I've never heard anyone else discuss it besides Greenberg, but reverse the odds for the draft. The first team to miss out on the playoffs has best odds to land top pick. That would give every team incentive to try and make playoffs and eliminate tanking, if it exists.

I think best idea is to take top twelve teams regardless of location and do 1-12, 2-11, 3-10, etc.

You can't just reverse the lottery. Bad teams would have no chance of getting better. Completely punishes teams who are simply bad and not tanking.

friendfromlowry;1703984 wrote:I think best idea is to take top twelve teams regardless of location and do 1-12, 2-11, 3-10, etc.

You can't take 12 teams and have the top four play in the first round. The third round would have 3 teams.

Laley23;1703987 wrote:You can't just reverse the lottery. Bad teams would have no chance of getting better. Completely punishes teams who are simply bad and not tanking.

No chance? Teams like Minnesota and Sacramento have been lost at sea for years despite consistently being in the lottery.

Sonofanump;1703989 wrote:You can't take 12 teams and have the top four play in the first round. The third round would have 3 teams.

Yeah, my bad. I just think they need to reduce it from 16 teams, though.

friendfromlowry;1704026 wrote:No chance? Teams like Minnesota and Sacramento have been lost at sea for years despite consistently being in the lottery.

And imagine how bad they would be without Love all those years or Cousins. Cause those guys wouldn't be on those teams.

friendfromlowry;1704026 wrote:Yeah, my bad. I just think they need to reduce it from 16 teams, though.

Unless you are giving out byes, it is 16 or 8. 8 is too little, IMO. 16 is fine, it just needs to be the best 16 teams. Not 8 and 8.

And owners wouldn't go for the byes as they lose a shit ton of revenue.

If they are going to eliminate playoffs by conference then they need to do reseeding every round imo.

wildcats20;1704036 wrote:Unless you are giving out byes, it is 16 or 8. 8 is too little, IMO. 16 is fine, it just needs to be the best 16 teams. Not 8 and 8.

Laley23;1704048 wrote:And owners wouldn't go for the byes as they lose a shit ton of revenue.

I forgot about the rule of eight. I agree eight is too few and byes gets complicated. Not to mention the teams that get byes could potentially be off for like two weeks while a best-of-7 series plays out.

Cross country flights across time zones in the first two rounds makes no sense to me. I still think you need conferences for that, but allow the top 16 in and set the east and west after that.

Yeah, not buying having a bye. You can be off too long.

Sonofanump;1704128 wrote:Cross country flights across time zones in the first two rounds makes no sense to me. I still think you need conferences for that, but allow the top 16 in and set the east and west after that.

I like this idea a lot

thavoice;1704426 wrote:Yeah, not buying having a bye. You can be off too long.

...and I'm not buying ( and have never bought in) to the shakedown of season ticket holders...making them buy playoff priced tickets to watch a #1 seed pummel an#8 seed to an early exit.
You play an entire season of a balanced schedule....so how does anyone pretend that an 8 seed( or even a #7) has a chance of a snowball in hell? Of course, it is ALL about money.

You could eliminate 4 or 6 teams in the "playoffs" right off the top and nobody would miss it from a competition standpoint.

you could take 5 teams from each conference, and have #4 play #5 to play in...and use a 2 out of 3 series for the first round...that way, the bye teams aren't off that long.

No chance in hell of this happening.....$$$$$$$.....so season ticket holders get it up the wazoo.

HitsRus;1704485 wrote:...and I'm not buying ( and have never bought in) to the shakedown of season ticket holders...making them buy playoff priced tickets to watch a #1 seed pummel an#8 seed to an early exit.
You play an entire season of a balanced schedule....so how does anyone pretend that an 8 seed( or even a #7) has a chance of a snowball in hell? Of course, it is ALL about money.

You could eliminate 4 or 6 teams in the "playoffs" right off the top and nobody would miss it from a competition standpoint.

you could take 5 teams from each conference, and have #4 play #5 to play in...and use a 2 out of 3 series for the first round...that way, the bye teams aren't off that long.

No chance in hell of this happening.....$$$$$$$.....so season ticket holders get it up the wazoo.

Yeah..they are not gonna ever go with less games.

Up until this year I used to be in with Steelers season tix with my buddies and NFL fans get hosed with having to pay for preseason games. Once the playoffs roll around you can choose to get the playoff tix or not. I am not sure if you can turn down lets say the WC and next game and just say yes to the AFC championship game. Wonder if in the NBA you can turn down playoff tix until they get later down the road.

No way I would blow that extra jack on early round games.

HitsRus;1704485 wrote:....so how does anyone pretend that an 8 seed( or even a #7) has a chance of a snowball in hell?

HitsRus;1704485 wrote:...and I'm not buying ( and have never bought in) to the shakedown of season ticket holders...making them buy playoff priced tickets to watch a #1 seed pummel an#8 seed to an early exit.
You play an entire season of a balanced schedule....so how does anyone pretend that an 8 seed( or even a #7) has a chance of a snowball in hell? Of course, it is ALL about money.

You could eliminate 4 or 6 teams in the "playoffs" right off the top and nobody would miss it from a competition standpoint.

you could take 5 teams from each conference, and have #4 play #5 to play in...and use a 2 out of 3 series for the first round...that way, the bye teams aren't off that long.

No chance in hell of this happening.....$$$$$$$.....so season ticket holders get it up the wazoo.

It almost happened last year. It did happen in 2012 and 2011.