There are 441 users in the forums

Changes coming to regular season and playoffs

Shop 49ers game tickets
Originally posted by Kyzen:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by mayo49:
Yeah, they needed to go to 18 games, to avoid the problem of who gets an extra home game, in a 17 game scenerio.

The additional game will be played on neutral sites (London, Mexico City for example) if this does in fact go through

f**k London games, Mexico I can live with.

That's not the case, apparently. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/packers-president-sheds-light-on-how-a-17-game-nfl-schedule-will-potentially-work/
Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I would rather they go on strike than have a 17 game season and add two more s**tty teams to an already watered down playoff format.
8-8 teams in the playoff going to become the norm.

It is sad.

Amen reverend Woo.

Couldn't agree more. Don't fix what ain't broken.
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 44,485
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I would rather they go on strike than have a 17 game season and add two more s**tty teams to an already watered down playoff format.
8-8 teams in the playoff going to become the norm.

It is sad.

What proof do you have exactly that the playoff format would be watered down? Plenty of pretty good teams would make the playoffs under the new format.
Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I would rather they go on strike than have a 17 game season and add two more s**tty teams to an already watered down playoff format.
8-8 teams in the playoff going to become the norm.

It is sad.

What proof do you have exactly that the playoff format would be watered down? Plenty of pretty good teams would make the playoffs under the new format.

More Teams = More Watered Down

Two teams that are currently not good enough to make the playoffs are going to become playoff teams. There will be a lot more mediocre playoff teams in this format.
Originally posted by captveg:
Originally posted by Kyzen:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by mayo49:
Yeah, they needed to go to 18 games, to avoid the problem of who gets an extra home game, in a 17 game scenerio.

The additional game will be played on neutral sites (London, Mexico City for example) if this does in fact go through

f**k London games, Mexico I can live with.

That's not the case, apparently. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/packers-president-sheds-light-on-how-a-17-game-nfl-schedule-will-potentially-work/

The whole thing seems a bit half-arsed. So they haven't decided what to do with the 17th game? Well, think it through first, then launch the idea.
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 44,485
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I would rather they go on strike than have a 17 game season and add two more s**tty teams to an already watered down playoff format.
8-8 teams in the playoff going to become the norm.

It is sad.

What proof do you have exactly that the playoff format would be watered down? Plenty of pretty good teams would make the playoffs under the new format.

More Teams = More Watered Down

Two teams that are currently not good enough to make the playoffs are going to become playoff teams. There will be a lot more mediocre playoff teams in this format.

Data says those two teams are usually better then some of the teams making the playoffs.
Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I would rather they go on strike than have a 17 game season and add two more s**tty teams to an already watered down playoff format.
8-8 teams in the playoff going to become the norm.

It is sad.

What proof do you have exactly that the playoff format would be watered down? Plenty of pretty good teams would make the playoffs under the new format.

More Teams = More Watered Down

Two teams that are currently not good enough to make the playoffs are going to become playoff teams. There will be a lot more mediocre playoff teams in this format.

Data says those two teams are usually better then some of the teams making the playoffs.

Who would have made it last year?

I am in favor of trimming down the field to less teams. 4 division winners and one wild card from would be better IMO.
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Who would have made it last year?

I am in favor of trimming down the field to less teams. 4 division winners and one wild card from would be better IMO.

Rams and Steelers. Rams were better than the Eagles and were surging. Titans nearly missed the playoffs had the Steelers won in week 17 and they were clearly one of the best teams.
Originally posted by Hysterikal:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Who would have made it last year?

I am in favor of trimming down the field to less teams. 4 division winners and one wild card from would be better IMO.

Rams and Steelers. Rams were better than the Eagles and were surging. Titans nearly missed the playoffs had the Steelers won in week 17 and they were clearly one of the best teams.

Teams without winning records making the playoffs won't make the playoffs better.

Why not just go to 20 team playoff format? We will be almost as half the teams getting in if this is approved. It cheapens the regular season and makes the playoffs less interesting IMO.
[ Edited by TheWooLick on Feb 27, 2020 at 2:34 PM ]
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by Hysterikal:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Who would have made it last year?

I am in favor of trimming down the field to less teams. 4 division winners and one wild card from would be better IMO.

Rams and Steelers. Rams were better than the Eagles and were surging. Titans nearly missed the playoffs had the Steelers won in week 17 and they were clearly one of the best teams.

Teams without winning records making the playoffs won't make the playoffs better.

Why not just go to 20 team playoff format? We will be almost as half the teams getting in if this is approved. It cheapens the regular season and makes the playoffs less interesting IMO.

So then make it based off conference record and get rid of divions. Bc thats what you are arguing. Nearly every year you have some 8 and 8 divion winner team making the playoffs. We've even had 7 and 9 make it before. Does that make the playoffs better?

One extra team from each conference is fine. Like Hysterical said, Eagles were not better than the Rams and the Titans almost missed the playoffs.
[ Edited by TheGore49er on Feb 27, 2020 at 7:02 PM ]
Why change something that's been working fine for so long?
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Why change something that's been working fine for so long?

To make more money.
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 44,485
Originally posted by Hysterikal:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Why change something that's been working fine for so long?

To make more money.

Greed is going to kill the best game in America.
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Teams without winning records making the playoffs won't make the playoffs better.

Why not just go to 20 team playoff format? We will be almost as half the teams getting in if this is approved. It cheapens the regular season and makes the playoffs less interesting IMO.

For the most part they'll be adding a 9-7 team. In the last 10 years 5 10-6 teams missed the playoffs, 9 9-7 teams missed, and 6 8-8 teams. It wasn't that long ago a 11-5 New England team missed the playoffs.

I don't think going to 7 teams will be any worse than allowing all division winners in.
Open Menu Search Share 49ersWebzone