I'm not opposed to 7-team formats in each conference, with only the #1 getting a bye. But I do think it sets up some scenarios for week #17 "coasting", because the #1 is not possible. Alternatively, it's equally possible that the week 17 game that used to be a "coaster" will be taken more seriously, for seeding reasons. So maybe it's an offset.
But the thing I REALLY want to see addressed is the playoff seeding for division winners vs W-L records. I think if you win your division, you should be in (as it is now). You were the best in your division, even if your division was weak, and that's fair. But I do not think it's fair that a 7-9 or 8-8 or 9-7 division winner should be hosting a playoff game against 10-6 or 11-5 or 12-4 or, god forbid, 13-3 wild cards; simply because you were the best of the weakest teams.
I'd like to see the 4 division champs clinch a spot, with wild cards to the remaining best records (also as it is now). But SEEDING should be based on W-L records. If home games are the reward for the better record, why does that not apply to ALL teams? If one division produces 3 teams with a 14-2 and a 12-4 and 11-5 records, and those 3 records are the 3 best in the conference, they survived the gauntlet of their own division and obviously kicked the crap out of every other division. By the logic of determining seeds, they SHOULD be the top 3 seeds in the playoffs, and they should be hosting the 8-8 division winners. To give the higher seed, and the home game, to the lesser record division winner just flies in the face of the very logic to determine seeding. WTH? JMO...