Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Aeir
I kind of wish it just took the top 4 regardless of division. I've seen some 6 win teams make the playoffs while 10 win teams don't - only because of the division they are in...which is how the NFL is, I get that, but this isn't exactly the NFL and I'd rather the best 4 make it.

http://www.cfl.ca/standings/2014/reg

There are five teams in the Western division of the CFL that are better than all four of the Eastern teams. The top two teams in the East still make playoffs. The third best team in the West will play in the first round against the second best team in the West to see who plays the #1 team in the West final. The fourth best team in the West will crossover and play the second best team in the East to see who plays the #1 team in the East final. There is a chance that the championship game will have two teams from the West.

Originally posted by Aeir
I kind of wish it just took the top 4 regardless of division. I've seen some 6 win teams make the playoffs while 10 win teams don't - only because of the division they are in...which is how the NFL is, I get that, but this isn't exactly the NFL and I'd rather the best 4 make it.
Than you could get rid of the divisions in general. Do it soccer style. Put 16 teams in one league, every team plays every other team for 15 season games. The team with the best record wins the league. Only problem, for some teams the season is over after 4 or 5 games...

If they want to keep it at 14 game seasons they could do something like this:

15 teams in a league, no divisions, everyone plays each other once. Either keep it at 4 teams make the playoffs (1 vs 4, 2 vs 3) or expand to 6 teams (1 and 2 get a bye week, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5, and then the highest seed plays the lowest seed in the second round). This would solve the two main problems with the current leagues in that everyone would now play the same schedule, no more advantages for teams in divisions with CPU/bad teams. Also, the best teams would always make the playoffs and the seeding would always make sense.

Ultimately this whole love for divisions thing is a waste of time, you can't keep any divisional rivalries going because the leagues are constantly changing, the Rangers have been in four different leagues in the last four seasons, I could care less who is (or was) in our division, I'd rather see league play actually make some kind of sense.

Originally posted by Danthesportsman
If they want to keep it at 14 game seasons they could do something like this:

15 teams in a league, no divisions, everyone plays each other once. Either keep it at 4 teams make the playoffs (1 vs 4, 2 vs 3) or expand to 6 teams (1 and 2 get a bye week, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5, and then the highest seed plays the lowest seed in the second round). This would solve the two main problems with the current leagues in that everyone would now play the same schedule, no more advantages for teams in divisions with CPU/bad teams. Also, the best teams would always make the playoffs and the seeding would always make sense.

15 teams lead to one bye week for every team, which is suboptimal IMO.

Benefits of the current team, relatively weak teams have a chance to make the playoffs, if they are lucky and in a bad division. The downside is, that you have situations where really good teams stay out of the playoffs because a division is stacked with good teams.

One part of that could help: title. Another part would be to shuffle teams after the regular season. So the team with the best regular season record goes to Alpha, the second best to Beta, the third best to Gamma, the fourth best to Gamma, the fifth best to Beta and so on... Another order would be debatable as well. But there need to be things done to make sure the best teams go to the playoffs. I dont have a problem, if the 2010 Seattle Seahawks make it to the playoffs here and there but it shouldnt happen all the time.

Originally posted by Evil Sports Agent
15 teams lead to one bye week for every team, which is suboptimal IMO.


Yeah, could move to 16 teams/15 game seasons, personally, as someone who does quite a bit of game planning I'd be perfectly fine with getting a bye week (or more precisely, one bye "day" per season).

Could probably do it without greatly lengthening the season too. If you add a 3 day week to the regular season to account for the bye week and move the "championship" week ladder match to that extra regular season week, then simply end the season right after championship day and go into the offseason. It'd only lengthen the season by a single day.