|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Rethinking the Playoff Selection and seeding process in pro sportsKeith R. Thompson, January 2008
During the NFL’s 2007
regular season the Cleveland Browns shocked everyone--except maybe
themselves--by winning 10 games, the highest single-season victory total for
the ‘new’ Cleveland Browns franchise that was established under Al Lerner in
1999, and the most for a Browns team since 1994. However, for all that
accomplishment the Browns narrowly missed making the playoffs from the AFC.
Nevertheless, another team that had fewer wins than them – the Washington
Redskins – managed to make the playoffs despite winning only 9 games. Why?
Because the Redskins competed in the less-competitive NFC (arguably the
weaker conference in the NFL these days). To further ‘rub salt in the
Browns’ wounds’ the Playoff ‘dis’ represented the third time since the
eight-Division format was established in 2002 that a ten-win team failed to
make the playoffs, but the first time since 1991 that a ten-win team failed
to make the playoffs from one conference while a team with fewer wins from
the other conference did. That year (in 1991) three teams ended the season
with 10 wins and 6 losses in the NFC and were battling for the final playoff
spot (the Eagles, Falcons & 49ers), while the 8-8 Jets made it from the AFC.
Even when the Browns play well they can’t seem to get any love from the
League. The NFL isn’t the
only sport where these anomalies tend to occur. During the NBA over the past
seven seasons we have seen two occasions where a team with a winning or .500
record from one conference failed to make the playoffs while sub.500 teams
from the other conference have been promoted to postseason play. This
occurred in 2004 and 2006. In 2004 the NY Knicks went 39-43 and the Boston
Celtics went 36-46 in the East but both still made the playoffs, while in
the West the Utah Jazz went 42-40 and the Portland Trailblazers went 41-41
but both still missed the playoffs. This anomaly has also
occurred in Major League Baseball and the NHL. Since 2003 in the MLB we’ve
seen 3 occasions where Wild-Card teams with a better record from the
American League lose out in their bid to make the playoffs to fewer win
non-Division-winning teams from the National League. This occurred in 2003
(Seattle Mariners with 93 wins missed the postseason but had a better record
than the NL Wild-Card winners the Florida Marlins with 91 wins); 2005
(Cleveland Indians with 93 wins missed the postseason but had a better
record than the NL Wild-Card winners the Houston Astros with 89 wins) & 2006
(the Chicago White Sox with 90 wins and the LA Angels with 89 wins had
better records than the NL Wild-Card champions LA Dodgers with 88 wins). Finally, in the NHL
we’ve seen three occasions since 2001 where a team with fewer points in one
conference make the playoffs over a team with more points in the other
conference (2001, 2002 and 2007). But is this right? And why is it allowed
to continue? The four major sports
leagues (MLB, NBA, NFL & NHL) all promote teams to the playoffs based on
their performance within their respective leagues or conferences. Therefore
the top-four-wins teams in each league within the MLB move on to the
playoffs, irrespective of whether one of those teams did poorer than another
team from the other league that failed to make the playoffs. The same holds
for the top-six-wins teams in each conference of the NFL, and the top-eight
teams in each conference in the NBA & NHL. This strategy made sense in the
past when there was no interleague play. In that scenario the top teams in
each league were independent of each other since there were no common
opponents to judge them against. However, with the advent of interleague
play in the MLB, and inter-conference competition within the NBA, NFL & NHL
the reason for now arbitrarily selecting playoff spots based on those
conference standings now makes no sense. Consider these facts:
*AL teams play 18 interleague games
since they have only 14 teams within the league, while the NL plays about 15
interleague games since they have 16 teams. From the table above
we see that NBA teams play 30 (37%) of their games against non-conference
opponents, while NFL teams play 25% of their games against non-conference
opponents. Given these very high ratios why then do the respective leagues
limit the playoff selection only to conference teams. The non-conference
games matter in the standings therefore, shouldn’t they also matter when
playoff selections are being made. In the MLB and NHL
given that only between 9 and 12% of games are against non-conference/league
opponents it is understandable that those leagues continue to determine
playoff selection based on conference/league standings. However, the NBA and
NFL need to reconsider their current policies. In fact, both the NBA
and NFL could adopt a playoff strategy which provides automatic promotion
only to the Division winners, then assign the remaining ten and four playoff
spots within each league respectively to the teams with the best winning
records irrespective of conference. Playoff seeding should also be based on
overall league standings, instead of only conference standings. This playoff strategy
could also potentially allow the NFL to add two additional teams to the
playoff picture (making it 14) and thereby only limit the first-round bye to
the top teams within each conference, instead of the current policy of four
teams receiving byes. A variant of this
playoff strategy is currently being practiced by the youngest of the pro
leagues in North America, Major League Soccer. The MLS provides an automatic
promotion to the playoffs only to the top two teams within each conference.
After that playoff selection is open to the best teams remaining in the
league, irrespective of conference.
The 2007 Cleveland Browns were an inspiration to many for the manner in which they competed during the regular season. Maybe now they can also provide another inspiration, that of radically overhauling the current playoff selection process which tends to penalize the conference with the better teams.
© 2008 PER Sports, Inc. Have a comment on this article. Send an email to us via info@persports.com |
Articles by Keith Thompson A Critique of the Amateur Player Draft in Professional Sports Critiquing the Playoff Selection and seeding process in pro sports Time for a new ‘Super’ League in European Soccer Europe's best football teams Which Soccer League is tops in the World A Big East - Big Ten College Football Realignment Proposal Time to Fix College Football's Flawed Championship Structure (Again) The 2004 Baseball MVP Race Baseball's Greatest Hitters of the 1990s The 1998 Baseball MVP Race Democracy for the Famous: Critiquing Baseball's '98 All-Star selection process Will Wilt Chamberlain Be Denied Number 3, Again? Articles by Jesse Goldberg-Strassler Baseball Tested Again Baseball's Five Tools of the Trade ---------------------------------------- Advertisement |
Contact Us |
Advertise With Us | Business Services | Draft Analysis | Player Evaluation
| Financial Advisory | Terms Of Use |
Privacy Policy | |