Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Flaxwless
So seems like there is support for expanding playoffs, but there may not be support for bottom 3 lottery.
So votes can alter to...
A) Toilet Bowl
B) Expand Playoffs to 6 teams
C) Rules Committee
D) Other
The main thing is that Playoff expansion NEEDS to go head 2 head with Toilet Bowl b/c they are both proposed to fix tanking. After that then the Playoff Expansion all the other details (home field, bottom 3 lottery, double headers, etc.) will go through further vote.
The big thing is that Playoff Expansion and Toilet Bowl go against each other in the same vote, as playoff expansion will increase competitiveness (as Popes and Ragers see) w/o sacrificng the worst teams get the best picks.
|
I disagree with your premise. In my mind, the toilet bowl and lottery both deal with tanking (i.e. intentionally losing games at the end of the season). The expanded playoffs deals with inattention/inactivity of middle tier teams throughout the season - no one is accused them of tanking. And yes, it might make the bottom-tier teams try harder early in the season, but that is long before tanking ever becomes an issue. I'd like to see the voting as:
Re teams tanking:
1. no change
2. lottery
3. toilet bowl
Re increased competitiveness generally:
1. no change to playoffs
2. expand playoffs to 6
I'd argue the proposal you made above effectively defeats the toilet bowl by matching it up against the seeming support for playoff expansion, when the two are very different and address different issues. Why can't I vote for the two ideas I like (especially when they deal with separate problems, IMO)?