Time to mix the AFC and NFC

Current system works very well IMO - no need to change anything

Last 2 Superbowls were cracking contests as well - both won inside last 30 secs.

Should also point out that we are in no way guaranteed to ever have a NE vs IND Superbowl - currently at least we are guaranteed to see them play each other at worst every 3rd season and usually every year.

They'd meet twice per year if u put them in the same conference

I mean the same division

best system in sport imo.

great rivalries and everybody starts the season in the same position. well kinda.

ind and ne are the 2 good sides atm, so what if you rejig everything just so they play each other but in 5 years time it's 2 other teams, and your rejigging fcks them up ever meeting each other? rejig again? lol

I'd like to see a way to make the lesser matches more important, something akin to relegation/promotion, however because of the draft system, that's a pretty crap idea and I don't have a good suggestion.

It is pretty tedious to see something like STL vs DET where the losers are rewarded with a higher draft pick though

not really a fault of the system though is it. more a fault of those teams being so **e every year.

they could bring in say 6 expansion teams and have those play in an nfl-2 with the top 2 taking their place in the nfl and the 2 worst nfl teams going in to the nfl 2. then have that same system every year. that would create quite a bit of interest. the problem may be that teams not in the main nfl could struggle badly financially.

Lori 22 Dec 19:28


I'd like to see a way to make the lesser matches more important, something akin to relegation/promotion, however because of the draft system, that's a pretty crap idea and I don't have a good suggestion.

It is pretty tedious to see something like STL vs DET where the losers are rewarded with a higher draft pick though

I'd do it like this - it's a touch complicated, but I think it'd work.

Draft positions 9-32 are determined as they are now.

The teams in positions 1-8 are determined as they are now (I believe wins, then strength of schedule). You ignore how they got into the worst 8.

Take these teams' final 4 games. Any who got 4 wins gets first overall draft pick. If there is a tie, then it is settled by whoever has the worst overall record. Then comes whoever got 3 wins, then 2 wins, then 1 then none.

The teams that finished in the bottom 8 last year were, in order (worst to best, total wins in brackets):

1 Detroit (0)
2 St. Louis (2)
3 Kansas City (2)
4 Seattle (4)
5 Cleveland (4)
6 Cincinnati (4)
7 Oakland (5)
8 Jacksonville (5)

So that's the order they got their original draft picks.

Under my system, that'd change to (wins in last 4 games/total wins):

1 Cincinnati (3/4)
2 Seattle (2/4)
3 Oakland (2/5)
4 Jacksonville (1/5)
5 Detroit (0/0)
6 St.Louis (0/2)
7 Kansas City (0/2)
8 Cleveland (0/4)

To those who say that that unfairly penalises the truly bad as opposed to those who just aren't trying, I would argue that at least one of Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City and St.Louis might have managed to pull at least one win out of the bag if they'd had more of an incentive to do so.

For what it's worth, I think that any teams should be allowed to swap divisions or conferences with any other if they wish to do so, with or without the consent of their divisional rivals. The caveat I would put on that is that they cannot move again for a 10 year period unless the NFL grant them an extraordinary waiver if they move cities.

Forgot to say that there needs to be a reasonable notice period. To switch for the start of the 2012 season, notice would have to be given by 31st Dec 2010.

Take these teams' final 4 games. Any who got 4 wins gets first overall draft pick. If there is a tie, then it is settled by whoever has the worst overall record. Then comes whoever got 3 wins, then 2 wins, then 1 then none.

That's roughly how my dynasty league works and I agree it's an improvement.