FanNation

I wish they'd get a different photo of Goodell. Damned thing looks like a cartoon character they'd have in a bathouse in the early 80's.

So... Only 4 teams per year will sit players instead of 8?

Blutwulf | 03/28/08, 07:26 AM

makes more sense ..

KPKahder-The ponies must die. | 03/28/08, 07:46 AM

Sounds fair to everyone involved. Let's see it in action.

Lady's Coach Belicat | 03/28/08, 08:23 AM

Roger Goodell on karaoke night: "You. Light up my life....!"

El Guapo Returns!! | 03/28/08, 08:27 AM

Roger - stick to spygate, Pacman, and long hair and let the brains make the important decisions

Hub Man | 03/28/08, 10:07 AM

I don't like that a division winner could be seeded lower than a wild card. The divisions within a conference do not play the same schedule, so the seedings is simply guess work.

Why not simply eliminate the divisions then, if won/loss is to be the determining factor?

GoPSULions | 03/28/08, 10:09 AM

This is a bad idea. In football you don't play enough games and each teams schedule is too different across divisions in order to do this. Winning your division has to mean something.

buckybadger | 03/28/08, 11:22 AM

I'd like to see them get rid of the bye week for conference winners. I think it gives to much of an advantage to teams that are usually pretty strong to begin with. The exception being the Patriots.

Mental Ray | 03/28/08, 12:05 PM

I think this is a good idea...but GoPSULions has a decent point. Get rid of the divisions and have the teams play relatively comparable schedules so the Win-Loss records are legitimately representative of the quality of each team.

Would that necessitate the elimination of inter-conference play? Or should they do it like baseball and have a week or two where they play rival match ups from the opposite conference? Just a thought...

ashman0207 | 03/28/08, 12:35 PM

Its already perfect the way it is. In a way its already seeded the top two teams get the bye and the other teams records depict home-field advantage with some other considerations of course. Why mess with a good and fair thing.

nascarzorin | 03/28/08, 12:36 PM

I like this. Same teams will make the playoffs, it just means you'll be seeded lower with a worse record. Nothing wrong with that.

And for those saying winning the division won't mean anything, yes it wil.. It guarantees you a playoff spot, even though you have a worse record then another team that didn't win their division, therefore that division may be toughter than yours (two teams with better records) and yet you still couldn't beat their record.

jdang307 | 03/28/08, 01:13 PM

This would be a good idea and so would two possessions for each team in overtime. Especially in the playoffs. Not cheesy like college, but a chance by each team to score on a regular set of downs at the beginning of OT. After that, it goes to sudden death.

Biakaba is Lt. Frank Drebin | 03/28/08, 01:15 PM

Like I said before this won't work because the schedules and common opponents are two different even for teams in the same conference. In order to do this you would have to not play everyone in your division twice so that the teams could play each other more and you would also have to take out inter conference play. I would not like this one bit. I like the fact that you create rivals with your division. You can't do it the way the schedule is created now.

Its just not the common opponents with in the division either. Its also the other division you play in your conference and the one you play in the opposite division. Those are all different as well. You might have an easier division,which makes up 6 games of your schedule, but the other two division, makes up 8 games, were tougher than the team you are losing your home game too. We can't make the season long enough to make up for all these differences. That is why divisions were made so that you can compete with those teams and than make out playoff structure from there.

buckybadger | 03/28/08, 02:59 PM

Ya, they need to rework the over time rules.

I hate the fact that the team that win's the coin toss has a much higher chance of winning and can potentially win the game without the other team even touching the ball.

Each team should have ATLEAST 1 possession each.

Arsenal69 | 03/28/08, 03:14 PM

Or just play the full 15 mins of the OT period and see what the final score is.

Arsenal69 | 03/28/08, 03:15 PM

Grade out the strength of schedule and do it that way rather than won-loss records. While the OT issue came up, why not have the teams start at their opponennts 40 and have alternate possessions. Similiar to the college football format.

Red Zone | 03/28/08, 03:56 PM

buckybadger is right. The schedules are not the same so it is not right to seed teams any other way than it is done now. If this year taught anything, it is that a road team can win it all. It was actually to the Giants advantage to play on the road. The team that is playing the best football during the play offs will win it all. Just leave it alone..

50yearfan | 03/28/08, 05:11 PM

I do think the overtime rule could be reworked. One lose cause of a coin flip could mean sitting home in January or playing. I like the two possession rule than go to sudden death. Not a fan of the college system. It takes out to many proponents that make up the game. There is no special teams play (punt and kick off return) and that is part of the game. I think the game should be simulated as much as possible so we know what team was the best not just one unit of that team being better than one unit of the other.

buckybadger | 03/28/08, 06:05 PM

This might give the playoffs a little more excitement(not saying that it is not exciting enough already}). I am down with that--------------------------> BIG TIME!

Cowboys4Lyfe | 03/28/08, 06:15 PM

Even teams within the same division don't have similar schedules except their own divisional opponents. Close in some cases, but still different. There isn't one team in the NFL that shares an exact home-road schedule as another. Personally, I don't like any kind of grading system except for the one on the scoreboard at time :00. It becomes too subjective and leaves too much room for argument/disagreement. Yeah, just look at college football. There is no denying a final score or a won/loss record. Ask a Cleveland fan.

Further, why change it? This year you would have had the Steelers playing in Jacksonville (Jags won anyway) and the Giants playing TB in the Meadowlands (G-men won that also). A few teams sat players to rest them for the playoffs. Yeah, so what? How did they make out? If I am a head coach, I'm playing my guys to win every game to keep that edge. If they get hurt, well that's just part of the game and could be hurt just as easily in the first as last game. Say what you want about the Giants (and no I am not a fan) but to play the Pats so hard late in the season, then go on the road to win in Tampa, Dallas, GB and the big one in Phoenix against the "best" team in football is not only commendable but downright awesome...not just for NY but for all of pro football. And for the benefit of Pats fans bothering to read this, I would say 7, 8 or even 9 times out of 10 they beat the G-men, but didn't when it mattered. That's why the game is played, why we all watch it and why we live for and die with our teams.

For OT, play a 7:30 quarter and if still tied give both teams a loss. What is this, soccer?

americanphils | 03/28/08, 06:24 PM