Randall Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 N.F.L. Owners Will Vote to Lengthen Season, Goodell Says By JUDY BATTISTA DANA POINT, Calif. — National Football League owners could vote in May on plans to lengthen the regular season to 17 or 18 games. The longer regular season, however, is unlikely to begin any earlier than 2011, Commissioner Roger Goodell said Monday at the N.F.L.’s annual meeting. Adding at least one regular-season game while reducing the preseason schedule is a critical component of what Goodell called “increasing value” — the league’s attempt to find new revenue while remaining attractive to fans in the challenging economic climate. There is almost no chance that the regular season will remain at 16 games. But teams are still grappling with changes that will be required for a longer season, among them the possibility of larger rosters. Additional games would have to be negotiated with television networks that broadcast games and with the players union. Owners must decide soon how long the season will be because it is expected to be included in coming negotiations with players on a new collective bargaining agreement. During his opening address to owners and team executives Monday morning, Goodell emphasized that the N.F.L. is facing trying times. “We have to recognize that after this, things might not be the way they were before,” said the Houston Texans’ owner, Robert McNair. “People, their habits in the future might not be the same as in the past, their spending. We have the strongest brand going but we have to protect it. People were overleveraged. Businesses were overleveraged. Going forward, they’re going to not be spending as much money, saving more. That’s going to impact a lot of us.” It is difficult to tell whether the N.F.L.’s hand-wringing is because the league is suffering or because it is beginning the posturing that will take place during negotiations with the players. Goodell said owners talked about their priorities for negotiations, and while he did not offer specifics, Goodell said one of the issues was that the players needed to recognize how the costs of operating franchises have increased. Owners, though, continue to decline to open their books for the union’s review. And in a deal announced Monday, DirecTV will pay about $1 billion a year to extend its rights to carry NFL Sunday Ticket broadcasts through the 2014 season. Still, ticket sales have lagged in other sports and Goodell conceded that he expected season ticket renewals for 2009 to suffer in some markets. That will lead to television blackouts in cities like Detroit, where the economy has been hard hit and where there were blackouts last season. Goodell said the N.F.L. would not change its blackout policy, which requires teams to sell out home games 72 hours before kickoff to avoid a blackout, although teams frequently receive extensions. Extensions were needed to sell out some playoff games in January. And in what could be the clearest sign of hamstrung corporate spending, two of the most high-profile stadiums in the league, the Cowboys’ new stadium that will open this season and the new Giants/Jets stadium that is scheduled to open in 2010, have not sold their naming rights. Those rights are an especially important revenue stream for teams that are building new stadiums without municipal financing. “The risk is entirely on the clubs,” Goodell said. “In this environment, people are very cautious about how they spend their money. I do think it’s going to have an impact on naming rights.” EXTRA POINTS Three new investors in the Pittsburgh Steelers were approved by owners Monday, including the Hall of Fame receiver and former Steeler John Stallworth. Six partners have been approved by owners as part of the reorganization that allows Dan Rooney and his son Art Rooney II to maintain ownership of the team. ... Patriots quarterback Tom Brady will make his return from knee surgery on the season opener of Monday Night Football, on Sept. 14 against Terrell Owens and the Buffalo Bills. The Steelers open the regular season Thursday, Sept. 10, against the Tennessee Titans. On Thanksgiving, Detroit will host Green Bay, Dallas will host Oakland, and Denver will host the Giants in the night game. ww.nytimes.com/2009/03/24/sports/football/24nfl.html?_r=1&ref=sports Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebdog Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 i'd love for them to add two more weeks. 16 games isn't enough. there's 82 in basketball and 82 in hockey...and the ridiculous 162 in baseball. nothing worse then waiting out the yawner baseball season for only 4 months of football. i know that players won't necessarily like it, but this is about me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 25, 2009 Author Share Posted March 25, 2009 i'd love for them to add two more weeks. 16 games isn't enough. there's 82 in basketball and 82 in hockey...and the ridiculous 162 in baseball. nothing worse then waiting out the yawner baseball season for only 4 months of football. i know that players won't necessarily like it, but this is about me. I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 (edited) i'd love for them to add two more weeks. 16 games isn't enough. there's 82 in basketball and 82 in hockey...and the ridiculous 162 in baseball. nothing worse then waiting out the yawner baseball season for only 4 months of football. i know that players won't necessarily like it, but this is about me. Absolutely. A 54 game season would be awesome!!! Edited March 25, 2009 by NAUgrad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 No way the NFLPA goes for this without additional money, and the owners are already going to cut back on the percentage of gross going to the players or lock the players out when the CBA gets revisited after next season. I don't see how either side can use this as anything more than a bargaining chip at the table when negotiations begin in earnest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 (edited) Adding at least one regular-season game while reducing the preseason schedule is a critical component of what Goodell called "increasing value" — the league's attempt to find new revenue while remaining attractive to fans in the challenging economic climate. lmao - what a laughably transparent crock of sh**. Yeah I bet the NFL is bordering on bankruptcy as we speak Just admit the NFL only cares about making money and spare us the "hard times" BS. There is almost no chance that the regular season will remain at 16 games. Sweet....but why stop at 17 or 18 games? Why not 20? Why not 30? Let's dilute each game/the season as much as we can. NFL year round, go for it Goodell and NFL exec POSs: FF is about the only reason I even care about the NFL at all any more. Edited March 25, 2009 by BeeR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 29, 2009 Author Share Posted March 29, 2009 I don't like the limits on off season team activities. I think if more were allowed pre season games could be lowered some and the season extended. Just don't add more bye weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 The only reason the N.F.L. (aka NFL) considers changing the schedule is TV revenue. Obviously the players will want in on the new income as well. Increasing value to the league is for everyone. They also should consider increasing funds towards player disabilities of both current and former players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Just a thought, comments welcomed... so what if they extended the season and removed bye-weeks? The key word in Goodell's quote is "increasing value" to the league. Playing a 16 game schedule over a 17 week period is a "increasing value" idea they had when negotiated tv contracts in previous talks. They aren't going to do away with that. They would increase it to 2 weeks before they would remove all of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I wouldn't mind if they added one more regular season game and then cut one of the four pre-season games to account for it. But that makes too much sense so it will never happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 The key word in Goodell's quote is "increasing value" to the league. Playing a 16 game schedule over a 17 week period is a "increasing value" idea they had when negotiated tv contracts in previous talks. They aren't going to do away with that. They would increase it to 2 weeks before they would remove all of them. +1. If the season goes to 18 games, there will be two bye weeks, IMO. That has the benefit of adding two games (with the associated costs) per team but adding three weeks to the NFL income from TV. I'm not that thrilled with the whole concept but it does have the benefit of pushing the Superbowl out three weeks, which would help make February, the most boring month in sports, much more entertaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skilly Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Adding one more game per season doesn't make any sense to me....that means there would be an unequal number of home/ away games. I suppose you could rotate every other year in getting that extra home game, but it seems silly to me. Get rid of two preseason games, add two regular games. Pay the players. Get tv revenue. It's all good.......just get it done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 The key word in Goodell's quote is "increasing value" to the league. Playing a 16 game schedule over a 17 week period is a "increasing value" idea they had when negotiated tv contracts in previous talks. They aren't going to do away with that. They would increase it to 2 weeks before they would remove all of them. They did the 2 bye weeks in 1993, but that was found to bad bad results as there were too few games in the byes, so they reverted back to 1 bye week in 1994. 2 mitigating factors are that there are 4 more teams in the NFL now and that the bye weeks could be spread further meaning less bye teams per week if they tried that with an expanded schedule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 (edited) Adding one more game per season doesn't make any sense to me....that means there would be an unequal number of home/ away games. I suppose you could rotate every other year in getting that extra home game, but it seems silly to me. Get rid of two preseason games, add two regular games. Pay the players. Get tv revenue. It's all good.......just get it done! Goodell has been pushing for a more international NFL involvement, such as the annual game in London now. This could play into his hands of 1 extra game per year per team, but it would be at a neutral site thus bring 16 total neutral-site games a year. Edited March 29, 2009 by Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Adding one more game per season doesn't make any sense to me....that means there would be an unequal number of home/ away games. I suppose you could rotate every other year in getting that extra home game, but it seems silly to me. Get rid of two preseason games, add two regular games. Pay the players. Get tv revenue. It's all good.......just get it done! They keep pushing for more international games (Mexico, Europe, etc.). They could take the one extra week of the schedule and make it an international neutral site game. That way nobody has to sacrifice a week of home field advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 They keep pushing for more international games (Mexico, Europe, etc.). Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Why? Have you seen the attendance figures for those games? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Have you seen the attendance figures for those games? How does that stack up vs the demographics of moving 2 entire football teams overseas for a week? I know the players & coaches hate it because of the travel time, the distractions, and the very short weeks in creates before & after the game date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 How does that stack up vs the demographics of moving 2 entire football teams overseas for a week? I know the players & coaches hate it because of the travel time, the distractions, and the very short weeks in creates before & after the game date. I agree with you 100%. I never said I was an NFL Executive minded person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I suspect it's a lot more than attendance, but also merchandising and advertising revenues. Agreed. And a portion of that goes to the players. But I'm highly skeptical that once the pie is divvied up that the impact would be signifciant enough for the players to not want to challenge the idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I agree with you 100%. I never said I was an NFL Executive minded person. More importantly, what does Phillip Rivers think of all of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 More importantly, what does Phillip Rivers think of all of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 (edited) More importantly, what does Phillip Rivers think of all of this? To hell with that loser... Edited March 29, 2009 by MTSuper7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Oh, I'm sure the players will challenge it since the real revenue stream won't be realized for years. Players are selfish, me-now... which shocks me that they didn't go back to the table a few years ago to amend the CBA to include a rookie cap. The players will challenge it for sure. But if there is anybody out there that thinks the NFLPA has the same juice it did when Gene Upshaw was alive is sorely mistaken. The owners know this and are pushing to get there changes in now before somebody steps up and starts playing hardball like Gene did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 How does that stack up vs the demographics of moving 2 entire football teams overseas for a week? I know the players & coaches hate it because of the travel time, the distractions, and the very short weeks in creates before & after the game date. IIRC, the two teams involved are on a bye the following week aren't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.