As this crazy NFL season plays out, drums probably will start beating to add more teams to the playoffs. The realignment of 32 teams into eight divisions is a drastic change, and there is a fear that an 8-8 division winner or two will enter the first round while 10-6 wild-card candidates are left grumbling and out of the playoff picture.

For the sake of equity for the next two years, it would be nice to stay with 12 playoff teams -- eight division winners and four wild-cards. Rosters are thin, so teams that might look like Super Bowl champs in September or October could fade with the falling leaves in the final two months of the season.

But from the initial looks of realignment, it's inevitable that the league will have to expand the playoff format by adding two to four teams. The NFL doesn't want to expand until the 2004 season at the earliest. Wisely, it wants to see how the new format works.

Watching the AFC East and AFC West races, though, will create the case for adding more teams. It can be argued that the Patriots, Dolphins, Raiders, Broncos and Chargers are five of the best teams in the NFL. If they aren't the best five, they are among the best seven. Two of those teams could be hurt by the AFC having only two wild-card berths. And don't forget the Chiefs, who are slowly climbing back into the race, too.

Part of their problem is the schedule. The two best divisions (AFC East and West) play each other, making their schedules ridiculously tough. The new format calls for six division games, four against another division within the conference, four against another division in another conference and two games against conference teams based on rankings.

If the AFC East and West elite hold up as top teams, that means those teams are playing six to eight playoff-caliber teams among those 10 games outside their division. That's tough. In the NFL, schedule is everything. The Super Bowl winner for the past six years didn't have a winning record against winning teams. The key for them was not playing a lot of winning teams.

"It's too early to tell how this will work out, and it's going to take more than a year to tell," NFL vice president of broadcasting and network television Dennis Lewin said. "Realistically, ever since the wild cards came into sports, there have been outcries. There have always been teams that had better records that don't make the playoffs. We used to have three wild cards. We now have two (per conference). But at the end of the day, you are always going to have controversy."

What would make life easier for the next two years is that the weaker divisions take advantage of their weak schedules and produce 10-6, 11-5 or 12-4 seasons. That means Pittsburgh or Cleveland better get into a groove in the AFC South, whose four teams currently have a combined record of 4-10. That means Indianapolis, Jacksonville or Tennesee need to get hot and run away with the AFC South.

The problem is in the AFC more than the NFC this year. There is a better saturation of teams in the AFC, and that makes those two wild-card spots that much more precious. Except for the Eagles and maybe the Saints or Bucs, it doesn't look as though there is a team in the NFC that can fight off enough injury problems to do better than 10-6. That should keep most teams in the division races, even some of the teams with only one win after a month.

Already, the panic in the AFC is starting to settle in. That's why you are seeing more quarterback changes; AFC teams don't have the luxury to fall too far down the standings. The Steelers know that they can't continue getting off to slow starts in games. Broncos coach Mike Shanahan wasn't going to let Brian Griese lose the opener to the Rams and was ready to bench him had the Rams tied the score.

Look at the Jets. If they lose to the Chiefs and drop to 1-4, what chance do they have to climb back into the race? They would be three games behind the winner of the Patriots-Dolphins game. It would be nearly impossible to get a wild-card spot being down that far.

The league's competition committee had a straw poll discussion in their meeting this spring and the sentiment is that adding playoff teams would be a good thing. The problem was figuring what would be the right way to add a playoff team per conference and make it work in the playoffs.

"If those teams that happen to be in strong divisions play each other, their records might not be good enough to get into the playoffs," Lewin said.

Good point. That's why I lean toward the side of waiting until 2004 because it cheapens the playoffs if a non-deserving team gets in. The argument for adding a playoff team is strong in the AFC. The flip side is that it currently doesn't sell in the NFC. If the best six teams in the NFC are Philadelphia, New Orleans, Green Bay, Tampa Bay, San Francisco and Chicago, who's the seventh? Is it Carolina? Is it Dallas? Is it Arizona?

At the moment, you may side with Carolina, but that's why there is a need to wait. It would be right to reward one or two of the AFC East or West teams, but it would be silly to reach for a playoff team in the NFC that might not be deserving.

Waiting allows general managers and coaches to figure what might be necessary to make their teams suited for making the playoffs. In the old days, division games meant everything. Rosters were structured to neutralize the division's best offenses with either quicker or stronger defenders. Offenses were structured to exploit the weaknesses of division opponents' defenses.

In the old days, division games comprised half of the schedule. Now, there are only six division games. Heck, last week there was only one division game on the schedule, only 13 in the first four weeks. The Giants played four games against the NFC West before getting into their NFC East schedule.

It's a different league with the new schedule, and it creates a different dynamic. And after the season, it appears there will be a cry from the teams in the AFC West or East that were left out.

Making the playoffs can make or break a franchise. A coach could lose a job if the schedule and realignment leaves him short of a playoff spot. Though it's not our mission to root for anyone, it would serve the system better if the AFC South and AFC North have division winners with 10-win records.

That will at least buy a year until the next wave of controversy begins. Eventually, the league will have to expand its 12-team playoffs. This season is going to make a good case for it next year unless some of the slow-starting teams get hot.

John Clayton is a senior writer for ESPN.com.