The 18-Game Schedule

[SteVo+ 3,702]

WIth CBA negotiations supposedly underway, it seems like the idea of an 18-game schedule is gaining steam. So, what say you, TGP?

Personally, I've had an idea in my head for a while that I think is a nice compromise that keeps everyone happy. It is: a 16-game, 18-week schedule where each team gets two bye weeks. Players win because the extra bye week gives added rest and should, in theory, help with injuries. Owners win because an extra weekend of football means more money (this is a win for players also). Fans win because it's an extra Sunday of football.

Discuss!

[butta54 371]

I don't see one single plausible reason for an increased schedule. 

[DJT20 11]

1 hour ago, butta54 said:

I don't see one single plausible reason for an increased schedule. 

The bottom line, bro... money. The league is trying to reach $25 billion in annual revenue within the next decade. Having an 18 game season would be a thing that would help towards that goal. The NFL doesn’t give a single fuck about “player safety”. Dollar sign over everything else. 

Edited August 11, 2019 by DJT20

[BigBen07 285]

3 hours ago, SteVo said:

WIth CBA negotiations supposedly underway, it seems like the idea of an 18-game schedule is gaining steam. So, what say you, TGP?

Personally, I've had an idea in my head for a while that I think is a nice compromise that keeps everyone happy. It is: a 16-game, 18-week schedule where each team gets two bye weeks. Players win because the extra bye week gives added rest and should, in theory, help with injuries. Owners win because an extra weekend of football means more money (this is a win for players also). Fans win because it's an extra Sunday of football.

Discuss!

I remember that the NFL tried that back in 1993 but the players found it too disrupting for their routines and the league reverted back to 17. I think the same thing would happen here.

21 minutes ago, DJT20 said:

The bottom line, bro... money. The league is trying to reach $25 billion in annual revenue within the next decade. Having an 18 game season would be a thing that would help towards that goal. The NFL doesn’t give a single fuck about “player safety”. Dollar sign over everything else. 

This.^ It's why we have massive overexposure.

Edited August 11, 2019 by BigBen07

[BJORN 679]

I mean, you don't see playoff teams dying with injuries when they play 2 to 3 more games. The first and last preseason games are pretty much meaningless, so I can see the argument for trading them for 2 regular season games. The only downside I see is that it starts a new era of statistics which is just annoying for nerds like myself. Also, the players get more money with extra games.

[butta54 371]

2 hours ago, DJT20 said:

The bottom line, bro... money. The league is trying to reach $25 billion in annual revenue within the next decade. Having an 18 game season would be a thing that would help towards that goal. The NFL doesn’t give a single fuck about “player safety”. Dollar sign over everything else. 

Money isn't a plausible reason...otherwise the answer would be keep increasing games. There would be no end to it. 

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Money is absolutely the reason. They would keep increasing it until the law of diminishing marginal returns kicked in.  The problem is they can't do it by themselves, players have to agree. It's not like the NFL can go in there and say 50 games com I get ready for it. OR they would.

Edited August 11, 2019 by Omerta

[Vin+ 3,121]

More games, less preseason.

Win-win for everyone.

[butta54 371]

I just don't agree. If you did more games and games were only sunday or monday then maybe

[SteVo+ 3,702]

On 8/11/2019 at 3:27 PM, BigBen07 said:

I remember that the NFL tried that back in 1993 but the players found it too disrupting for their routines and the league reverted back to 17. I think the same thing would happen here.

I respectfully disagree. It failed in 1993 for two main reasons: 1) bye weeks scheduled too closely together, and 2) more byes mean fewer games, so fans were getting stuck with bad games on TV.

Problem #1 can be fixed by the schedule-makers, I have no doubt.

Problem #2 is eased by fixing problem #1, but it's mostly solved by the huge wild card that wasn't available in 1993: RedZone. I don't think fans would be stuck in the same situation.

[BigBen07 285]

2 hours ago, SteVo said:

I respectfully disagree. It failed in 1993 for two main reasons: 1) bye weeks scheduled too closely together, and 2) more byes mean fewer games, so fans were getting stuck with bad games on TV.

Problem #1 can be fixed by the schedule-makers, I have no doubt.

Problem #2 is eased by fixing problem #1, but it's mostly solved by the huge wild card that wasn't available in 1993: RedZone. I don't think fans would be stuck in the same situation.

Yeah, good points. The 18-week schedule could also be a huge benefit for teams that play the (still dumb) London games. Extra rest.

[BC 331]

SteVo's new plan sounds really solid. But there's just something so comforting about the idea of keeping it the way it is. The NFL gained popularity from the way it was; not the way it is now. All this BS about defense-less receivers, not being able to land on the quarterback anymore or even incidentally touch one above the shoulders has me terrified about changing more aspects of the game we love. 

[PhilElliot 65]

If money is the reason for this, then it' the reason for everything  the league does. Why wouldn't  it be the reason it lets/makes certain teams win and certain players seem better than others. 

It doesn't' matter if they go to 18. They already take up 4 months. The 18 probably  stands for/means something else about the coming season.

 

..and oh yeah. .enough with the chat ban. It's  been far too long and entirely  unnecessary.  I still like football. I just watch it like wrestling/a movie  now. 

No reason for you to not be able to handle a different  perspective. 

 

 

[BC 331]