PDA

View Full Version : Owners to meet to debate 18-game season


CloakNNNdagger
08-25-2010, 08:15 AM
The 18-game season season may have a good deal to do with if we have a 2011 season or not. Money is a concern on the part of owners and players. But injuries seem to be a concern mostly on the part of the players. Fans are no factor beyond their willingness to contribute to the "kitty."

Since NFL season ticket holders pay full price for all 10 home games, including preseason games, revenues won't change there. But there would be an inevitable increase in non season ticket holder ticket sales bumping the revenues. Somehow, I would not count on NFL teams not raising ticket prices for their present and newly "captive" audiences. Cable and satellite contracts will also logically require adjustment with little doubt that fan's bills will likewise see a rise for the "privilege" of watching an additional 2 regular season games.

See article: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2010-08-24-owners-debate-expanded-season_N.htm

Thorn
08-25-2010, 09:01 AM
I have very mixed feelings about an 18 game season, I think more negative ones that positive ones. The starters playing more games means more injuries, so will the teams roster size increase to make up for this?

WWJD
08-25-2010, 09:01 AM
I heard Goose Gosselin talk on a radio show yesterday and he had these ideas about changing the current season:

go to 18 regular season games with an extra bye week.

do away with preseason as it currently exists and go to 2 controlled practice games. One at your home training camp. One away.

He felt sure there would be a lockout next season; he has no idea how long it would last but he said the main issue is always going to be money related.

ChampionTexan
08-25-2010, 09:24 AM
I have very mixed feelings about an 18 game season, I think more negative ones that positive ones. The starters playing more games means more injuries, so will the teams roster size increase to make up for this?

Marcellus Wiley had an interesting point on this. He said as a player, he'd much rather play two additional regular season games than go through the two weeks of preseason that would be eliminated. His point was that even if your only playing a series or two in those games, the training camp atmosphere between pre-season games is far more grueling than what goes on during the week in the regular season.

I think that an 18 game season would include both increased roster size, more game-day active players, and a revision to the IR rules to let players return in-season (after a minimum period of time) rather than having be simply the remainder of the season.

Dutchrudder
08-25-2010, 10:20 AM
Here's my idea.

Preserve the 16 game format, but remove two pre-season games and replace them with 2 bye weeks. That would give 19 weeks of actual football season as opposed to 17, and you could do bye weeks in 3 blocks of 4 week spans. So if your team has a bye in week 4, then they would have a bye in week 8 and 12 as well. The last three weeks would have no bye weeks, so you still have a strong ending to the season with all the playoff contention.

This system would have 8 teams on byes at a time instead of 4 or 6, but the season still goes longer without actually increasing the number of games. You would get to see more games from teams that are not in your local market, which may also create some interest among fans who would otherwise not see teams from the opposite coast. It would also give players a bit more time to recover or to rest nagging injuries. But it is a tough sell to the owners because they lose 1 home preseason game without much compensation, unless the TV revenue increases from having 2 extra weeks of meaningful football on TV.

Thoughts?

gwallaia
08-25-2010, 01:48 PM
Expanding the regular season by two games will also effect the new records that would be established.

1,000 yd rushers will really be no big deal at all with 18 games. All-time passing and rushing leaders, etc. would have their records more easily and quickly broken.

I'm just waiting for the owners to stick it to the fans with much higher ticket and concession prices.

TheCD
08-25-2010, 02:01 PM
I'm just waiting for the owners to stick it to the fans with much higher ticket and concession prices.

From a fan/consumer standpoint, more games should equate to cheaper tickets, as there is more supply now available, and a slightly smaller demand.

The owners may still raise ticket prices though...

gwallaia
08-25-2010, 02:07 PM
I thought the total number of games would remain the same and that the pre-season would be cut to just two games.

Thorn
08-25-2010, 02:08 PM
Baseball and basketball both lost me because of overt commercialization of the product, player strikes, and insane salaries for cry baby pro athletics. It would take a lot for football to drive me away, but it can be done I suppose.

Iím to the point now where I donít finically support the football product anymore. I donít go to games, donít buy jerseys, just watch it on TV and thatís it. I would hate to think the NFL could do something as horrible as the NBA or MLB did. I hope not anyways, because Sundays would be awful boring without football.

Hervoyel
08-25-2010, 02:16 PM
I do not want to see any sort of change at all but I wouldn't get upset if the preseason simply shrunk to a pair of games instead of four. Yes, I just said I'd prefer less football. No, I'm not running a fever. I think 18 games is too many for a regular season. I'd prefer players took less of a beating.

Speedy
08-25-2010, 02:37 PM
I do not want to see any sort of change at all but I wouldn't get upset if the preseason simply shrunk to a pair of games instead of four. Yes, I just said I'd prefer less football. No, I'm not running a fever. I think 18 games is too many for a regular season. I'd prefer players took less of a beating.

Agreed. With all the off-season training and team activities that go on, they just don't need a month of pre-season games any more. Chop 2 pre-season games off and stick with a 16 game schedule. And maybe you could throw in an extra bye week as well. An 18 week regular season with 2 bye weeks, and having the pre-season cut in half. Perfect!!

CloakNNNdagger
08-25-2010, 04:19 PM
From a fan/consumer standpoint, more games should equate to cheaper tickets, as there is more supply now available, and a slightly smaller demand.

The owners may still raise ticket prices though...

When is the last time you saw the league or teams drop or even hold prices for more product..........unless, of course, they were having a "fire sale" trying to avoid worse consequences, e.g., "blackout" or franchise move?

ChampionTexan
08-25-2010, 04:44 PM
When is the last time you saw the league or teams drop or even hold prices for more product..........unless, of course, they were having a "fire sale" trying to avoid worse consequences, e.g., "blackout" or franchise move?

Which is exactly why the idea that they would simply eliminate two preseason games without replacing them with regular season games is laughable.

For me, I say give me 18 RS games. I just don't see the difference of converting two pre-season games (and two weeks of pre-season practice) to two regular season games as that big a deal. I'll take more real football thank you.

As to the stats - it's football. Jim Brown played 12 games a year the first four seasons of his career - then went to 14. Nobody really cared about that when Walther Payton broke his all-time record. O.J. Simpson played 14 games the season he broke the 2,000 yard barrier the first time. It gets mentioned, but the fact that every NFL rusher who has subsequently gone over 2,000 yards did it in a 16 game season doesn't really taint the accomplishment.

The NFL played 12 games up until 1961. They played 14 games up until 1978. Folks adjust - the NFL is not a statistics driven league.

Double Barrel
08-25-2010, 04:52 PM
I have very mixed feelings about an 18 game season, I think more negative ones that positive ones. The starters playing more games means more injuries, so will the teams roster size increase to make up for this?

Injuries are my chief concern, as well. Watching a bunch of second/third stringers in the playoffs is not a good product.

I'd rather see the NFL get rid of conferences. Just have 8 division winners and 4 wildcards. Then you won't have an 8-8 wildcard from one conference make the playoffs with an 11-5 or 10-6 from the other conference not make the playoffs. 8-8 wildcard teams are not playoff worthy, IMO. Conferences have outlived themselves with the playoffs structured like they are now. The two best teams should be in the Super Bowl, not a conference championship game.

ChampionTexan
08-25-2010, 05:11 PM
Injuries are my chief concern, as well. Watching a bunch of second/third stringers in the playoffs is not a good product.

I'd rather see the NFL get rid of conferences. Just have 8 division winners and 4 wildcards. Then you won't have an 8-8 wildcard from one conference make the playoffs with an 11-5 or 10-6 from the other conference not make the playoffs. 8-8 wildcard teams are not playoff worthy, IMO. Conferences have outlived themselves with the playoffs structured like they are now. The two best teams should be in the Super Bowl, not a conference championship game.

The problem is the 8-8 (or worse) teams in the playoffs have gotten there because they won their divison - not as wildcards, and your system wouldn't change that.

Thorn
08-25-2010, 06:16 PM
Injuries are my chief concern, as well. Watching a bunch of second/third stringers in the playoffs is not a good product.

I'd rather see the NFL get rid of conferences. Just have 8 division winners and 4 wildcards. Then you won't have an 8-8 wildcard from one conference make the playoffs with an 11-5 or 10-6 from the other conference not make the playoffs. 8-8 wildcard teams are not playoff worthy, IMO. Conferences have outlived themselves with the playoffs structured like they are now. The two best teams should be in the Super Bowl, not a conference championship game.

You know DB, I think I like your idea there of getting rid of the conferances. :thinking:

Double Barrel
08-25-2010, 07:04 PM
The problem is the 8-8 (or worse) teams in the playoffs have gotten there because they won their divison - not as wildcards, and your system wouldn't change that.

yeah, this is true, but at least division games still mean something. You would still have the potential of 8-8 division winners, but at least it greatly reduces a .500 wildcard team.

You know DB, I think I like your idea there of getting rid of the conferances. :thinking:

Thanks, man! I've been rolling this idea around in my head for awhile, and with the exception of nostalgia about the merger of the NFL & AFL, I don't see the point of conferences these days.

Thorn
08-25-2010, 07:14 PM
Thanks, man! I've been rolling this idea around in my head for awhile, and with the exception of nostalgia about the merger of the NFL & AFL, I don't see the point of conferences these days.

Considering the number of old NFL teams in the AFL conferance, it doesn't really have any real meaning any more other than as a label for the conferance. No one really cares about their "trophy" for winning the AFC or the NFC, if they don't get the REAL trophy at the Super Bowl it doesn't mean much.

JB
08-25-2010, 07:31 PM
But, how would you determine who played in the pro bowl for which side? There's always gotta be sides! Would you change it to a North/South or East/West?

Thorn
08-25-2010, 07:36 PM
But, how would you determine who played in the pro bowl for which side? There's always gotta be sides! Would you change it to a North/South or East/West?

there's always someone in the crowd that will stick a pin in your balloon. LOL

Good point though.

rmartin65
08-25-2010, 07:43 PM
I hate the idea. Ruins all historical stats, increases likeliness of injuries, etc. Bad idea all around.

JB
08-25-2010, 07:53 PM
I hate the idea. Ruins all historical stats, increases likeliness of injuries, etc. Bad idea all around.

That's the same that a lot of people were saying when the league went from 14 to 16 games. Didn't change the total # of games, because the pre-season used to be 6 games.

Texecutioner
08-25-2010, 08:26 PM
I do not want to see any sort of change at all but I wouldn't get upset if the preseason simply shrunk to a pair of games instead of four. Yes, I just said I'd prefer less football. No, I'm not running a fever. I think 18 games is too many for a regular season. I'd prefer players took less of a beating.

This is sort of how I feel. Just take out the extra two pre season games.

If it came down to having 4 pre season games or 18 regular season games though, I'll take the 18 regular season games over that easily, so that is what will need to happen at this point because there is no way that the NFL owners are going to just get rid of the two pre season games unless they make those games regular season games. So with that being said, I'd rather have the extra two games instead.

And I don't know why anyone would care about the records. Records are meant to be broken and this would be no different than when the NFL expanded the seasons from 14 to 16 games and guys broke records easier.

Wolf
08-26-2010, 02:32 AM
ATLANTA Ė NFL owners are eager to increase the regular season from 16 to 18 games.

The players aren't so sure.

During a five-hour meeting at a posh hotel in downtown Atlanta, the push to add two more games to the regular season picked up steam Wednesday ó at least among those who sign the checks.

"I think it's a win-win all around," said Bob Kraft, owner of the New England Patriots.



But talks on the expanded season dominated most of the meeting.

Goodell pointed out that the league already has the right to impose an 18-game schedule ó and keep four preseason games for each team ó under the current labor agreement with the players. But that contract expires after this season, and it's clear the expanded schedule will be a central issue in talks on a new collective bargaining agreement.

The owners would like to keep the season at 20 weeks, reducing the number of preseason games from four to two.

"We want to do it the right way for everyone, including the players, the fans and the game in general," Goodell said. "There's a tremendous amount of momentum for it. We think it's the right step."

The owners held off on voting on a specific proposal that could be presented to the players union. Among the issues that still must be resolved: when to start the expanded regular season, possible roster expansion to cope with more games, and changes in training camp and offseason routines to come up with ways for evaluating younger players who wouldn't have as many preseason games to make an impression.

"We want to continue to address a variety of issues before putting together a specific proposal, which our negotiating team will provide to the union's negotiating team," Goodell said. "There's tremendous support for it. Almost all the questions, all the discussions, are how to do it in a way that's fan friendly."

Around the NFL, however, many players questioned the wisdom of making an already grueling season even longer. At the very least, they want more money ó and several proposed changes in the rules governing injured players, or adding an extra bye week to deal with the grind.

"With 16 games, every game is important and therefore the fans are very into it, the stadiums are packed because they know if their team loses, it pushes them further and further away from making the playoffs," Cincinnati quarterback Carson Palmer said. "I think if you go to 18, each game kind of loses a little bit of its significance."

The players clearly expect to be receive a bigger chunk of the multi-billion-dollar NFL pie if they're going to be putting their bodies on the line in two more games that count.

"Obviously the players want to be compensated for two more games," San Francisco 49ers linebacker Matt Wilhelm said. "That's the one thing the players have to get met."

They are also concerned about an increased risk of injuries and fret that it could shorten their careers or increase the number of health problems they endure after retirement.

"I would vote to eliminate two preseason games and then keep it at a 16-game season because the longer you're out there playing, the more your body breaks down," Chicago Bears tight end Desmond Clark said. "When you get into December, you're like walking zombies. You can't feel your joints."

Cleveland Browns linebacker Scott Fujita said the timing of the proposal is odd, considering the owners want the players to accept a smaller share of the revenue in the next labor agreement.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100826/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_nfl_meetings;_ylt=AjRDMczgjU3DjsIFnbsyGixn.3QA ;_ylu=X3oDMTM1bDB2Z3Z2BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwODI2L2Zi bl9uZmxfbWVldGluZ3MEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3Bvcw M3BHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDbmZsbW92 aW5nZm9y

HoustonFrog
08-26-2010, 08:20 AM
I think this whole thing is crap and the players should stand strong against it. I was listening to Aikman talk about this...and LZ was saying the same this morning about Aikman and others....and no one wants this. They say their bodies are shot by the time the playoffs come around and they are going on fumes to win it all. Think about it. The guys in the trenches are probably barely able to function at Week 16-17. Banged up and hurt. If you make them play 2 more games, someone is going to not only get themselves hurt but their QB hurt because they aren't up to snuff. Then you get watered down teams and watered down leagues with backups instead of stars. I just think the whole thing is crap.

Double Barrel
08-26-2010, 11:13 AM
But, how would you determine who played in the pro bowl for which side? There's always gotta be sides! Would you change it to a North/South or East/West?

lol! Pro Bowl?? Nobody watches it, and with it being scheduled the week before the Super Bowl now, it won't even have a lot of the players in it that have been nominated for it. Scrap it. Let the NCAA work out a playoff system and have the national championship game the week before the Super Bowl.

I think Frog has a good point. At the end of the day, the players have to play the two extra games, and they should have a word in this decision. Fans always want more games, owners want more revenue, but it's the players that will have to pay the ultimate price with their health. I think ignoring their concerns misses the point.

WWJD
08-26-2010, 11:17 AM
As others have already said the owners are going to do whatever makes them the most money. It'll always bottom-line out to that.

JB
08-26-2010, 11:18 AM
lol! Pro Bowl?? Nobody watches it, and with it being scheduled the week before the Super Bowl now, it won't even have a lot of the players in it that have been nominated for it. Scrap it. Let the NCAA work out a playoff system and have the national championship game the week before the Super Bowl.

I think Frog has a good point. At the end of the day, the players have to play the two extra games, and they should have a word in this decision. Fans always want more games, owners want more revenue, but it's the players that will have to pay the ultimate price with their health. I think ignoring their concerns misses the point.

I guess I should have used the sarcasm smiley...

infantrycak
08-26-2010, 11:28 AM
lol! Pro Bowl?? Nobody watches it, and with it being scheduled the week before the Super Bowl now, it won't even have a lot of the players in it that have been nominated for it. Scrap it.

Not taking a side here but the last pro-bowl had the highest ratings ever.

TheCD
08-26-2010, 11:33 AM
A bulk of the players' arguments are that they should be compensated for the extra two games. Aren't they paid for preseason games as well? That would mean that their paycheck should be equal, despite them playing in about 4 more quarters of football over that same period.

My suggestion would be to take the extra revenue that the players would otherwise generate from the expanded season, and use it for the retired players fund, or in some other fashion to support retired players. This way the NFL, the NFLPA, and the retired players are all receiving a portion of revenue generated, and those players in serious need of help to afford medical bills, medication, etc. can receive it.

What do y'all think about that?

infantrycak
08-26-2010, 11:48 AM
A bulk of the players' arguments are that they should be compensated for the extra two games. Aren't they paid for preseason games as well? That would mean that their paycheck should be equal, despite them playing in about 4 more quarters of football over that same period.

My suggestion would be to take the extra revenue that the players would otherwise generate from the expanded season, and use it for the retired players fund, or in some other fashion to support retired players. This way the NFL, the NFLPA, and the retired players are all receiving a portion of revenue generated, and those players in serious need of help to afford medical bills, medication, etc. can receive it.

What do y'all think about that?

The players are kind of screwy on this one. All players receive the same compensation for mandatory events but their contract salary is paid in equal game day checks for regular season games. That doesn't mean they are only being paid for those games. They are on an annual salary for the league year - it just gets paid out during the season. In addition if revenue goes up due to extra regular season games then that means the cap goes up automatically so they will get more money.

OzzO
08-26-2010, 01:51 PM
Well, if not shortening the preseason / more reg season, then keep it as is and knock the price off the tickets for the preseason in relation to how long the starters pay.

1st preseason is 25% of regular game ticket
2nd preseason is 50% of regular game
3rd is 75%
and 4th is free.

How 'bout them apples? :-P

Double Barrel
08-26-2010, 02:17 PM
I guess I should have used the sarcasm smiley...

hehe, I figured you were kidding, which is why I did the ol' "lol!" at the beginning.

I used your post to piggy-back as I've heard the Pro Bowl argument from radio callers.

Not taking a side here but the last pro-bowl had the highest ratings ever.

I bet you a dollar that an NCAA national championship game from a playoff system would eclipse the last Pro Bowl's ratings.

Back to the 18 game season, one aspect that I have not heard elaborated on is the exporting of games. Many fans think that we will get one more home game every year, but I think the NFL will use the extra games to do more regular season games in foreign cities.

If they were to add more games, I think it should be 17. That way, teams end up with either winning or losing seasons. None of this .500 crap. Make it a 3 game preseason with 1 extra regular season games, and then add more wildcard games and get rid of the bye week in the first round of the playoffs. Radical!!

Speedy
08-26-2010, 07:08 PM
Not taking a side here but the last pro-bowl had the highest ratings ever.

Uh, that's probably because Slingin' Matty Schaub was tearing the joint up with his laser rocket of an arm!! Who doesn't want to see that?




I bet you a dollar that an NCAA national championship game from a playoff system would eclipse the last Pro Bowl's ratings.

I'll bet a dollar that an NCAA national title game from a playoff system would rival Super Bowl ratings. Not worldwide of course, but certainly on a national stage.

TimeKiller
08-26-2010, 11:40 PM
Make the Super Bowl winners play a mega team of all stars. That'll be interesting and probably just as cool as the SB. Maybe the players would be interested in the game too, since they now have a bit of pride at stake. Any team who won the Pro Bowl would be that much more glorious and hailed.

Anyway, I'm down for the 18 game season. More football is more football.