Goodell thinking off extending playoffs to 14 or 16 teams· Page 3

Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)

Porforis
Veteran Member

12 years ago

That aside.. I actually like the idea of more playoff games. But only if they expand the league by at least 2 more teams (preferably 4)

Originally Posted by: Formo

I didn't think of that earlier, but that's the only way I could possibly think of being okay with more playoff games. But if you're adding new teams, then the concern is if you can field enough quality teams, or if you're going to have a perennial expansion flop team like Jacksonville. Also, I'm afraid that more teams = A team in London which is a colossally bad idea.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

12 years ago

#22

The playoff amount of teams.
The amount of NFL teams.
The lack of a team oversea's.

All are FINE. Quit trying to muck it up!

Eliminate some of the rules. Make them more black/white. Make players watch a video of players who have been retired for more than a decade and sign a waiver of some sort acknowledging they know the dangers of playing in the NFL.

Quit trying to CHANGE the NFL!

flep
Member Topic Starter

12 years ago

#23

I didn't think of that earlier, but that's the only way I could possibly think of being okay with more playoff games. But if you're adding new teams, then the concern is if you can field enough quality teams, or if you're going to have a perennial expansion flop team like Jacksonville. Also, I'm afraid that more teams = A team in London which is a colossally bad idea.

Originally Posted by: Porforis

More teams is more watering down of the quality of players.

The only way in my opinion he will extend the playoffs is by making it 14 teams. 7 from each conference (being 4 division winners and 3 WC's) with only the #1 seed from each conference getting a bye week. So there would be 3 wc games in each conference on Saturday and Sunday with he kick of times like a normal Sunday.

And the idea of a London franchise is impractable.

Believe me, I'm from the UK and post on the NFLUK forum, and the vast majority of posters are against a UK franchise. We are very happy (scratch that ecstatic)with 2 games a season being played at Wembley from next year but we are football fans already and all have our teams in the NFL who we support with a passion and would not switch allegiance to another team just because it was based in the UK.

As I have posted in the past the time zone is the biggest obstacle.

All home games would have to be 6PM (UK time) kick offs which is 1PM EST and 9AM PCT. A london team could never host a late afternoon game (9:25PM kick off) as the game wouldn't finish until nearly 1AM UK time. so a Sunday Night, Monday night home game is out of the question as they would kick off at 1:20AM UK time which is totally out of the question.

And this talk of a Superbowl in the UK is just that "Talk".......

The game would have to kick off 7PM UK time at latest which is 10AM PCT. With all the hoopla that goes with the big game i.e. TV build up pre match entertainment etc the TV programming on the West coast would be starting at 5AM in the morning.

This your game USA we just happen to love it and accept the times of kick offs.

Maybe as has been said already Goodell is just putting this out there to gauge fan reaction so he can go to the owners and tell them it's a no go.

We'll see.

Formed Merseyside Nighthawks. British Champions 1992. Packer fan for 32 years

I feel very wrong now!!!!!!!!!

Pack93z
Select Member

12 years ago

#24

More teams is more watering down of the quality of players.

Originally Posted by: flep

My opinion, is there is more than enough college talent for a couple more teams across the league. The exception might be the upper echelon QB's, but that really applies to today's game as it is. So what is two more teams with mediocre QB's, the Bears have won for a couple decades with average to below average QB's. So have the Ravens.

I believe there are many young players that exit the league that could be successful in the right situation for their talents.

I don't believe talent is the limiting factor, I believe that it is drawing local fan interest is the issue. Building a stadium is a huge undertaking, then trying the generate and fill those stadiums without a built in tradition is the limiting factor.

Look no further than Jacksonville, Tampa, San Diego.. etc. Weekly they are fighting blackouts and most of the time, upside down yet in investments in the stadium itself. Even established teams like Indy are struggling to recapture public funding money for stadium costs. Buffalo is playing a couple home games a year in Toronto partially because of waning fan interest.

So why in God's green earth would you want to add more teams while we have franchises struggling already.

I think the NFL is too aggressively trying to force growth in place of it naturally taking place with demand for the product.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Formo
Veteran Member

12 years ago

#25

My opinion, is there is more than enough college talent for a couple more teams across the league. The exception might be the upper echelon QB's, but that really applies to today's game as it is. So what is two more teams with mediocre QB's, the Bears have won for a couple decades with average to below average QB's. So have the Ravens.

I believe there are many young players that exit the league that could be successful in the right situation for their talents.

I don't believe talent is the limiting factor, I believe that it is drawing local fan interest is the issue. Building a stadium is a huge undertaking, then trying the generate and fill those stadiums without a built in tradition is the limiting factor.

Look no further than Jacksonville, Tampa, San Diego.. etc. Weekly they are fighting blackouts and most of the time, upside down yet in investments in the stadium itself. Even established teams like Indy are struggling to recapture public funding money for stadium costs. Buffalo is playing a couple home games a year in Toronto partially because of waning fan interest.

So why in God's green earth would you want to add more teams while we have franchises struggling already.

I think the NFL is too aggressively trying to force growth in place of it naturally taking place with demand for the product.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

The bolded is absolutely correct. There are 120 something D1 college football teams. If the NFL expanded drastically and added 4 more teams, there still would be FAR enough talent to go around. I believe there are dozens of extremely high talent that gets lost at the wayside of the NFL because of early injuries/poor college coaching/poor college academics. Expanding the NFL by 4 teams would only force teams to find for those hidden gems even more so.

93z's spot on in that the crimp in the hourglass is the local fan interest and the money to be found to operate the new teams. Certainly there are markets for many more NFL teams.. But unless the new ownership wants to build stadiums that are 50k seats or less, those markets won't be tapped, IMO. The Dakotas come to mind (and I hope they never get a franchise).

I agree with Shawn on his last sentence, too. Well, the second part of it. I think the NFL can be aggressive in expansion, but cut back the stadium capacities and find markets that will be loyal (again, there are plenty). Sometimes those markets are found in the oddest of places (Baltimore is one of them, IMO. I would have never thought that city/market could have handled a NFL team before the Browns moved there. History proved me wrong.)

Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!

zombieslayer
Registered

12 years ago

#26

I used to love watching football. I may stop soon. Completely.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

wpr
Preferred Member

12 years ago

#27

I used to love watching football. I may stop soon. Completely.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer

I know. The owners think just because they paid for a franchise that means that they can do whatever they want to the game. How can these people who have obviously been incredibly successful in business be so stupid when it comes to what makes football popular? Thus profitable. Sooner or later they will kill the goose that is laying their golden eggs. Then they will wonder what happened.

Wade
Veteran Member

12 years ago

#28

Can't blame Goodell for the owners locking out the refs. But I can blame him for how unprepared and bad the replacement officials were.

Originally Posted by: packfanwithtwins

Can we also blame him for how bad the replacement officials' replacements have been?

[grin1]

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

Wade
Veteran Member

12 years ago

#29

I used to love watching football. I may stop soon. Completely.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer

Hm...I thought the reason I had been more easily distracted from games these days was just frustration with the OL and Mason Crosby.

Maybe there is something deeper in my apathy.

I do know that the NFL looks more like life at a corporation that once upon a time had been driven by innovation and was now "managed" by bean counters and image maintainers.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

gbguy20
Veteran Member

12 years ago

#30

The bolded is absolutely correct. There are 120 something D1 college football teams. If the NFL expanded drastically and added 4 more teams, there still would be FAR enough talent to go around.

Originally Posted by: Formo

Disagree. The league can't even put out 32 starting caliber quarterbacks as it is. Expansion will just lead to more teams like the Jags, who one, can't even fill half a stadium, and two can't find a QB or the rest of the personnel to field a decent team.

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (1h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status

Zero2Cool (1h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : That was terrible.

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.

beast (2h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent

beast (2h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime

beast (2h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing

Zero2Cool (3h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is

Zero2Cool (3h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true

beast (4h) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management

wpr (6h) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.

Mucky Tundra (13h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago

beast (14h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years

Zero2Cool (20h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.

packerfanoutwest (21h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it

beast (22h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done

Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.

Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS