The NFL going to an 18 game regular season?

[NWPATSFAN]

Players want more $, especially guarenteed. Why should an owner take a loss? Another home game could be the fix?

3 byes damn I hope not. How about 2?

PB&J sandwiches WTF OP

 

[tducey]

Option 2 for me.

 

[eaglesnut]

If I were you I'd be voting for them to cut it to about 8 weeks...

One trick pony

 

[eaglesnut]

As Eugene Monroe says, the players should be able to get the herb thing without anything given up. There's a huge number of players fucked up by opiods. Past and current.

To have to give something up in exchange seems wrong when people everywhere can basically make their own decisions about their health. And I think only the Carolina Panthers are in a state that doesn't recognize medical marijuana.

Players should use their money to hire ms-13 assassins to attack pharma executives until the league relents.

 

[eaglesnut]

Doesn’t matter when it comes to a CBA. It’s all about give and take. Or in this case, give and toke.

Players should play dirty like the owners. They have the means.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

no way they go to 18 games.
If they did though.
Cut the 2 preseason games so the season still ends around the same time.
Increase the Roster
All players on the team can only play in 16 games.
So you have one actual bye week & 2 weeks were starters wouldnt play. (3 bye weeks for players only one actual)

Players only playing 16 games but with more rest in the season.
Owners & the NFL get more weeks of meaningful Football

& yes. I know this will never happen so I will eat my PB&J sandwich.

 

[Brees#1]

2 preseason and 16 regular games are enough.

 

[fastforward]

Traditionally locations have paid a substantial part of the cost of new stadia and stadium renovation. Going forward I see that amount of money decreasing. Effectively that's all out of the owners' end of the CBA agreement. If the average amount of financial assistance given to a team by a location is around $400M and it's going to decrease towards zero then owners are going to want the players' side of the deal to contribute to their shortfall. If a stadium has an NFL lifespan of 30 years then each franchise needs to find $13.333M more each year. I don't see the players being eager to take a $6M+ hit to the salary cap figure. Playing more games costs little more form a stadium depreciation point of view. Thus more games should mean a higher proportion of the revenue going to the players. Moving to an 18 game season seems a likely outcome sometime in the future.

Expanding the playoffs to include a #7 and possibly a #8 seed seems almost certain. Playoff games generate significantly more revenue than regular season games , mostly through tv advertising. In the short-term this will likely be sold to the public with a 10-win minimum. Thus if a potential #7 seed has 10 wins they're in and they'd play the #2 seed, (who would obviously lose their bye). The same would apply to a potential #8 seed, although it would only rarely happen).

 

[Myles]

Traditionally locations have paid a substantial part of the cost of new stadia and stadium renovation. Going forward I see that amount of money decreasing. Effectively that's all out of the owners' end of the CBA agreement. If the average amount of financial assistance given to a team by a location is around $400M and it's going to decrease towards zero then owners are going to want the players' side of the deal to contribute to their shortfall. If a stadium has an NFL lifespan of 30 years then each franchise needs to find $13.333M more each year. I don't see the players being eager to take a $6M+ hit to the salary cap figure. Playing more games costs little more form a stadium depreciation point of view. Thus more games should mean a higher proportion of the revenue going to the players. Moving to an 18 game season seems a likely outcome sometime in the future.

Expanding the playoffs to include a #7 and possibly a #8 seed seems almost certain. Playoff games generate significantly more revenue than regular season games , mostly through tv advertising. In the short-term this will likely be sold to the public with a 10-win minimum. Thus if a potential #7 seed has 10 wins they're in and they'd play the #2 seed, (who would obviously lose their bye). The same would apply to a potential #8 seed, although it would only rarely happen).

What you say may all be true, but I sure hope not.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Yea, I can’t imagine the NFLPA liking or supporting that idea

This is why I'm making a call on a work stoppage coming up. The players seem to have several agenda items they want to see happen and owners are going to want something in return.

I think 16 games is fine, I wouldn't even mind seeing 2 PS + 16 games.

I don't see the players going for 4 PS + 18 games, but 2 + 18 they might go for if that means they are getting some major agenda items to fall their way.

We shall see.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Traditionally locations have paid a substantial part of the cost of new stadia and stadium renovation. Going forward I see that amount of money decreasing. Effectively that's all out of the owners' end of the CBA agreement. If the average amount of financial assistance given to a team by a location is around $400M and it's going to decrease towards zero then owners are going to want the players' side of the deal to contribute to their shortfall. If a stadium has an NFL lifespan of 30 years then each franchise needs to find $13.333M more each year. I don't see the players being eager to take a $6M+ hit to the salary cap figure. Playing more games costs little more form a stadium depreciation point of view. Thus more games should mean a higher proportion of the revenue going to the players. Moving to an 18 game season seems a likely outcome sometime in the future.

Expanding the playoffs to include a #7 and possibly a #8 seed seems almost certain. Playoff games generate significantly more revenue than regular season games , mostly through tv advertising. In the short-term this will likely be sold to the public with a 10-win minimum. Thus if a potential #7 seed has 10 wins they're in and they'd play the #2 seed, (who would obviously lose their bye). The same would apply to a potential #8 seed, although it would only rarely happen).

I'm really curious to see how the owners respond to reducing the pre-season games, because they make the bulk of the money on those and playoff games. Most people don't realize, most of the star players are taking a cut in pay to play in playoff games.

 

[SeattleCoug]

If they were to do this I would think the preseason has to be cut to two weeks.

 

[Old Lion]

Actually if you think about how the schedule is done 18 would make it fairer. Teams would play each team in their div twice and then once against 3 other divisions. They could eliminate inter conference games too if they wanted too so playoff teams in each conference would have a fairer comparison. So basically a team would play each team in their conference once and their division twice for a total of 18 games.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

All teams would have to operate under the same conditions of potential injury and having their team depleted like the Bengals did last year. Get rid of two preseason games, increased active roster size by 2, and have coaches start working their lineups like baseball coaches do over a 162 game season. Start a couple guys lower on your roster in this game, start a couple lower ones in this game, sub in and out more frequently, etc.

For the players, the cap ceiling and floor would have to be raised by at least 12.5% to account for the extra two games, you are able to add 2 more players to the active roster giving more guys jobs, coaches maybe would require lower depth chart players to get more playing time to keep guys healthier, and the lower depth chart guys can maybe get a chance to prove themselves more.

Then you play your entire conference, 1 game each, 2 against division rival, makes 18 games.

Then you do not play against the opposing conference until the SB, and winning the division means nothing, as the 6 best teams in conference advance regardless, you just have to play your own division twice. You can win your division, and be a division champ, but that does not guarantee you a playoff spot if you win your division at 9-9. May be 6 other better teams in the conference. First round byes could go to teams in the same division, and home team in a playoff game always has a better record during the season, always.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

They could also do the following:

They could reduce the quarter lengths from 15 minutes to 12.5 minutes each.

A 16 game season with 15 minute quarters would = 960 minutes of regular season game time

An 18 game season with 12.5 minute quarters would = 900 minutes of game time

This would improve game time, reduce exhaustion injuries late in a game, they can add more commercials into a game, which sucks for fans but would make tv companies happy and line the league with just as much money. They players also get more in game rest, and less time on field during a game. This would generate the 18 game schedule, reduce playing minutes, maintain revenue strength with broadcasting companies. Win for the players, win for the owners, win for the broadcasting companies, semi win for the fans with reduced game lengths.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

If 18 games are decided they'll have to expand the rosters...so the players union won't throw a hissy fit ...because as we all know the players have trouble dealing with 16 games...get rid of pre season...just do inter team scrimmages add the 2 games and increase the roster

The owners will lose all the season ticket revenue for the preseason game lost. Once you start pulling money out of the owners pocket... deal dead!

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

I don't understand why the union and fans are always so quick to go to "player safety" when talking about extending the season or not. It really doesn't matter if the season is 18 games, 16, or 10; it's a violent sport. All the talk about "making it safer" is the equivalent of adding a cotton filter to a cigarette.

The league itself looks stupid for all the rules changes concerning helmet to helmet hits and CTE. It's a sport where the participants are paid for what is essentially gladiatorial combat. Injuries are inevitable.

Now I get it when your favorite star gets hurt and misses significant PT as a result. But this is the sport you watch: players hurl themselves at each other at top speed, wearing a good deal of body armor. The only way to make it "safe" would be to eliminate all contact, no pads or helmets, and go to two-hand touch or flags on the hips.

 

[richig07]

Actually if you think about how the schedule is done 18 would make it fairer. Teams would play each team in their div twice and then once against 3 other divisions. They could eliminate inter conference games too if they wanted too so playoff teams in each conference would have a fairer comparison. So basically a team would play each team in their conference once and their division twice for a total of 18 games.

Interesting. Every team would play each other in each conference. Can't get more fair than that. The whole "strength of schedule" shit about how Team A had an easier road than Team B would be almost rendered irrelevant.

Tough to imagine the NFL dropping inter-conference play, though. Teams having the same schedule every season is less exciting and a tougher sell. You don't ever get to see the best QB's in opposing conferences square off unless they meet in the Super Bowl... etc...

 

[Wamu]

An 18 game schedule.

I never wanna hear the lie again that the owners give 2 shits about players health/safety. Greed, greed, greed. That's what making the season 18 games is all about.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

An 18 game schedule.

I never wanna hear the lie again that the owners give 2 shits about players health/safety. Greed, greed, greed. That's what making the season 18 games is all about.

my way of an 18 game season would be healthier/safer for the players. Not as good for the fans who want to see a particular player, but owners dont give a shit about that anyways.