Kevin O’Connell’s Vikings Responsible for Lions’ Playoff Proposal As Mike Tomlin and Sean McVay Stand Against Seeding Change

The NFL playoffs have always been as American as Thanksgiving leftovers and heated debates over ref calls. But this offseason, a new twist is simmering like a slow-cooked rivalry game. Picture the NFC North last season: three teams with 11 or more wins, clawing for supremacy like pit crews at Daytona. Now, one team’s gripe over a playoff seating chart—yes, seating—has sparked a league-wide showdown. The stakes? Nothing less than the soul of postseason football.

In the third week of March, the Detroit Lions dropped a bombshell proposal to overhaul the playoff seeding rule, aiming to prioritize regular-season records over division titles. Translation: Win more, host more—even if you’re a wild card. Lions GM Brad Holmes didn’t mince words while speaking with Mike Florio on March 31: “The Minnesota Vikings how that went down… I mean, you win 14 games, you got to go on the road? Should that really be the case?” His jab?

A nod to the 14-3 Vikings, who last year became the winningest wild-card team in NFL history… only to crash out in L.A. as a No. 5 seed. Detroit’s proposal is simple…

Seed teams 1-7 by record, with division champs guaranteed only a playoff spot—not a home game. Last season, this would’ve vaulted the Vikings to No. 3 (instead of No. 5) and booted the 10-7 Rams and Bucs from hosting wild-card games. “With the format that we propose, every single game will matter, and there is no resting stars. I think that’ll be great for the league,” Holmes argued, channeling the spirit of ’84 Tigers’ wire-to-wire dominance. But here’s the twist.

The Lions’ own Week 18 win over Minnesota secured their No. 1 seed. Now, they’re fighting to prevent future themselves from getting Vikings’d. Critics call it hypocrisy. Supporters call it progress. But this isn’t just about Detroit—it’s about fairness in a league where 14-win teams shouldn’t play road games against 10-win ‘champs.’ However, not everyone’s buying the hype.

Tomlin and McVay: defending the old guard of playoff rules

Steelers coach Mike Tomlin, a self-proclaimed “division purist,” slammed the idea. “I love the rivalries that is division play. I love the structure of our scheduling that highlights it,” he growled, channeling his inner Lombardi. “Winners should get a home playoff game.” Besides, the NFL’s DNA is built on divisional blood feuds—think Bears–Packers or Cowboys–Eagles. Mess with that, and you’re tossing gasoline on a tailgate grill. Rams coach Sean McVay piled on.

He noted schedule disparities: “I would be all for it if we played all 15 NFC teams and then two cross-conference games. But when you’re playing six divisional games, then you’ve got the strength of schedule based on whatever previous year’s record was, it’s not all the same. So I do think there is something to be said for winning your division.” His point?

The Bucs’ cupcake NFC South slate isn’t the Vikings’ meat-grinder NFC North tour. Until schedules balance, he argues, division crowns must matter. History isn’t on Detroit’s side, either.

Similar proposals have flopped for decades. Remember the 2010 Seahawks (7-9) hosting—and beating—the 11-5 Saints? The “Beast Quake” game became folklore, but it’s Exhibit A for the playoff seeding chaos. Yet, the Lions’ push taps into a growing frustration. Why should a 14-win team like Minnesota get punished for sharing a division with titans?

As owners vote this week, the question isn’t just about rules—it’s about identity. Do we prioritize Cinderella stories or reward consistency? As Crash Davis once said in Bull Durham, “The world is made for people who aren’t cursed with self-awareness.” So, should the NFL stay cursed by tradition or finally level the field?