If the NFL goes to

todpod

Golden Member
Nov 10, 2001
1,275
0
76
an 18 game schedule then they need to schedule the Super Bowl on Presidents Day weekend They also will need to expand the rosters somewhat to make up for the extra injuries.
 

bignateyk

Lifer
Apr 22, 2002
11,288
7
0
They need to just leave it the way it is. Sure, most fans think that 4 pre-season games are useless, but it's how teams evaluate and make roster selections. Pre-season games don't exist for fan enjoyment.

Now with 18 games, they will lose that ability to make educated roster selections, there will be more injuries, players won't last as long in the league.

There are too many injuries as it is now. If they go to 18 games, half the damn team is going to be injured by the time the superbowl rolls around. I'd rather watch the superbowl with most of the starters playing, not half the second and third stringers battling it out for the championship.

Also, Polomolu has a good point. The owners don't guarantee their contracts, so what incentive do the players have to play more games with a much higher risk of injury?
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,712
427
126
tbqhwy.com
i hope the players strike and there is no NFL for a year like what happened with the MLB and NHL

that would be awesome
 

HydroSqueegee

Golden Member
Oct 27, 2005
1,709
2
71
Jesus. As is MLB, NHL and the NBA seasons arnt long enough already. They're going to dilute the importance of each game. And the wear and tear on the players is going to be rough.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
18 game season is a doner. Expect total and active roster expansions.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
688
126
Yeah, as lupi said, it is a done deal. I don't like it personally, but whatever. I'm sure they'll expand rosters. Even though I don't think they will, they should probably consider a second bye week too. Maybe just have a weekend in the last part of the season where no one plays or something like that.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
A second bye week is probably a 50/50 if not greater probability as there is some discussion of getting the super bowl moved permanently to the holiday weekend.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
I am a huge football fan. but this is a mistake. i want to see good games not teams filled with scrubs because starters get hurt or players playing to not get hurt or such.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
Also, Polomolu has a good point. The owners don't guarantee their contracts, so what incentive do the players have to play more games with a much higher risk of injury?

Guaranteed contracts are one of the worst things about baseball. I really hope the NFL doesn't do it.
 

boomhower

Diamond Member
Sep 13, 2007
7,228
19
81
Guaranteed contracts are one of the worst things about baseball. I really hope the NFL doesn't do it.

They don't need guarunteed contracts when they get massive signing bonuses. The #1 pick this got right around 50mil guarunteed, do they really need to do the rest of it?

Back to the OP I agree it's a bad idea but it is going to happen. They won't have a chance to evaluate talent and a lot of good players will never get a fair shake. Injuries are going to be increased and carriers are going to be decreased. Only people this is going to benefit is the owners who get to sell two more games worth tickets and get two more games worth or television revenue. I just can't believe the most popular sport that has a salary cap is doing that bad.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
shit, expand to 17 games and that way we can have that odd game played at a neutral, likely international, site that way we don't have to have teams give up a home game and thus have an unfair advantage, plus it would mean every team plays one international game so that's a lot more foreign exposure for the NFL.

Anyways, I keep hearing from most players, and its obvious just paying attention to any team, that even 16 games is too tough on the bodies of these players. What we need is a significant roster expansion as well as an additional bye week.

19 or 20 games might be better in that regard though, to really justify significant enough roster increase as well as an additional bye.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
I am a huge football fan. but this is a mistake. i want to see good games not teams filled with scrubs because starters get hurt or players playing to not get hurt or such.

Yup, extending the season by 2 games is a mistake for a few reasons:

1) The NFL is having difficulty selling out games as it is. Instead of expanding the regular season, teams should be looking for ways to bring fans to the stadium. I'm afraid that the NFL (and other professional sports) are falling victim to the boxing phenomenon. By increasing ticket prices, they're actually driving away future fans. Boxing did this by switching every major fight to PPV, now nobody cares about it. The NFL needs to bring more fans in to the games it has, not expand for no reason.

On that note, the NFL should make the preseason games general admission. Instead of pissing off season ticket holders by forcing them to buy tickets to four games they don't care about, make all tickets $20 and make it an opportunity for fans with less money to enjoy the NFL experience. Yeah, they'd miss out on some short-term revenue, but it's not like the NFL is hurting for money right now AND I think it would help them solidify, strengthen, and expand their fan base.

2) More injuries. We want to see our stars play, not the backups or the backups of the backups. More games will lead to FAR more injuries as players get worn down throughout the regular season.

3) Games are less meaningful. Right now, every one of the 16 games played matters (for the most part). Why is 18 games going to be better? Personally, I don't want to see the Colts play two MORE meaningless games in Week 17 and 18 after they've locked up their division by Week 14. (Obviously just an example from the last two years).

4) Kinda goes with #1 -- by eliminating the four game preseason, teams will no longer travel for training camp, something that has become a big tradition in many places. It helps bring revenue to small towns and it gives the fans a chance to connect with the players and the team. Why rob them of that opportunity?
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
They don't need guarunteed contracts when they get massive signing bonuses. The #1 pick this got right around 50mil guarunteed, do they really need to do the rest of it?

Back to the OP I agree it's a bad idea but it is going to happen. They won't have a chance to evaluate talent and a lot of good players will never get a fair shake. Injuries are going to be increased and carriers are going to be decreased. Only people this is going to benefit is the owners who get to sell two more games worth tickets and get two more games worth or television revenue. I just can't believe the most popular sport that has a salary cap is doing that bad.

Still, that's 8.3 million for 6 years. Even Tom Brady becomes "only" a $12 million albatross should he decide tomorrow to phone it in for the next 4 years. Compare that with Barry Zito, who the Giants are stuck with for 7 years at $18 million. To get any big name player in baseball you have to give them a huge disincentive to work hard (long-term contract worth lots of money).
 

dfuze

Lifer
Feb 15, 2006
11,953
0
71
I wonder if the increase in the number of games would cause teams to recruit more from the colleges instead of letting them stay in school and graduate since as others pointed out the rosters would most likely expand due to increased chances of injury.
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,549
1,130
126
If they can get a second bye week, bigger rosters, while limiting OTA's and getting rid of the pre-season, i don't see why the players Union wouldn't go along with it.

Players bitch about offseason activities, they bitch about preseason, etc. Plus with additional roster spots equals more opportunity for more players. Which means more Union members.

Theres going to be a lot of changes in the next contract. There will be 18 game seasons, offseason and preseason stuff will be limited. They may or may not get a second bye week, but they will have decently expanded rosters. There will be a rookie salary cap and the veterans minimum will be going up. Well all minimums will be going up because of the 18 games, but the veterans will go up more than that.
 

AMDZen

Lifer
Apr 15, 2004
12,589
0
76
I love it and can't wait. As a season ticket holder for 10+ years, it is excruciatingly nauseating to have to pay full price for 2 games every year that don't matter. Pre-season is gay and 2 games is more then enough time to evaluate peeps.
 

Bill Brasky

Diamond Member
May 18, 2006
4,324
1
0
I've heard speculation that this is being built up by the nfl committee so it can be used for negotiation purposes with the players union. Food for thought...
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
On that note, the NFL should make the preseason games general admission. Instead of pissing off season ticket holders by forcing them to buy tickets to four games they don't care about, make all tickets $20 and make it an opportunity for fans with less money to enjoy the NFL experience. Yeah, they'd miss out on some short-term revenue, but it's not like the NFL is hurting for money right now AND I think it would help them solidify, strengthen, and expand their fan base.
season ticket holders aren't really paying for those games. oh, sure, there's a face value on the ticket and if you add up all the face values on all 10 tickets it comes out to the price you paid for all 10. but you would have paid that price for just the 8 regular season games because no one cares about the preseason.
 

AMDZen

Lifer
Apr 15, 2004
12,589
0
76
season ticket holders aren't really paying for those games. oh, sure, there's a face value on the ticket and if you add up all the face values on all 10 tickets it comes out to the price you paid for all 10. but you would have paid that price for just the 8 regular season games because no one cares about the preseason.

WTF are you talking about? Yes we do pay for the preseason games same as the regular season.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,213
12
81
Deeko dislikes virtually every decision made during the Roger Goodell era. This one included.
 

gimmewhitecastles

Golden Member
Mar 2, 2005
1,834
0
0
Yup, extending the season by 2 games is a mistake for a few reasons:

1) The NFL is having difficulty selling out games as it is. Instead of expanding the regular season, teams should be looking for ways to bring fans to the stadium. I'm afraid that the NFL (and other professional sports) are falling victim to the boxing phenomenon. By increasing ticket prices, they're actually driving away future fans. Boxing did this by switching every major fight to PPV, now nobody cares about it. The NFL needs to bring more fans in to the games it has, not expand for no reason.

On that note, the NFL should make the preseason games general admission. Instead of pissing off season ticket holders by forcing them to buy tickets to four games they don't care about, make all tickets $20 and make it an opportunity for fans with less money to enjoy the NFL experience. Yeah, they'd miss out on some short-term revenue, but it's not like the NFL is hurting for money right now AND I think it would help them solidify, strengthen, and expand their fan base.

2) More injuries. We want to see our stars play, not the backups or the backups of the backups. More games will lead to FAR more injuries as players get worn down throughout the regular season.

3) Games are less meaningful. Right now, every one of the 16 games played matters (for the most part). Why is 18 games going to be better? Personally, I don't want to see the Colts play two MORE meaningless games in Week 17 and 18 after they've locked up their division by Week 14. (Obviously just an example from the last two years).

4) Kinda goes with #1 -- by eliminating the four game preseason, teams will no longer travel for training camp, something that has become a big tradition in many places. It helps bring revenue to small towns and it gives the fans a chance to connect with the players and the team. Why rob them of that opportunity?

If games are less meaningful then players won't be playing as hard so will lead to less injuries. Also, with all the attention being given to concussions and rules to prevent injuries (horse collar tackles, tom brady rule, etc.) injuries should see a decline in the near future.

Its going to lead to more pansy football, which I'm not really looking forward to but will be tactical in advancing the sport, especially in other countries.