Fixing Playoffs in Professional Sports

The WNBA is mixing things up for its 20th season.

The league has eliminated the first round of the playoffs and is breaking up the traditional quarterfinal into two sets of play-in games. Furthermore, while it’s keeping its two-conference format for scheduling purposes, it’s eliminating the format for playoff purposes. In essence, the top two teams by record will be given byes to the semifinals — and will avoid the play-in chaos.

The three and four seeds will be given byes to the second round while No. 5 faces No. 8 and No. 6 faces No. 7 in a one-and-done format, with the highest seed facing the No. 4 and lowest facing No. 3. The teams will reseed for the semifinals as well.

The semifinals and WNBA Finals will be best-of-five series. Previously the conference finals were best-of-three. The WNBA is also balancing out its regular season schedule. The conferences will consist of six teams in each league. Teams will face everyone in their conference four times and the teams in the opposite conference three times.

The only thing I’d do differently is instead of awarding byes to the two best teams by record, I’d make the regular season conference championships mean something and award the byes to them. The true No. 2 by record would still be at worst No. 3 — and thus not have to face No. 1 until the final — but this way the conferences are not just scheduling brackets. They have some weight.

Credit to the league for doing something different — sacrificing early-round games (AKA: some solid gate revenue for playoff teams) — and ensuring that the two best teams remain on opposite sides of the bracket. It got me thinking what other sports could do to make their postseasons better.

NBA/NHL: Less is More

The NBA and NHL suffer from overindulgence, way too many teams qualify for the postseason that it makes their respective regular seasons meaningless. Both leagues take 16 out of 30 teams (eight per conference) — more than half the league. This virtually ensures that at least one team with a losing record qualifies for the postseason.

Yes, I know that sometimes sub-.500 NFL teams qualify for the postseason, but very rarely. And even more rare in baseball. The NBA and NHL routinely send bad teams to the postseason.

The argument in hockey is “well anyone really can win it.” Yeah, but isn’t the point of the regular season to eliminate the bad teams that aren’t worthy of winning it? It’s a joke to see an eight-seed make a run to the semifinals or final, that team in either league shouldn’t even be in the dance.

And best-of-seven series for all four rounds? Gag me. These tournaments stretch on from mid-April to mid-June — about eight weeks each. That’s way too long.

These leagues could take a cue from the WNBA and give their best teams byes to the second or third rounds. Ideally, both leagues cut down to six teams per conference with the top two (in the case of the NHL, the two division winners) receiving byes to round two. No. 3 faces No. 6 and No. 4 vs. No. 5 in a best-of-three series, giving the top two teams no more than a week off.

From there, the second round is best-of-five and the final two rounds are traditional best-of-seven series. I recommend reseeding the bracket to ensure the No. 1 seed receives the easiest path to the final.

If the leagues don’t want to cut teams from the postseason, than model the format exactly after the WNBA. Top two get byes to the second round, No. 3 and No. 4 get byes to the first round while No. 5 faces No. 8 and No. 6 faces No. 7 in a one-off play-in game. The winners advance to the best-of-three second round, and the opening two rounds last no more than a week to ensure the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds aren’t sitting around too long.

Either of these moves cut both postseasons down to a manageable five weeks — much better than the two-month marathons that they are right now — and inject some excitement into the opening two rounds. For some perspective, the NFL’s postseason is five weeks (one off week between the Super Bowl) and MLB’s is about four. Both of those tournaments are just the right length.

NFL: Fix the Process

If the NFL expands it’s playoffs, it would be one of the dumbest decisions ever. The 12-team (six per conference), four bye (two per conference), tournament is perfect just the way it is. Adding even one more team per conference would water it down, though the idea of only the regular season champion getting a bye is enticing.

One of the reasons for the NFL expanding — aside from the obvious money grab — is that routinely a quality team is left out of the field in favor for a mediocre division champion. Most notably in 2010 where Seattle won the NFC West at 7-9 and both Tampa Bay and the New York Giants were outside looking in at 10-6. A sub-.500 Carolina Panthers squad reached the postseason at 7-8-1 because it won the NFC South while Philadelphia didn’t get in at 10-6.

Those were the most extreme examples, but not the only ones. Denver won the AFC West at 8-8 in 2011 while Tennessee was outside looking in at 9-7. In 2013, the Packers won the NFC North at 8-7-1 and the Arizona Cardinals missed the cut despite being 10-6.

Not only that, but those bad teams all got to host playoff games, which is ridiculous. The 7-9 Seahawks beat the 11-5 Saints largely because the game was played in Seattle, one of the toughest places to play. Move that game to the Superdome and I’m sure the result changes. Carolina did win in 2014, but to be fair Arizona was down to its third-string quarterback, so the venue of the game probably wasn’t the cause.

If the NFL does nothing else, it should seed the wild card teams by record and do away with guaranteeing the No. 3 and No. 4 division winners home games. Make a division title a qualifier for a first-round bye, but eliminate it for hosting a home wild card game.

I’d go one step further and re-align the divisions all together to ensure that none of these mediocre teams get into the tournament in the first place. The NFL should change its divisional structure to two — East and West — with eight teams each and do away with the home-and-home divisional series. Every team plays every team in its conference one time, for 15 games, and a 16th game against the other conference.

The two division winners are awarded byes while the four next best records get the wild cards, seeded by record. Every team in the league has one clear head-to-head, streamlining the tiebreaker process.

I know what you’re thinking — this would really cut down on inter-conference play. But honestly, I don’t care about seeing teams from the other conference. It would give more teams that have true conference rivalries, but don’t play all the time because of the fragmented structure, annual games. I’d rather Cleveland play it’s AFC brethren once a year every year than see four teams from the NFC or the Steelers twice.

And don’t tell me no rematches make division rivalries less important. Part of the allure of college football rivalries is the one-shot mentality. Teams get one chance to spoil their rivals, fail and wait till next year (or maybe the postseason).

The change to the divisional structure is admittedly extreme, but it would make the playoffs and the regular season more balanced.

MLB: Just Right

I previously wrote how change to the divisional structure and qualification process could help enhance baseball if it chooses to expand by two teams, but under the current format of two leagues with three divisions the playoffs format works perfectly.  

I like the added emphasis on winning the division and the intensity of a opening round wild card game, despite being opposed to expansion when it was initially proposed. The format has grown on me.

Don’t mess with a good thing.