Expanding the NFL Season to 18 Games

[RainMaker]

I'm sure this has been discussed in some NFL thread but I couldn't find it. Seems there has been more and more talk about the NFL attempting to expand the season to 18 games in the recent weeks. What is everyone's thoughts on this?

While I'd love to have more football, I'm really against it. There are so many injuries in the game that NFL rosters already look patch-work by the final weeks. Winning the Super Bowl or even making the playoffs would be more about just staying healthy than being the best team. It would also reduce the length of careers so you wouldn't have an attachment to some players like you currently do.

I also think an element to why we love football is that we don't get a ton of it. We can watch most other sports 6-9 months out of the year but football you just have for 5 months. You can also add in records which become meaningless as they'll get broken much easier.

While it'd be nice to turn on TV for an additional two weeks of football every year, I think the negatives far outweight the positives.

[jbergey22]

I doubt the players union will ever go for it. If they did have 18 games theyd have to have 2 bye weeks per team making it a 20 week regular season.

[RainMaker]

Money talks and if it means pay raises and expanded rosters, I think they'll listen.

[Apathetic Lurker]

They will take 2 games away from pre-season..they will give more loot to the PA..presto !! 18 games season.....everyone, except the fans gets mad money

[Danny]

I like the 16 game season and the meaning each game has. This is why the NFL regular season is so superior to the NHL, NBA or MLB

[Pyser]

i could always go for more football. i dont see the problem

records will take a while to adjust, but thats really my only downside. the injuries dont bother me, sorry.

[rowech]

Doesn't matter. Uncapped year and eliminating revenue sharing is the end of the NFL's popularity. It'll be just like baseball. Now that the old guard of owners, the one that built the sport into what it is, are either dead or getting very close, the new owners can start to do what they want to do.

[claphamsa]

Doesn't matter. Uncapped year and eliminating revenue sharing is the end of the NFL's popularity. It'll be just like baseball. Now that the old guard of owners, the one that built the sport into what it is, are either dead or getting very close, the new owners can start to do what they want to do.
+1

[Grammaticus]

Bad idea for most of the reasons mentioned.

[gstelmack]

I don't buy the injury argument. You already have key players getting injured in preseason when it doesn't matter, and owners forcing folks to buy preseason tickets to watch bad football. Why not let them get injured when it means something? I want to see two games go away from the preseason; if the way to get that is to make them regular season games, I'm all for it.

As for football's popularity ending, I can buy that. With the kids I don't get to watch nearly the football I used to, and I don't miss it as much as I thought I would. Plus every time I tune in I have to listen to stupid announcers who don't seem to be watching the same game, don't understand the rules, and officiating that makes mistake after mistake that just make the game frustrating.

[weegeebored]

Personally, I hate four preseason games. (Three really when you consider that the starters play less than a quarter in the last game.) What I would like to see is a 17th regular season game, no bye week, and perhaps a roster expansion to account for the potential increase in injuries. (That really is a weak argument with no proof for those claiming that, but let's satisfy the PA.) Or maybe change the rules a bit about the practice squad, more-or-less making that more like the regular roster so that teams cannot just pluck your players from it with no compensation.

[Passacaglia]

They will take 2 games away from pre-season..they will give more loot to the PA..presto !! 18 games season.....everyone, except the fans gets mad money

Why should the fans get money?

[Chubby]

Doesn't matter. Uncapped year and eliminating revenue sharing is the end of the NFL's popularity. It'll be just like baseball. Now that the old guard of owners, the one that built the sport into what it is, are either dead or getting very close, the new owners can start to do what they want to do.


Because football was so unpopular before the cap got put in place...

[RendeR]

Not sure where the idea that revenue sharing would ever go away. Sure one season will be uncapped but after that they have to have a new deal entirely or there won't BE a football season in 2011.

There will be a salary cap, there will be revenue sharing, there will be 18 regular season games because thats what the league can sell successfully. 4 pre season games is stupid, it only gets people hurt for nothing. So we'll do away with 2 games, add two and a second bye week. The timing of the season will not change at all because pre season games will all happen in a 2 week period starting with HoF weekend.

You still get a grand total of 22 weekends of pre/regular season football. Doesn't make it longer at all, so its not changing anything really, other than the quality of the games we see.

THe owners, wether they want to admit it or not, know they need the revenue sharing, they also know they need the cap (duh) The only issues will be "how much" of each thing will there be?

2010 is gonna be an ugly offseason as players get re-fucking-diculous one season deals.

[gstelmack]

perhaps a roster expansion to account for the potential increase in injuries.

With the salary cap in place, I don't get the roster limits anyway. If you want to pay a bunch of minsal guys to practice and be there for blowouts, more power to you. They made sense before the salary cap, they don't now.

[molson]

18 v. 16 games doesn't make a huge difference to me. But to try to keep more cities interested in the longer season, they'd also likely increase the # of playoff teams. That would really suck.

[Bearcat729]

Not sure where the idea that revenue sharing would ever go away. Sure one season will be uncapped but after that they have to have a new deal entirely or there won't BE a football season in 2011.

There will be a salary cap, there will be revenue sharing, there will be 18 regular season games because thats what the league can sell successfully.

From ESPN yesterday.

NFL to pull plug on $100 million revenue-sharing program - ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4718965)

NFL to end $100M in revenue sharing
Comment Email Print Share
By Chris Mortensen
ESPN
Archive

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones was fined at least $100,000 in September for violating a gag order by suggesting that revenue sharing was on its way out.

Turns out, he was only tipping the owners' hand.

In a significant move that could impact the flow of money to potential free agents and the competitive balance of teams, the NFL has notified the players' union that effective in March, owners will pull the plug on the $100 million-per-year revenue-sharing program that has subsidized lower-revenue clubs, multiple sources said.

By Tuesday, the NFL Players Association will challenge the move with an NFL arbitrator, special master Stephen Burbank, claiming owners can't terminate the revenue-sharing model without the union's approval because it was adopted into the 2006 labor agreement, which doesn't expire until March 2011.

Management counters that the supplemental model pertained only to salary-capped seasons; 2010 is scheduled to be uncapped.

Burbank is a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who is responsible for resolving collective bargaining disputes between the NFL and the NFLPA. Approximately eight to 12 lower-revenue teams have qualified on a yearly basis to draw from the supplemental pool. The $100 million fund is part of $6.5 billion in revenues shared by all clubs.

"We are simply going forward on the terms the union approved in March of 2006," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said.

In the applicable section of the 2006 collective bargaining agreement, it reads: "The revenue sharing program described to the NFLPA by memorandum dated March 10, 2006, has been determined by the NFLPA to be satisfactory. Any material modification to that program must also be reasonably satisfactory to the NFLPA."

A management source said when the owners chose for an early opt-out of the labor deal, triggering an uncapped year in 2010, it opened the door for the supplemental pool to be disbanded.

Lower-revenue clubs that have been subsidized under the supplemental plan will not be subject to the minimum spending rules that exist with the current salary-cap system.

According to NFLPA spokesman George Atallah, "Revenue sharing helps maintain the 'any given Sunday' dynamic in the NFL.

"The amount of money some owners propose to pull out of the system in 2011 could mean the difference between playoffs and blackouts for many teams," he said.

Chris Mortensen is a senior NFL analyst for ESPN.

[molson]

Funny to hear the player's union complain about competitive balance. I don't think anyone has to worry about the salary cap going away.

Edit: And there will always be a relative competitive balance in the NFL due to the nature of the short season and that the games are bought and sold and televised nationally. There are no local TV contracts, like the other sports. That's where the competitive balance issues really take hold in MLB.

[Doug5984]

From ESPN yesterday.

NFL to pull plug on $100 million revenue-sharing program - ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4718965)


Burbank is a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who is responsible for resolving collective bargaining disputes between the NFL and the NFLPA. Approximately eight to 12 lower-revenue teams have qualified on a yearly basis to draw from the supplemental pool. The $100 million fund is part of $6.5 billion in revenues shared by all clubs.


12 teams share 100 millions (thats 8.33 million per team) that will not make or break a franchise when 6.5 billion is shared by all clubs- hell a top 10 rookie makes that much a year, simply put in a rookie slotting system similar to NBA and that money is already saved.

Back to main topic though- I'm all for 18 game schedule if they add another by week AND expand the roster, it's crazy to have the roster capped so low when teams start getting injuries and are forced to play player who are dinged up and could really use another week of rest.

I fully expect to see 18 week, another bye, and an expanded roster. I would also love to see a Injured list that was like IR by maybe only 6 weeks.

[jbergey22]

I don't buy the injury argument. You already have key players getting injured in preseason when it doesn't matter, and owners forcing folks to buy preseason tickets to watch bad football. Why not let them get injured when it means something? I want to see two games go away from the preseason; if the way to get that is to make them regular season games, I'm all for it.

As for football's popularity ending, I can buy that. With the kids I don't get to watch nearly the football I used to, and I don't miss it as much as I thought I would. Plus every time I tune in I have to listen to stupid announcers who don't seem to be watching the same game, don't understand the rules, and officiating that makes mistake after mistake that just make the game frustrating.

Because you had kids and you dont like the announcers it means the popularity of football is going to end?

[Rizon]

We don't need to see the Browns go 1-17.

[jbergey22]

We don't need to see the Browns go 1-17.

LOL

[Galaxy]

We don't need to see the Browns go 1-17.

Better than the Lions going 0-18.

[SteveMax58]

I am never in favor of adding games to a regular season. Maybe it's just the stats, or tradition, or comparing records, etc. But...meh, don't like it.

I wouldn't mind if they just got rid of 2 preseason games and made 1 week a bye week before the season and the other a random bye week (a little later) in the season. Unlikely to happen...but this is my selfish opinion.

[sooner333]

Wasn't there talk of a 17-game season a year or so ago. It would be 8 home, 8 away, 1 foreign game.

[Atocep]

Peter King touched on this a few weeks ago in an article when asked about it and he said it's a matter of when, not if. This is one of the top things on Roger Goodell's list of things to do.

It's something I definitely don't want to see. 2 preseason games means you're either going to have starters that aren't getting enough time to prepare for the season or you're going to have teams getting even less to evaluate cuts on. Plus, there's the added two games played at full speed that will inevitably lead to more injuries.

[Buccaneer]

What good is having more games when fewer and fewer star players (the ones fans pay to see) are available to play?

[gstelmack]

It's something I definitely don't want to see. 2 preseason games means you're either going to have starters that aren't getting enough time to prepare for the season or you're going to have teams getting even less to evaluate cuts on. Plus, there's the added two games played at full speed that will inevitably lead to more injuries.

Roster expansion mitigates most of this. And we already have plenty of preseason injuries.

One issue with what we've got now is teams aren't really prepared on week 1 anyway because the preseason games are a joke with the starters maybe playing most of game 3. The others are all about not showing much and evaluating young talent.

[Atocep]

And we already have plenty of preseason injuries.


This argument makes no sense, though. If there's already plenty of preseason injuries when the the players aren't playing the entire game and they're not going 100%, then there's likely to be considerably more in games they're playing hard and they're playing the entire game.

[gstelmack]

This argument makes no sense, though. If there's already plenty of preseason injuries when the the players aren't playing the entire game and they're not going 100%, then there's likely to be considerably more in games they're playing hard and they're playing the entire game.

There may be more, but at least they'd be getting hurt when it mattered, rather than hurt when it doesn't. And then you've got the young guys just trying to make the team whose whole career can be ruined playing in a meaningless game fighting for the maybe one or two special teams openings that are actually being competed for in the preseason.

[Abe Sargent]

Doesn't matter. Uncapped year and eliminating revenue sharing is the end of the NFL's popularity. It'll be just like baseball. Now that the old guard of owners, the one that built the sport into what it is, are either dead or getting very close, the new owners can start to do what they want to do.

+2


EDIT:

I mean, look at the old owners like Mara and Hunt. They knew what was right for the league. The remaining owners with perspective, like Ralph Wilson and the Rooneys are just lost against the very large number of Neuveau owners. Do you know how many NFL franchises have a new owner or majority shareholder in the last ten years?

[RendeR]

Actually the removal of the 100 mill revenue sharing allotment at the end of this season makes perfect sense for the NFL.

They have an uncapped year ahead, this leaves all the teams holding their own funds going into next season, it will allow the league to gague just how far apart every team is revenue wise during a full season. They can then renegotiate the revenue share system as part of the new CBA and have every team on a solid footing going forward from there.

It also gives the league and players union another revenue source to work with during negotiations.

[RainMaker]

Speaking of revenue sharing and salary caps, is the league really equal these days? I'd argue that there is more disparity between the top and bottom teams now than there has been in a long time. New Orleans and Indianapolis just seem so much farther ahead than Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis.

One of the problems with the 18 game season is that I think you have to add a 2nd bye week in. Look at the rosters now and it's riddled with injuries to players. That makes the season almost a month longer which does take some of the lure out of it. I'm guessing it would however give the NFL more flexibility to schedule Thursday and Saturday games which they seem to be interested in doing.

Besides the injuries that teams would have piling up, I think you'd find coaches trying to counteract that with playing guys less in games. I don't think you'll see guys getting 30 carries in a game and more teams using 2-3 backs. You'd have to expand the active rosters and I think contracting 2 teams would help with the talent dillution that takes place with the expansion of rosters.

I guess my concern is that I think the NFL is nearly perfect. There are some minor gripes here and there, but I just think it's been tweaked to as good as a league can get over the past couple decades. I don't want to see the NFL turn into other sports with long, drawn out regular seasons that lose meaning halfway through for most teams.

[RainMaker]

Wasn't there talk of a 17-game season a year or so ago. It would be 8 home, 8 away, 1 foreign game.
That's an interesting proposal and I'd feel more comfortable with that then the 18-game season. I'd suggest they do it in the middle of the season and have everyone play from different parts of the world in one week. Kind of a bowl like setup that could add some intrique.

My concern would be how you find 16 foreign locations. I'd imagine you could find a couple Canadian cities, Mexico City, and London. Maybe a game in Tokyo too. But then the choices really start diminishing.

[rowech]

Speaking of revenue sharing and salary caps, is the league really equal these days? I'd argue that there is more disparity between the top and bottom teams now than there has been in a long time. New Orleans and Indianapolis just seem so much farther ahead than Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis.



The league is setup to be equal with the salary cap and the draft is setup to make the bad teams better. If you suck for a long time in the NFL, it's because you have poor scouts, poor coaches, poor drafts, etc.

[Passacaglia]

That's an interesting proposal and I'd feel more comfortable with that then the 18-game season. I'd suggest they do it in the middle of the season and have everyone play from different parts of the world in one week. Kind of a bowl like setup that could add some intrique.

My concern would be how you find 16 foreign locations. I'd imagine you could find a couple Canadian cities, Mexico City, and London. Maybe a game in Tokyo too. But then the choices really start diminishing.

I'd imagine some cities could double up. Plus you could include some other European cities besides London.