Guest converge241 Report post Posted January 17, 2003 Following the presentation of the team's ``Community Quarterback Awards'' yesterday at Foxboro Stadium, the Patriots owner revealed that he will push his fellow owners to expand the NFL postseason from the current 12-team pool. ``We went from 28 teams to 32 teams (due to expansion), and we have the same number of teams in the playoffs,'' said Kraft, who met with Belichick for 90 minutes earlier in the day to discuss team business. ``I think there probably should be two more teams (per conference) in the playoffs, and that's something personally I'm going to lobby for. some other people have talked about this..whats your opinion i say they shouldnt - the top seeds work hard for byes/homefield and would lose that in an 8 team system, plus that waters it down Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TUS_02 Report post Posted January 17, 2003 I agree with you. With only 6 teams being able to make the playoffs per conference, it makes every game just as important as the last. If you add 2 more teams, there's possibilities of having a 7-9 team being able to make the post-season... what's the fun in that? Adding franchises should also stop too... 32 is fine. It also adds to the competition. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted January 17, 2003 I voted no, but for the sake of argument I'm gonna put forth some arguments FOR adding 4 more teams to the playoffs... - increased revenue - it's all about the Benjamins - more playoff parity - the home team almost always wins the divisional finals, and this would give the underdogs more of a chance. - due to the parity of the teams, some deserving teams would make it in whereas right now they may not. Obviously the reverse can apply, and some bad teams might sneak in. ...well, that's about all I could think of off the top of my head. Ah, screw this devil's advocate thing. The proposal is clearly about making more money, not making the game better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TUS_02 Report post Posted January 17, 2003 I voted no, but for the sake of argument I'm gonna put forth some arguments FOR adding 4 more teams to the playoffs... - increased revenue - it's all about the Benjamins - more playoff parity - the home team almost always wins the divisional finals, and this would give the underdogs more of a chance. - due to the parity of the teams, some deserving teams would make it in whereas right now they may not. Obviously the reverse can apply, and some bad teams might sneak in. ...well, that's about all I could think of off the top of my head. Ah, screw this devil's advocate thing. The proposal is clearly about making more money, not making the game better. Yeah, standing in the shoes of an owner, it makes a lot of sense. But I'm not a owner, I'm a fan and as a fan, I want to see hard, intense games 17 weeks out of the year to get into the playoffs Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DrTom Report post Posted January 17, 2003 Absolutely not. Hell, I think a dozen teams is too many, but the format works, so I won't quibble about it. But sixteen would be beyond the pale. Half the teams in the league would make the playoffs then. You might as well just flip a coin on opening weekend and see who gets in. Football's regular season means something now, both because of the smaller playoff pool and because the season is so short. I'd hate to see it gravitate toward hockey and basketball with respect to meaninglessness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted January 17, 2003 Absolutely not. Hell, I think a dozen teams is too many, but the format works, so I won't quibble about it. But sixteen would be beyond the pale. Half the teams in the league would make the playoffs then. You might as well just flip a coin on opening weekend and see who gets in. Football's regular season means something now, both because of the smaller playoff pool and because the season is so short. I'd hate to see it gravitate toward hockey and basketball with respect to meaninglessness. You say half the teams, but since you can pretty much eliminate Detroit and Cincinnati there would actually be a BETTER than 50% chance of making the playoffs if they went to a 16-team format... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted January 17, 2003 No no no no no no no no. Besides, the last two weeks of the season are like playoff football anyway for bubble teams anyway... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Will Scarlet Report post Posted January 17, 2003 I voted no. I think having a bye week really makes the number 1 or 2 seeds more importance, and more advantage, at least in theory. I think 12 is fine. I believe baseball has too few teams, while other sports have too many. I feel it's just right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest cartman Report post Posted January 18, 2003 I heard a decent idea on the radio this morning about this situation. What about adding 1 team in each conference? Making it 7 teams that make the playoffs. The #1 team in each conference get's a bye and the other 6 play in the first round. Three games saturday and Three games sunday. Then depending on seeding and whatnot the lowest seeded team would play the #1 team that had the bye whilst the other two play each other, and so on... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted January 18, 2003 I believe baseball has too few teams, while other sports have too many. The last thing any sport needs is more playoffs, especially baseball. The playoffs exist to crown a champion. If you can't finish in the top 8 after 162 games, then you shouldn't have a shot of winning a title anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
