The NFL began using record-based home-field advantage in the playoffs in 1975, but it took until 1990 for every division winner to receive a guaranteed postseason home game. The Lions have challenged a long-held norm by proposing a change to remove the guarantee of a division champion being assured at least one January home tilt.
No change in the NFL’s playoff structure occurred at the league meetings this week, but the Detroit proposal was not voted down. No vote took place, as the league tabled the measure, NFL.com’s Tom Pelissero tweets. However, some teams supported it. More notably, Roger Goodell offered some praise to what would be a significant change — one that had already come up before the Lions made an official proposal.
“I thought it is a very healthy proposal and a very healthy point that we need to evaluate and continue to look at,” Goodell said, via CBS Sports’ Jonathan Jones. “It went through many different forms. There was some great data to show that we should really look at some form or version of this. But there was also a really strong point of view that winning the division was the No. 1 thing. When you come into training camp, that’s the goal: win that division first. And should that reward for winning that division be you’re in the playoffs and a home game?”
While competition committee member Mike Tomlin pushed back against stripping division champs of first-round home games, Jones notes the Cowboys were one of the teams that supported a format in which a team’s record — regardless of its divisional finish — dictated the postseason sites. This would have benefited the Vikings last year, as the Lions’ Week 18 win over their division rival pushed 14-3 Minnesota to the No. 5 seed — ahead of an eventual loss to the 10-7 Rams, who rested starters after being assured of a home game by virtue of an NFC West title.
The NFL’s first five post-merger playoff brackets came without records determining home fields, as the sites rotated annually. The 14-0 Dolphins famously had to play the 1972 AFC championship game at Three Rivers Stadium. When the league shifted to record-based home-field determination in 1975, the division winner with the third-best record still had to begin on the road due to only four teams per conference making the playoffs. From 1978-89, each conference’s third-best division champ also began on the road against the No. 2 seed — under a setup featuring one wild-card game and three teams holding first-round byes per conference. The NFL’s move to six-team playoff brackets in 1990 began guaranteeing home games to division champs.
This has produced some interesting matchups, with .500-or-worse teams using the home game to upend better opposition. The 2008 Chargers went from 5-8 to 8-8 and upset the 12-4 Colts in overtime, while Marshawn Lynch‘s “Beastquake” journey powered the 7-9 Seahawks to a win over the defending Super Bowl champion Saints (11-5) in 2010. A Tim Tebow-to-Demaryius Thomas game-winner propelled the 8-8 Broncos to a 2011 wild-card win over the 12-4 Steelers, while a 7-8-1 Panthers team defeated an 11-5 Cardinals squad — one using a third-string QB — in 2014. Washington (2020) and Tampa Bay (2022) also hosted games as sub-.500 teams. Those instances appear to have come up at the meetings.
“There was some discussion potentially about if you’re .500 or less and you won that division, should you also get the home game? I think there was some interest in that also,” Goodell said. “But I think the reality is it was very healthy and I think there will be more discussion of it.”
As a move to 18 games appears inevitable in the not-too-distant future, the prospect of clubs clinching divisions earlier looms. A balance between guaranteeing a division winner a playoff spot but not a home game could help force teams — particularly those with stronger home-field advantages — to keep pushing for higher seeds. Resting starters in Week 18 has become fairly common since the schedule expanded, and this figures to come up — especially with an 18th game all but certain to be added before the 2020s wrap — when owners revisit this discussion.
While the NFL yanking a home game away from division champs would devalue the accomplishment to a degree, it would seem unlikely the divisions would devolve into the fairly meaningless coalitions the NBA uses. Goodell regularly drives changes, and his not dismissing Detroit’s proposal opens the door to this becoming a serious talking point.
The revision expands the number of teams in the playoffs to 32.
If you are going this route then just do away with the divisions. What purpose do they serve if there is no incentive to win it?
You would still make the playoffs for winning the division, you just wouldn’t be guaranteed a home game.
Keep it as is. If you want a home playoff game beat the other 3 teams in your division to do as such, it is really simple.
Each division plays similar teams each year as far as schedules go, the other divisions have different teams they play and could have an easier or harder schedule and it is not an apples to apples comparison between two conference teams in different divisions. Weather also impacts this as well.
Keep it as is, it isn’t broken.
Be simple unless the team in your division wins 15 games and you’re a second place team winning 14.
It’s still simple – – I didn’t win the division, so no home game.
It is simple you’re right When nine games When your division And get a home game and make a team that 14 games travel duh
Win your division – teams who can’t win their division want this
The Lions won their division and submitted this proposal
Winning the division will still have value bc it guarantees a playoff spot. The few teams that have won their division with .500 and sub .500 records would not have made the playoffs if it wasn’t for being division Champs.
If they want to eliminate bad division winners and home field issues then they should consolidate the divisions from 4 to 2 in each conference. The challenge would be the scheduling.
I could live with taking away the home-game from a .500-or-below team, but this debate seems to be centered on our constant need to complain about everything.
This is pointless, the league has so much parity and almost 2-4 new teams make the playoffs every year. If you vote yes to this don’t complain when you now lose your chance to host the game.
But aren’t certain divisions weaker than others?
Yes but there was a 15 year period where every NFC south team went to the Super Bowl. That is better than the NFC East, North, AFC East. The league can be quite short sighted, if the Minn vs Det game last year was this new format why care? Both teams would have gotten to host a game. If they cared about home fans stop giving regular season games to foreign countries.
Just do away with Divisions all together and have just the 2 Conferences. You’d play each team in your Conference once and 3 random non-conference teams. Top 7 from each Conference make the playoffs with top 2-4 seeds from each Conference getting 1st week home playoff game. Top seed in the Conference still gets a bye.
No more whining about weaker Divisions it’ll all be based on the Conference!
Goodell will probably have the great idea to have the Super Bowl in London or Mexico City. Put all the teams in a hat and pull out names, or throw darts at a dart board, or how about some other stupid crap only a non playing executive doodus can think up? What’s wrong with status quo? Stop monkeying around with things that aren’t broken.
The NFL ain’t gonna hold the Super Bowl outside Murica as long as a red-capped man with orange hair is in the White House.
This should have been a thing years ago. Just my opinion, but if you’re a division winner with a record far worse than your upcoming playoff opponent, you should be playing in their building.
I doubt there is a practical application but the most equitable format would be a home and home playoff setup where the aggregate score of the two games determines who advances. At one time this setup was used in the CFL.
Two-legged ties with one side advancing on aggregate is a soccer thing.
My soccer knowledge is very limited but I thought they just went to a shootout format during tournaments to determine who advances.
Sounds like more losers whining to me. Just like blatantly lying to try to bam the tuah push
This discussion only happens after something like the Vikings (last year) Seahawks (7-9) etc. it’s been only a handful of times. I could see changes if it was a yearly thing. It’s not.
If you play in division in which the division winner only has 2 win 10 games to win the division comfortably you should not be seeded higher than a 14 win team. There is a case to be made that the Rams and Buccaneers should have been seeded behind the top 3 teams in the NFC north.
The automatic home game is the reason the NFC and AFC Souths have been (mostly) wastelands for a decade now.
And once upon a time the NFC East was a s#!tshow with every team finishing under .500.
Week 18 is the greatest week of the year — everything in the division, usually a division title and/or wild cards to play for.
Lions want home game in case they don’t win division. With Goff at QB, no Super Bowl. Losing to Washington at home in playoffs left the fans crying until tracing camp opens. Just gut wrenching.
Here is an arguably bad idea:
Instead of an 18 game regular season, why not really throw open the playoffs.
Top 2 from each conference get a bye and a home game. The next 12 teams get in, meaning only the worst two teams from each conference fail to make the playoffs.
That would be 6 games from each conference in round 1 or let’s still call it Wild Card Round. 6 games delivers 6 winners, so now you’ve got 8 alive in each conference.
Call it round of 8, Conference Quarter final or use AI to make something up. After those 4 games in each conference, there would be 4 remaining from each conference.
The Conference Semi-Final Round or the how much longer is this going to take round, will deliver the two Conference championship teams for each Conference.
I think you can figure out the balance.
Teams either need to really tank to miss the playoffs or you’ll incentivize some to keep going. This could play heavily on late season coach firings if nearly everyone is in the playoffs.
As I said, a bad idea.