RolStoppable said:
The argument has to be about what we have now vs. a system with 14 playoff teams, not your non-existent top 6 system that potentially leaves division winners out. If you leave division winners out, then why have divisions to begin with? Adding a seventh team to the playoffs isn't just about an additional playoff game, but an extended wild card hunt during the regular season. You are even more annoying than the guys in the rugby thread who think that they are watching a sport that isn't dumb. |
...now I'm confused. I've been doing nothing but stating that I'm arguing for a hypothetical playoff scenario where the top 6 teams make the playoffs. In fact, I said a couple posts back that I'd probably prefer 7 teams to what we have now. My argument has never been anything but advocating for top 6. What posts have you been reading?
...and the argument "has" to be on the status quo vs. 7 teams? We're already debating the merits of one hypothetical playoff scenario, why not two?
You have divisions to foster rivalries and determine schedules, much like you have conferences in college football. You shouldn't automatically get a spot in the college football playoff if you win a crappy conference (assuming it had enough spots to fill that many conference winners), and you shouldn't automatically get a spot, much less a home game, in the NFL playoffs simply for being the best of an awful division.









