NFL owners could reportedly push for 18-game season during labor talks

[Akrasian]

Rather than increasing the regular season to 18 games, why not cut the pre-season down to 2 or 3 games ?

Money. IIRC, to buy season tickets you have to pay for the preseason games too. So cutting preseason down to 2 games would reduce revenue. They may not always sell out, but the teams still sell a bunch of high priced tickets, and expenses are low since players may get a stipend etc but not their high salaries.

 

[Riverumbbq]

Money. IIRC, to buy season tickets you have to pay for the preseason games too. So cutting preseason down to 2 games would reduce revenue. They may not always sell out, but the teams still sell a bunch of high priced tickets, and expenses are low since players may get a stipend etc but not their high salaries.

2 Bye weeks per season would make up and likely exceed the proceeds from 1 or 2 pre-season games.

 

[Akrasian]

2 Bye weeks per season would make up and likely exceed the proceeds from 1 or 2 pre-season games.

More TV revenue, less ticket revenue. I'm dubious about the teams being willing to give up the ticket revenue.

 

[Merlin]

Rather than increasing the regular season to 18 games, why not cut the pre-season down to 2 or 3 games ?
We know that the coaches like at least one game for the starters to tune-up, usually the week 3 game of pre-season, allowing a week of rest or to heal, but a few games for all the new players to present themselves and compete for those many back-up & special teams roles also seems imperative. jmo.

I think that's what the owners plan to do. Turn two preseason games into regular season games, leaving two where the coaches can sit who they want.

I suspect this preseason the NFL is going to get some unhappy feedback from networks when they're telecasting only dudes who are going to be cut or on the bubble while the starters sit. IMO most teams are going to follow McVay's lead from last preseason.

 

[Riverumbbq]

I think that's what the owners plan to do. Turn two preseason games into regular season games, leaving two where the coaches can sit who they want.

I suspect this preseason the NFL is going to get some unhappy feedback from networks when they're telecasting only dudes who are going to be cut or on the bubble while the starters sit. IMO most teams are going to follow McVay's lead from last preseason.

I honestly don't believe an 18 game season will fly with the players or their union, that and I and a lot of other fans aren't going to support a system which endangers the health of the players even more than at present. Fans are starved for football when pre-season games start up again, so I doubt that much of the feedback will be any different, or more negative, but as mentioned prior, if pre-season games were cut down to 3, and the league goes with a 2'nd Bye week, the regular season is extended and the revenue flow will be increased. jmo.

 

[FrantikRam]

Two bye weeks, one being a mid season break. 60 man game day rosters, 16 game maximum for each player. Make it happen.

I've been saying this for years. It's the perfect solution. Doesn't impact player safety because players can only play in 16 games. Also keeps the integrity of the NFL record book (even though we already went from 14 to 16 before..)

They could also make the first or second bye week before every team's Thursday night game - so this could actually HELP player safety.

Also a huge win for the fans - on multiple fronts. The main one being people would no longer pay for unnecessary garbage preseason games. It would also add intrigue for the fans as to when the team chooses to rest their best players for the two games.

 

[FrantikRam]

I really think coaches would hate having to make their best players a healthy scratch at any point in the season. Especially games they have to win to make the playoffs or to save their jobs. Imagine the primetime game in which one or both coaches are sitting their starting QBs. Or the end of the season game which you have to win to get in the playoffs, or the division, or the no 1 seed but can't put your best lineup on the field because of the 16 game rule.

I don't think fans who are buying tickets would like it, I don't think players or coaches would like it, I don't think it's a better product on the field. I get the reasoning but I just see it as a huge can of worms.

How is it a bigger can of worms than when the NFL schedules the Dolphins and Jets for a primetime game?

What's the difference between any other teams resting their best players and being forced to watch two bad teams in primetime?

Teams may not like it, but it's the best solution for something that needs to change. Just asking for the preseason to go away when owners make money off of it is not going to happen.

Here's the best part: if every team had 36 key contributors, you'd be "losing" two key contributors for each game on average - but in reality, I would bet that the average NFL player over the course of a 16 game season misses at least two games anyways. So this would actually further help player safety - because the players wouldn't need to be healthy scratches. It would take care of itself because you likely have at least two guys banged up every week anyways.

 

[tempests]

How is it a bigger can of worms than when the NFL schedules the Dolphins and Jets for a primetime game?

What's the difference between any other teams resting their best players and being forced to watch two bad teams in primetime?

A fan buying tickets in advance of a New England/KC game or LA/KC expecting one of the league's premier QB battles and not getting it because a coach decides to sit his QB.

If the league already has a bad "QB/team" problem it's only going to increase by making MVP candidate players sit out when they're not injured.

 

[ScotsRam]

A fan buying tickets in advance of a New England/KC game or LA/KC expecting one of the league's premier QB battles and not getting it because a coach decides to sit his QB.

If the league already has a bad "QB/team" problem it's only going to increase by making MVP candidate players sit out when they're not injured.

It happens in Baseball tho right? I'm not an expert in that sport but the star pitchers barely play right?

I like the idea of 18 games but 16 max per player. I think it adds a whole new level of intrigue. The whole roster would be important, depth would be important, strategy would be even more important. You'd need to significantly increase roster sizes though.

 

[Rams43]

Why overthink this when a couple of sensible changes are all that’s needed?

Only 2 meaningless preseason games followed by 18 regular season games.
Each team gets 2 byes between weeks 5 and 15 (it’s now a 20 week season).
Increase rosters to at least 60 players, 63 would be better.
All players active on gameday.
All teams schedule at least 2 controlled scrimmages with each other as the Rams have done for the last 2 years, 4 would be better.
Keep playoff format as it is.

The End.

 

[norcalramfan]

Which teams would we play? An extra game against the Cards and 9er’s?

 

[FrantikRam]

A fan buying tickets in advance of a New England/KC game or LA/KC expecting one of the league's premier QB battles and not getting it because a coach decides to sit his QB.

If the league already has a bad "QB/team" problem it's only going to increase by making MVP candidate players sit out when they're not injured.

This doesn't make sense because on any given week, a player could get injured anyways. And think about it: are the Patriots more likely to rest Brady against the Chiefs? Or the Dolphins?

Very unlikely that teams would rest their stars for marquee match ups - but even if they did, so what? Any NFL player could get hurt the week before the match up anyways.

 

[FrantikRam]

Which teams would we play? An extra game against the Cards and 9er’s?

My format would be:

6 games vs. divisional opponents
4 games vs. division in same conference
2 games vs. teams that finished same place as you in same conference
4 games vs. division in other conference
2 games vs. opponents that finished same place as you in other conference

So our schedule would be the same as this year, just adding two of the Patriots, Chiefs or Texans - which would happen on a rotating schedule by division each year.

This format would have all of the division winners playing each other except one - all in all, 6 of the 18 games would be against teams that finished the same place as you the prior year.

This has the added benefit of adding games from the opposite conference which aren't as impactful for playoff seeding. There's also a high probability of having a Super Bowl rematch every year. And it increases the frequency in which teams play one another overall.

OR another idea:

6 games against division opponents
4 games against division from other conference (so AFC West for us)
2 games vs. teams that finished same place as you in same conference
4 games vs. division in same conference
2 games vs. teams from division on other conference selected randomly

 

[OldSchool]

Which teams would we play? An extra game against the Cards and 9er’s?

My guess would be the 1st and 2nd place teams would play the 1st and 2nd place teams of the other conference divisions. For example we play the NFC south this year and the 1st place team vs the other 2 divisions, we would also play the 2nd place team in those 2. Either that or it'll be something random but that makes sense because the 3rd and 4th place teams would also play the 3rd and 4th places in the 2 divisions they match up against. It's somewhat logical from a strength of schedule/competitive balance scenario.

Also those thinking the union won't sign off on their players making more money are selling the union and the players desire for more money incredibly short. You already have former players saying they'd do it if it meant more money. It seems like some think the only people after money are owners.

 

[Rynie]

Do away with the pre-season completely then.

 

[RamFan503]

Absolutely NO to an expanded playoff season and more eligible teams

Totally agree.

Why it won't happen this time around? The league is putting it out there again, knowing the union won't go for it and the league itself really isn't ready for it anyway. But by floating it out there again, it establishes it as a real bargaining point for when the real shoe drops.

Why it will happen? The league will want to expand and going big with eight new teams (one for each division) would make sense. The union will go for it because, of course, that means more members and more power. That means the two extra games would be against that additional team in each division.

Do I say this because I think it's a good idea? Nope. But the NFL can do and has done some stupid shit these days and this just makes too much damn sense with what I see them doing.

Which teams would we play? An extra game against the Cards and 9er’s?

The new teams in each division of course.​

 

[Akrasian]

Totally agree.

Why it won't happen this time around? The league is putting it out there again, knowing the union won't go for it and the league itself really isn't ready for it anyway. But by floating it out there again, it establishes it as a real bargaining point for when the real shoe drops.

Why it will happen? The league will want to expand and going big with eight new teams (one for each division) would make sense. The union will go for it because, of course, that means more members and more power. That means the two extra games would be against that additional team in each division.

Do I say this because I think it's a good idea? Nope. But the NFL can do and has done some stupid crap these days and this just makes too much damn sense with what I see them doing.

The new teams in each division of course.​

Adding 8 teams would shrink the share of TV revenue each team got by 20%, outweighing the slight increase in TV rights. I doubt the league wants that at this time.

Also, filling every reasonable city would reduce the bargaining power of teams for new stadiums on favorable terms. The owners would not like that either.

 

[RamFan503]

Adding 8 teams would shrink the share of TV revenue each team got by 20%, outweighing the slight increase in TV rights. I doubt the league wants that at this time.

Also, filling every reasonable city would reduce the bargaining power of teams for new stadiums on favorable terms. The owners would not like that either.

That's why I say they are not ready. But there are also areas of the country disaffected by the NFL and the prospect of bringing those viewers as well as Mexico, maybe Toronto, Vancouver (probably too close to Seattle), God forbid London (no disrespect to our friends over there, just too far), San Antonio, San Diego, gasp... St Louis, Portland, etc...

Again, I don't think it's a good idea but Goodhell needs a legacy and right now he will just be remembered as a giant douche.

 

[nighttrain]

the last sentence rings!!!!!!!!!!!!!
train

 

[TexasRam]