Or, we could just have the best of both worlds and just eliminate 2 preseason (1 home and 1 away) games altogether and not add any to the regular season (watering down the level of competition). That's just too easy for the NFL to do, so it will never happen, because they're never going to cut into their own revenue by removing games entirely. The compromise they have come up with is the 18-game schedule which preserves their ticket revenue and tosses season-ticket holders a bone by making one of those extra games they are forced to purchase a meaningful one.
Of course, I am against 14 teams in the playoffs for the same reason - you're watering down the level of competition during the season - more spots to grab and more games to get your butt in gear to do it.
That said, here are some pros and cons of the 14-team playoff format I've come up with:
PROS:
-Increased suspense and "who's gonna be Cinderella?"-factor. As emphasized by the recent failure of #1 seeds, and the success of teams like the Giants, 08 Cardinals, 05 Steelers and other non-dominant regular season teams in the playoffs. A larger field would allow for more under-the-radar teams and teams that are peaking at the right time (i.e. Teams like the 09 Titans or even the 2011 Cardinals that were kept out by abysmal starts, and then went on a tear) to get in while they're hot and create for more exciting match-ups.
-More football. There'd have to be at least one additional game played per conference, meaning at least 2 more win-or-go-home exciting playoff match-ups between the best teams in the league.
CONS:
-A watered-down field of teams with an increased likelihood of 8-8 (or 9-9?
) and 7-9 teams. While some of these teams may be "hot" and deserving of a playoff spot after bad starts,
there's also the potential for more clunkers, rendering some of those extra "exciting playoff match-ups" moot.
-Nearly half the league qualifying. 14 out of thirty-two teams would mean that anyone one spot better than end of the top half of the conference standings (the team with the 7th best record out of 16) would qualify for the playoffs. This is potentially underattractive, as it diminishes the accomplishment of making it into the playoffs when all you have to do is
basically just not finish in the bottom half.
-More football. An argument with the same crux as my argument against an 18-game schedule. It'd make regular season games slightly less meaningful, as more teams could simply settle for qualifying and even increase the opportunity for more home playoff games at some point during the playoffs for teams that didn't even win their division (although these would likely be against other wild cards). It'd be a little more like the NBA, where losing streaks would mean less, and there'd be more emphasis on merely playing well enough to qualify, and then have the real games begin in January. No one wants to see fewer high-stakes games from September to December for the sake of 2 more in January.
