What if the NFL had a play-in tournament?
More postseason weirdness? Yes, please.
The NBA’s fairly new play-in tournament — it debuted during the Disney Bubble last year — wraps up tonight with the Warriors and Grizzlies battling for the last playoff seed in the Western Conference.
As either a refresher or primer, this format pits the final four seeds in each conference against each other with two playoff bids on the line:
Game 1: No. 9 vs. No. 10, loser is eliminated
Game 2: No. 7 vs. No. 8, winner is the No. 7 seed
Game 3: Winner of Game 1 vs. Loser of Game 2, winner is the No. 8 seed and loser is eliminated
The play-in games have been a bit of a mixed bag. The Eastern Conference action has been a total snoozer, but the Western Conference has picked up the slack. Even if the man himself disagrees, the entire tournament has been worth it to watch a one-eyed LeBron hit the game-deciding three in a Warriors-Lakers matchup that managed to exceed its hype.
That moment alone was compelling enough that we began imagining what an analogous playoff would look like in the NFL.
We’ll say, as part of this hypothetical, the NFL decided last season to increase the number of playoff teams per conference to eight instead of seven. Both the NFC and AFC would host a four-team play-in tournament, while the top two seeds would have a bye until the Divisional Round.
Here’s how that would’ve looked this past postseason in the NFL, with eight teams instead of the NBA’s 10:
AFC
Game 1: No. 7 Colts vs. No. 8 Dolphins, loser is eliminated
Game 2: No. 5 Ravens vs. No. 6 Browns, winner is the No. 5 seed
Game 3: Winner of Game 1 vs. Loser of Game 2, winner is the No. 6 seed and loser is eliminated
The winner of Game 2 would have advanced to face the No. 4 Titans. The winner of Game 3 would have next played the No. 3 Steelers. The Chiefs and Bills would have rested another week.
NFC
Game 1: No. 7 Bears vs. No. 8 Cardinals, loser is eliminated
Game 2: No. 5 Buccaneers vs. No. 6 Rams, winner is the No. 5 seed
Game 3: Winner of Game 1 vs. Loser of Game 2, winner is the No. 6 seed and loser is eliminated
The winner of Game 2 would have then met No. 4 Washington. The winner of Game 3 would have gone on the road against the No. 3 Seahawks. The Packers and Saints would have had another bye.
Now, let’s discuss!
Which of those play-in matchups would have the most Warriors-Lakers potential?
Sarah Hardy: In some ways, the second Ravens-Browns game of the 2020 season was a precursor to the Warriors-Lakers showdown: two divisional rivals with a lot of history going down to the wire in primetime, and the biggest star on either sideline coming back from a memeworthy moment to save the day.
I don’t know how Ravens-Browns Part 3 could possibly follow that epic Monday Night Football clash from just a few weeks earlier, unless Lamar Jackson managed to (maybe, allegedly) poop his pants again.
I think it’d easily be the best game of the weekend, though, especially with so much on the line for both teams. The Browns hadn’t won a playoff game since before Art Modell up and moved the franchise to Baltimore. The Ravens had been one-and-done in the postseason in their first two years with Jackson at quarterback.
At least the loser would still have another shot at advancing, against the winner of what would’ve probably been a total drag of a Colts-Dolphins matchup.
Christian D’Andrea: Well, it’s not anything involving the Colts, who lost by at least nine points to the Browns and Ravens in the regular season but still would have likely baffled Tua Tagovailoa in a matchup with the Dolphins. Bucs-Rams with an injured Jared Goff would have been a snoozer instead of a replay of 2019 or 2020’s regular season Tampa-LA firefights.
So let’s go with Cardinals-Bears, which pits Kliff Kingbury’s aerial attack against a formidable Chicago defense. Kyler Murray and Mitch Trubisky could have traded confusing scrambling decisions (15 fumbles between them last year). Allen Robinson and DeAndre Hopkins could have traded amazing, how’d-he-do-that catches as it became abundantly clear their passing offenses had little to offer beyond them. Arizona could have reclaimed the midseason magic that made wins over the Seahawks and Bills instant classics.
On the flip side, this play-in game could have theoretically stripped Trubisky of the most meaningful award of his football career:
I’m not sure how I feel about a world in which Mitch doesn’t wear a crown of slime.
Ryan Van Bibber: It’s kind of a rule that on any given weekend of the NFL playoff there’s really only one game that’s actually good, assuming you don’t like the defensive slug fests we get mixed in there (which I don’t). There was a time when a Ravens game would have meant at least a couple of those in their postseason run, but they’re so much fun to watch with Jackson now. Ditto the Browns. Throw into the mix an actually heated rivalry, and you’ve got the makings of a classic.
Which player would have a LeBron-esque moment in the play-in round?
SH: Lamar Jackson is the obvious answer, considering his movie script-like heroism the last time he played the Browns.
If not Jackson — who, siiiiigh, has never been at his best during the playoffs — I’ll say Kyler Murray, escaping a sack and then scooting his way to a last-minute touchdown.
CD: DeAndre Hopkins. Have you forgotten about this?
I imagine Bill O’Brien hasn’t.
RVB: Magic catches (or the occasional non-catch) are usually the NFL equivalent of those kind of moments in the NBA. I still get heart flutters from the Minneapolis Miracle. But when you throw in the kind of QB heroics that guys like Jackson or Murray, it’s just so much more exciting than a methodical Brady-esque game-winning drive. I like it when it’s some fringe tight end or a depth chart receiver who makes the moment, like David Tyree’s Helmet Catch. It would have been cool to see Larry Fitzgerald do something like that last year while Hopkins is tied up in double coverage. And though he’s not at all a depth chart guy, Ravens tight end Mark Andrews could have easily made a heroic touchdown grab to save a game.
Which teams do you think would’ve made it out of the play-in weekend?
SH: I think the Rams and Buccaneers would move on in the NFC, but I like the Rams in their No. 5 vs. No. 6 matchup. Don’t forget 1) how good that Rams defense was under Brandon Staley, 2) that the Bucs weren’t completely jelling yet, and 3) the Rams had already beaten them once that season.
I don’t think the Bucs would’ve had much trouble against the Bears (because Trubisky) or the Cardinals (Tom Brady and Co. could’ve carved that defense up in a Bruce Arians revenge game).
The AFC is trickier for me. While my heart says the Ravens and Browns would both make it through and overcome their playoff narratives, I worry the loser of their game could struggle, especially psychologically, against the Colts (who I’m assuming would beat the Dolphins) the following week. The Colts were already a tough out against the Bills in the real playoffs, and I could easily envision them prevailing. But since this is a fun exercise, I’ll still say Ravens and Browns because that’s what I would want to happen.
CD: The Ravens and Browns from the AFC — sorry Philip Rivers — and the Buccaneers and Cardinals from the NFC. Tampa gets the nod for obvious reasons, but few teams can match the potential for chaos Arizona brings to the table. While I know the Rams pantsed an overblown Seahawks team last season, I feel like they would have been unable to topple the Cards three times in the span of 34 days as the 2020 season went into overdrive.
RVB: I’m in complete agreement with Sarah on the NFC side. Barring some fluky play or the refs messing it up, the Rams and Buccaneers were still a step or two ahead of those others. The Bucs would’ve beaten the Rams; I’ve seen too many Rams’ collapses to believe otherwise.
The AFC is tough. I’d take the Colts over the Dolphins in Game 1. It’s probably a coin toss, but I think the Browns would’ve won Game 2. They looked so good, and I’m still amazed they hung with the Chiefs as well as they did in the actual playoffs last year. So from there, you’d have the Colts vs. Ravens, and that’s an easy pick, the Ravens.
How would the first round of the playoffs have differed from what really happened?
SH: I don’t know if much would’ve meaningfully changed in the AFC — I don’t think the Steelers or Titans had enough juice to win a postseason game this year, so the Divisional Round and AFC Championship Game might’ve looked the same. The NFC is a different story.
In my scenario, the Rams would’ve been the No. 5 seed, which means they would’ve played Washington and then (presuming a win) the Saints, who would’ve been out to avenge the no-call PI postseason game from two years before.
The Bucs would’ve faced the Seahawks and then (again presumably) the Packers, who would’ve been nice and rested. Sure, Tampa won that matchup in real life when it was the NFC Championship Game, but with all the extra wear-and-tear from playing their fourth postseason game in as many weeks, I don’t think the outcome goes in the Bucs’ favor this time.
So in my mind, the NFC would come down to the Saints and Packers. Meaning, it would somehow end in heartbreak for the Saints, and then who knows what Aaron Rodgers’ relationship with the Packers would look like now if they had gone to another Super Bowl together.
CD: We would have seen Kyler Murray’s stock value spike and crash with all the volatility of an Elon Musk-beloved cryptocurrency. The former No. 1 pick would have to face the Bears and Rams star-studded defenses in back-to-back weeks in my scenario. While that’d be a recipe for stunning plays like the aforementioned Hail Mary, it would also create several opportunities for his world to collapse around him faster than the Sega Saturn’s hype train. As exciting as Murray is, he’s also the same guy who’s either fumbled or thrown an interception 39 times in 32 NFL games. That’s not a problem that would get any better in a playoff scenario.
RVB: The NFC wouldn’t look much different in my scenario. The Bucs would have played Washington, an easy win, and the Rams and Seahawks would’ve squared off, a game the Rams won in reality. And with the Ravens and Browns moving forward in my AFC scenario, that wouldn’t been much different either, unless the sure-fire slugfest between those two teams resulted in injuries, which is very realistic.
Overall, what do you think is the biggest change between the hypothetical version of the playoffs and the real version?
SH: The way I see it, the biggest change — besides the extra byes and the postseason debuts of Kyler Murray and Tua Tagovailoa — is we’d have a different Super Bowl winner. In the real version of January 2021, the Buccaneers struggled a bit with 7-9 Washington before hitting their stride the next week against the Saints. In this alternate January 2021, they would have to start off right away with a rematch against the Rams, a team that had already beaten them in late November. If the Bucs fell to the Rams again, they’d have to play an additional game just to have a chance at survival.
In that kind of format, it seems unlikely the Bucs are Super Bowl 55 champs. It’d be an uphill climb for any of the teams in the play-in portion.
CD: The NFL makes more money with extra playoff games, all while alienating the fans of other teams who suddenly have to wait two to three weeks to see their squad in the postseason. The players, confronted with an extra bye week or two, would probably love it as long as they aren’t stuck in the play-in and suddenly staring down 19 meaningful games before even getting to the Wild Card Round.
RVB: Sure, our scenarios aren’t all that different from reality in terms of who went onto the Super Bowl, but what I like about the tournament format is that it would introduce more uncertainty into the playoffs, more weird games, Cinderella stories, etc.
Who wins the Super Bowl in this alternate timeline?
SH: Last year, the Chiefs were my preseason Super Bowl pick, and I stubbornly stuck with that prediction until about the second quarter of Super Bowl 55. I wasn’t terribly surprised that they didn’t win another title — it’s now so rare for the NFL to produce back-to-back champs — but I choose to believe that I was right in some alternate universe.
CD: Yeah right, like I’m gonna count out Touchdown Tom.
RVB: Yeah, I’m still probably going with the Bucs here too.
Do you think the NFL would ever adopt a playoff format like this? Should it?
SH: If it involves the NFL making money, then we can never rule it out. I just don’t see how the logistics would work, particularly now with a 17-game regular season. Two extra weeks of the postseason, before we even got to the “real” playoffs, is a lot to ask of the players — especially the ones who would be racking up all this mileage on their bodies during the play-in tournament.
CD: I love the idea, but it’s unreasonable in an NBA-style format since it holds up the rest of the postseason. Taking an extra two weeks to pare the playoffs down to six teams from each conference would be a big ask, even if it jibes with Roger Goodell’s mission to make football season a nine-month affair. You’d also risk devaluing the importance of the regular season, which I’m sure would be debated breathlessly on no fewer than 98 percent of talk radio shows out there.
RVB: The 17-game season killed any hope of that.