams and ends with a record of 24-8 shouldn't be seeded lower than a team that played only 3 top-25 teams and ended up with a record of 26-6.
934369
16 team playoff system using the rankings of the BCS to decide who gets in and what they are going to be seeded.  More importance on SOS outside of conference would have to be involved, and independents schedules would be compared with the weakest conference.  First round games played at higher ranked opponents home field, second round games played in 4 lesser bowls, and then the Fiesta, and Orange/or Sugar would host remaining 4 teams and the championship game is played in the Rose Bowl.  School is out most of December, and early January so there wouldnt be that much school missed, and by still playing in bowl games the schools and conferences still make their money.  \n\nAlso by taking away some bowl slots it puts more emphasis on winning schedules instead of 64 teams out of 119 getting into a bowl game.
1123938
O Sweet Lord I agree 100%.  We already had the draft so now is the dead season until training camp starts.  Then, on a beautiful Thursday night in early September (Sept 7), there will be a glorious rising of pads pounding together, of the wind whsitling around a tightly spiraled pigskin, of jukes, spin-moves, stiff-arms, and wrapped up runners.\nFantasy football fans checking continuously on their scores.  Friends and family hanging out on a pleasent Sunday afternoon watching copius amounts of football (and some beer and brats).\n\nThanks alot, now all I'm gonna think about is football (REAL FOOTBALL) for the next 83 days, 7 hours, and 49 minutes.\n\np.s. Paulie, that is an absurd analogy.  In the NFL, almost every year, there is a team that is 9-7 or 8-8 that makes the playoffs.  A 9-7 team's season translated to baseball would roughly mean they go 91-71 (162 game schedule).  Do some research before you speak next time.
1110488
I like it but I think they need to make changes.  First off, they need to transfer one NL team to the AL to balance out leagues.  Then they need to do what NFL does with interconference, rotate matchups so that you play each division once every three years.  And eliminate geographical matchups so every team in a division is playing the same interleague slate.  It's not fair if the Marlins and Mets are battling for playoffs that Marlins play six games against Devil Rays every year and Mets have to play six games against Yankees each year.
279681
Might be more willing in November, but how many would already be injured and unable to play because of a long season ... or would be burned out because they have been playing for eight months.\n\nI like the extended All-Star Break in July idea. To make it easier on MLB players, you could even shorten the season in those years back to the old 154 game season to make room for the WBC. It is only every three years, so it's not like its an annual dilema.\n\nHopefully, they'll get it all figured out by 2009.
1018402
I don't think that's a good idea. I like the current scoring system...
169343
I like the shootout, and the new rules in general, but they didn't go far enough.  If they really wanted to put some teeth in it, they should...\n\n1. Get rid of that extraneous 5-minute 4 on 4 sudden death OT.  With the shootout looming, it seems like those who like the shootouts agonize through that 5-minute period hoping it will still end in a tie.\n\n2.  Then, while you're at it, eliminate that wimpy "each team gets a point" for regulation-time ties.  It should be like baseball...no ties.  You win or you lose.  1 point or none.  Deal with it.  At least then, the 5-minute OT means something.
862814
Any way you structure it will still be criticized, I think the most exciting whould be an 8 team tourney (the eight BCS teams) but who knows. BCS is a crock of crap. It would help alot if you had large schools play large schools out of conference. More ohio state v. Texas and ND vs USC match ups, that would lead to less unbeaten teams.
13163
I don't think that it's fair that the division leader automatically gets a top seed in the playoffs.  It can, and usually does leave out a team that would have normally made it to the playoffs if it were by record.  Plus, like what was mentioned on an ESPN article that I read about a month or so ago, it works out where the top two teams by record in the conference will never play each other anymore in the conference finals because of the way the divisions are set up now.  So I don't think they are a good idea.
1023175
Yep, I don't think that is a bad idea. How it would benefit is in the sense that teams would not be able to play for a draw etc to manipulate not playing certain teams in the next stage earlier than they would like. If they are good enough and deserving of the championship it shouldn't matter. They have to play each other some time.
229719
You can't have a *balanced* 15 game schedule with 7 teams - to keep it balanced you need to have games played be a multiple of 6. 6, 12, 18, ...  My experience - just go with the 15 game schedule - use it to create a seeding for a playoff format ... that way there's less sensitivity about potential *unfairness* of having to play a particular team more than some other team might have to play that same team.
617863
I agree with cooley.  The are not overall fixed.  However, by extending the series, companies can make money on broadcasting and advertisement.  Sometimes, I feel the refs are biased in their calls..but for the most part I don't think they are fixed.  I really feel the first round should go back to a 5 game series.
882021
Division winners will be chosen based on head-to-head results with other teams in the division (i.e. say 6 of the Colts 8 wins came against the Jags, Texans, and Titans, the Colts would be 6-0 in the division and thus the division champs). If there is a tie inside the division, it then goes to results within the conference (i.e. say the Colts and the Jaguars both are 5-1 in the division each with a loss to the other, the NFL then looks at their records against other AFC teams, so say the Jaguars are 3-1 against AFC teams and the Colts are 2-2, the Jags would win the division. That is how the division winners would be determined, and that accounts for 8 out of 12 total playoff spots. I believe when determining the 4 Wild Card spots, only the conference records are looked at, but I am not 100% sure on that.\n\nAnd I'll be damned if this ever happens...  : )\n\nJust to correct the chick above me, there are 32 teams just in case you didn't know, and I do believe this would be mathematically possible, it is just a far cry!
1008058
I personally think it would be a great idea, but I don't know how it would work financially. I don't know if I would make it a farm system like in MLB, but I think a developmental league would be good, with entry at age 18, and keep the NFL age limit the same. I think it would be great for talented players who don't have the academic ability to play at a good college, but would still like a shot at playing in the NFL. I think you would have to make the pay enough for someone to live on (30-40k maybe?) but not enough for kids to aspire too. You don't want the kids capable of going to college to skip school because they can make too much money in the developmental league. \n   Since it's a developmental league, I would say make it a year-round league. Obviously you can;t play a game a week year round, but you could have 15 games in the fall and 15 in the spring, with time off and practice sessions in between. And I don't mean OTA's or voluntary minicamps like in the NFL, I mean mandatory practice and development (positional instruction, breaking down film, etc.) I think the league would have to be concentrated in areas that are die-hard football areas. No disrespect to the smaller markets (Jacksonville, Indianapolis, etc.) but you've got to get enough turn-out to at least help fund the league. The brunt of the expense would fall on the NFL, but they're going to need fans coming out to help with the expense, and if the NFL teams in these areas have a hard time drawing crowds, then a minor-league team would have no shot. Also, I think you handle it like MLB does, in that you have the teams in smaller, suburban towns outside of the main market city, with smaller, no-frills stadiums, but more fan-friendly. These could also double as training-camp facilities for the NFL team in that area.
759457
The NFL this season will implement for the first time in its history a primetime "flexible scheduling" element on Sundays in Weeks 10-15 and in Week 17. \n\nFlexible scheduling will ensure quality matchups on Sunday night in those weeks and give surprise teams a chance to play their way onto primetime. \n\nThe 2006 NFL schedule will list start times for all Sunday games during the "flex" weeks as 1:00 p.m. ET, except for games played in the Mountain or Pacific Time zones, which will be listed at 4:05 p.m. ET or 4:15 p.m. ET. \n\nThe NBC Sunday night time slot for "flex" weeks will list teams as "TBD." \n\nOnly Sunday afternoon games are eligible to be moved. Flexible scheduling will not be applied to games airing on Thursday, Saturday or Monday nights. \n\nJust as the six major college football conferences have done for many years, the NFL now will have additional flexibility to move the start times of games on Sundays, using a 12-day notice format. \n\nFor example, a game scheduled for Sunday, November 26 could move from a 1:00 p.m. ET kickoff to an 8:15 p.m. start, but the change would be made and announced no later than Tuesday, November 14. \n\nThe NFL has commonly moved games between 1:00 p.m. ET and 4:15 p.m. ET (eight times last season) on Sunday afternoons. The new practice allows the NFL to employ flexible scheduling to include one of its primetime package of games – on Sunday evenings. \n\nSunday afternoon games, as in the past, can still be moved between 1:00 and 4:05 or 4:15 p.m. ET. \n\nIn Week 17, in order to ensure a Sunday night game with playoff implications, the decision to move the start time may be made on six days notice. \n\nCBS and FOX will each be able to protect a total of five games in the seven weeks of flexible scheduling, but not more than one game in any week. \n\nDuring the 2005 regular season, the NFL conducted a study with mock flexible scheduling. An eight-person task force consisting of team executives, one from each division, was consulted on a weekly basis. In addition, television network partners and the NFL's broadcasting department participated weekly in the process. \n\n\nNFL Flexible Scheduling 101:\n\nBegins Sunday, November 12, 2006 (Week 10) \n\nIn effect Weeks 10-15 and Week 17. \n\nNot in effect Week 16 due to holiday weekend. \n\nOnly Sunday afternoon games in Weeks 10-15 and 17 are subject to being moved into the Sunday night window. \n\nThe majority of games on Sundays will be listed at 1:00 p.m. ET during flex weeks except for games played in Pacific or Mountain Time zones which will be listed at 4:05 or 4:15 p.m. ET. \n\nNo impact on Thursday, Saturday or Monday night games. \n\nThe NFL will decide (after consultation with CBS, FOX, NBC) and announce on 12 days notice the game being moved to 8:15 p.m. ET and may also announce games moving to 4:15 p.m. ET. \nWeek 17 start time changes could be decided on 6 days notice to ensure a game with playoff implications. \n\nThe NBC Sunday night time slot in "flex" weeks will list teams as "TBD." \n\nFans and ticket holders must be aware that NFL games in flex weeks are subject to change 12 days in advance (6 days in Week 17) and should plan accordingly. \n\nNFL schedules all games. \n\nCBS and FOX each get to protect a total of 5 games in the 7 weeks of flexible scheduling, but not more than one game in any week. \n\nTeams will be informed as soon as they are no longer under consideration or eligible for a move to Sunday night.