NFL schedule readjustment

[Flock of Moosen]

No, the NFL is not thinking about changing the way they make up the schedules each year. At least not as far as I know.
This is about what I think they should do to make the league more competitive and fair.

As it stands now the way the NFL sets up their schedules, it has very little to do with the way a team finished the previous season. It used to in the past, but with the new league realignment that apparantly has changed.
I'll take the NFC East as an example. Every team in that division plays each other twice which is normal. That is 6 games. Then each of them also plays every team in the AFC East and the NFC South. That is another 8 games bringing the total to 14. You know what that leaves? 2 whole games based on a team's previous season record. Two games?!?! How the hell is that considered a competitive schedule? Who's to say the NFC East isn't getting a much harder schedule than say the AFC West?

This is how I would reschedule the league. Of course you keep in the 2 games against each of your 3 division rivals. Then, every year you also have to play each team in the other Conference similar to yours (i.e. AFC East vs NFC East, AFC West vs NFC West, etc.) This would also bring about mini-rivalries (i.e. Giants-Jets, 49rs-Raiders, etc.)
Okay, that is now 10 games. The remaining 6 would be against every team that finished in the same position as you did the previous year (i.e. all 1st place teams play, all 2nd place teams play, etc.)

Maybe this would work, maybe it wouldn't, but in my mind this would make more sense and be more competitive than the way the NFL currently does it. What do you think?

[diceisgod]

Nah

[Ronin]

that is a good point.. i like your idea.. but why play every one in the opposite division? for the NFC East, play only two team from the AFC East and two teams from the NFC West. Then for the remaining games, just do them on some sort of algorithm (Giants play the 2 place team from the AFC South, etc..). Because I would like to see the Giants play the Bengals or Tennessee some times.. Jon Kitna and Steve McNair are great quaterbacks but I never get to seem them play since they never play the Giants!

[Suzie]

I like the idea, but instead of only playing the same area/opposite COnference for a "mini-rivalry" I'd rather those 4 games be played against ONE diff sector of the opp Conference each year. Allows for more parity.

WHat I would like to see is a revision of the OT rules so that each team is guaranteed a post-regulation possession. 28% of the time the team that won the coin toss gets it without the opposing offense allowed back on the field.
I haven't come up with an excellent alternative to allow both teams to come out, only thing I can think of is a Bball type OT where maybe 10:00 is put on the clock and the score at the end of that time is it. That way the coin toss winner will be less likely to try only get in Field Goal Range if there's a chance that won't be enough points to win.

[Sloats]

I like it the way it is.

[JimmyBlueEyes]

Setting up rivalries is good....

[Ronin]

Originally posted by Suzie

WHat I would like to see is a revision of the OT rules so that each team is guaranteed a post-regulation possession. 28% of the time the team that won the coin toss gets it without the opposing offense allowed back on the field.

college football OT does that, right?

[Suzie]

College does it a little different

[Drunken GW]

it's basically the way it was done before the divisions were realigned

[Flock of Moosen]

Originally posted by Drunken GW
it's basically the way it was done before the divisions were realigned

What is? The way they are doing it now, or the way I explained. If you are saying now is the same as it's always been, I have to disagree. I do not recall ever seeing one division play every team in two other divisions before.