Dear Goodell and NFL team owners: shove it

[Youre Going Down]

The way I look at it is we will have two more weeks of fantasy football!

[Skilly]

I am for it if they expand rosters to say . . . 60 players to allow for extra injuries and keep players to develop. That way you can spend more time coaching up a project without worrying he will get snatched off your practice squad. I wouldnt mind seeing the practice squad increase as well.

 

That way the union gets to add more members, there are more "camp bodies" that can be used for practice purposes, and you could even keep your players healthier by having more special team players take that burden off starters at skill positions.

 

IMHO of course . . .

 

I believe this is the best solution. Teams have to have more players to use for substitution and fill in for injured players. Some have mentioned that the talent pool is thin, but perhaps part of that is because teams can't spend the time to develop players who need more time.

 

I don't really give a crap how many games they play, but I'm going to be seriously pissed if they shut down next season.

[keggerz]

I don't buy the 2 more games means more injuries and we need so much more pay...

 

already a number of teams (playoffs) play in 2 or more games than other teams(20 of 32 teams don't make the playoffs)....how many more injuries do they have because of their added games played(and the playoff games are usually that much more physical than reg season games)? look up at the amount they get paid for playing in a playoff game....for the most part outside of the SB the amount is probably nominal compared to most contracts....the SB is the equivalent if extrapolated out to like 1.6 mill)....so if they add 2 more games then 62.5% of the NFL will be playing in approximately the number of games that playoffs teams play in every year.....yeah that means that the playoff teams do go into uncharted territory but that would be at best just 37.5% of the league.

Edited August 26, 2010 by keggerz

[wildcat2334]

NBA and MLB are a joke because the regular season means nothing. Way too many games, players don't go all out, they rest way to much, blah blah blah. It's all because those regular seasons are WAY, WAY too long. NFL would be taking a huge risk in trivializing the regular season - we can get our fantasy updates on our phones now for goodness sake, there's very little reason to even watch games now. If they make the season such a grind for the players that they start half-assing it like NBA players do the NFL is done.

 

 

apples and oranges - you just cant compare those 3 sports, saying NBA and MLB mean nothing is just an ignorant statement, besides with the current 16 game sched PLENTY of NFL guys coast and half-ass it, you kidding me?

 

I don't care either way but I fail to see how 2 more games would "trivialize" the regular season........

[piratesownninjas]

I think 18 games is too much unless they want to expand rosters greatly and get ready for a watered down end of the season where half the runningbacks aren't playing due to wear/tear.

 

Although I think this is going to be something that the owners back off of in CBA negotiations in order to get the NFLPA to back off some of their issues.

[keggerz]

apples and oranges - you just cant compare those 3 sports, saying NBA and MLB mean nothing is just an ignorant statement, besides with the current 16 game sched PLENTY of NFL guys coast and half-ass it, you kidding me?

 

I don't care either way but I fail to see how 2 more games would "trivialize" the regular season........

I don't think it would either but some sure try to play it up...as it is now each game is .0625 of the season and expanding takes each game to .0555

that is a difference of 11.2% .....some talk about how good teams might sit players 2 or more weeks...I would doubt....and something I think the NFL should do to combat sitting of players is to make the final 3 weeks of the season ALL DIVISIONAL GAMES...that would go a long way to making those remaining games important since divisional games seem to always have much more importance.

[ajh2]

Heard Herm Edwards on ESPN radio talk about this.

 

He said the following

 

1.) He pointed out that players only gert $1,000.00 per preason game.

2.) 53 players are paid every week while only 46 can dress.

3.) 2 bye weeks for rest.

4.) Rookie Wage Scale coming.

5.) Present Contracts have to be changed for this to work.

6.) Increase Practice Squad from 4 to 12

7.) and of course 2 regular season games for two pre-season games

[ajh2]

I feel in order to make the season worth while they make all 6 divisional games a part of the final 8 weeks.

[keggerz]

I think 18 games is too much unless they want to expand rosters greatly and get ready for a watered down end of the season where half the runningbacks aren't playing due to wear/tear.

 

Although I think this is going to be something that the owners back off of in CBA negotiations in order to get the NFLPA to back off some of their issues.

The following teams all played 2 or more games during the playoffs:

NYJ, DAL, BAL, ARZ, MIN, IND, NO(indy and no 3 games)

 

How many of their RBs weren't playing due to wear and tear?

[keggerz]

I feel in order to make the season worth while they make all 6 divisional games a part of the final 8 weeks.

that would be tough but actually I wouldn't have any problem with that either (i don't think)

[Big John]

Heard Herm Edwards on ESPN radio talk about this.

 

He said the following

 

1.) He pointed out that players only gert $1,000.00 per preason game.

2.) 53 players are paid every week while only 46 can dress.

3.) 2 bye weeks for rest.

4.) Rookie Wage Scale coming.

5.) Present Contracts have to be changed for this to work.

6.) Increase Practice Squad from 4 to 12

7.) and of course 2 regular season games for two pre-season games

It is currently 8 players.

[piratesownninjas]

The following teams all played 2 or more games during the playoffs:

NYJ, DAL, BAL, ARZ, MIN, IND, NO(indy and no 3 games)

 

How many of their RBs weren't playing due to wear and tear?

Not following you here. Are you saying that teams wouldn't have runningbacks and other players worn out from an 18 game regular season?

More games=More chance for injury. The 16game schedule is perfect. If it aint broke dont fix it.

[keggerz]

Not following you here. Are you saying that teams wouldn't have runningbacks and other players worn out from an 18 game regular season?

More games=More chance for injury. The 16game schedule is perfect. If it aint broke dont fix it.

what I am saying is that those teams played essentially 18 game schedules last year...So if 7 teams can play 18 games (and I think you will agree that playoff games are more "intense" than reg. season games) without suffering thru what you described above then I think the rest of the NFL will be just fine....now I did also say in a few posts up that it would uncharted territory for a few playoff teams but then again there have been teams that have played 20 games in a year (reg. season and playoffs combined)

[piratesownninjas]

what I am saying is that those teams played essentially 18 game schedules last year...So if 7 teams can play 18 games (and I think you will agree that playoff games are more "intense" than reg. season games) without suffering thru what you described above then I think the rest of the NFL will be just fine....now I did also say in a few posts up that it would uncharted territory for a few playoff teams but then again there have been teams that have played 20 games in a year (reg. season and playoffs combined)

And I would be willing to bet that that the colts/whoever else has clinched a month before the end of season will be resting their starters. Either way the end of the season we'll see backups playing a ton on elite teams.

[ajh2]

Herm said 4 on Pratice Squad. (He sounded a little unsure about the size however) But the jist is to oncrease the sizae of the roster. I think 12 is reasonable.

[keggerz]

FWIW, the following 8 teams have played in 20 games (regular season and playoffs)

80 Raiders

85 Pats

92 Bills

97 Broncos

99 Titans

00 Ravens

05 Steelers

07 Giants

 

I don't have the time to look up who the RBs where and how they did but maybe someone else does....also would be curious to see what sort of additional injuries those teams had that would have been so much worse than the teams that played 16 games.

Edited August 27, 2010 by keggerz

[keggerz]

And I would be willing to bet that that the colts/whoever else has clinched a month before the end of season will be resting their starters. Either way the end of the season we'll see backups playing a ton on elite teams.

Which we already see....Hopefully the NFL will move the 2nd divisonal game to the final 3 weeks and that could possibly help to curb that from happening.

[BeeR]

apples and oranges - you just cant compare those 3 sports, saying NBA and MLB mean nothing is just an ignorant statement,

He said the reg season "means nothing" which is obviously an exaggeration to make a point. They have so many games that any one means little. More games added only takes you farther in that direction. It dilutes things.

 

besides with the current 16 game sched PLENTY of NFL guys coast and half-ass it, you kidding me?

Even if true, so you're saying let's add 2 more and make it worse? ?

 

I don't care either way but I fail to see how 2 more games would "trivialize" the regular season........

Yes, clearly you do.

 

Well it's all moot really, it's gonna happen. The almighty dollar wins every time.

[DMD]

All things being equal, I love the 16 game schedule and having 32 years worth of records in that format. But if it means the NFL continues without interuption and the product doesn't change, then I am for it. Be interesting to have a 15 game regular season and and then a three game post season.

 

It seems like a lot more but look at baseball (162games) and basketball (82). The NFL still has a lot more riding on any single game and players only have to perform in a quarter as many as in basketball and 1/8th as many as in baseball. I mostly lament the end of 1:1 records.

[kingfish247]

The following teams all played 2 or more games during the playoffs:

NYJ, DAL, BAL, ARZ, MIN, IND, NO(indy and no 3 games)

 

How many of their RBs weren't playing due to wear and tear?

This is obvious. Some teams make it to 18 or 19 or 20 games just fine, or almost fine, but that doesn't mean getting there didn't require some judicious personnel decisions. Who practices, who doesn't. Who's a game-time decision, who isn't. Who sits if they can, who guts it out if necessary. Who's injured, plays, but just doesn't get his number called as often. The decision to come back before or after a bye. Gotta watch player X's reps so we're switching around our personnel and tweak our scheme. That's football. 2 additional games makes those decisions all the more important. If your guy is iffy with a grade 2 MCL sprain but could probably go after 3 weeks, why rush him back when the season is 2 extra games on the schedule?

 

But let's take the above listed teams... 4 of them were in the top 10 for rush attempts. Each of those 4 had and used capable RB2s, 3 of them even used decent RB3s. 1 used wildcat semi-often (NYJ), and another dabbled (BAL). Only two had a runner with 300+ attempts (NYJ, MIN). The next RB as heavily used as either of them had 60 less attempts (Rice, 254 attempts). The Super Bowl champs' most heavily used back had only 172 attempts.

 

The point isn't just the RBs. It's reps by everyone. There will certainly be some guys who are machines for 18 games in the season but, on a year-to-year basis, there are likely to be less of them as compared to a 16 game schedule.

[wildcat2334]

He said the reg season "means nothing" which is obviously an exaggeration to make a point. They have so many games that any one means little. More games added only takes you farther in that direction. It dilutes things.

 

no, I don't think going from 16 to 18 dilutes it enough to matter.....

 

Even if true, so you're saying let's add 2 more and make it worse? ?

no, I am saying that some athletes half-ass it whether an NBA player plays 82 games or an NFL guy plays 16,18 games

 

Yes, clearly you do.

No, I really don't. I like the current 16 game sched- going to 18? hard to say if it would be any better until it happens......

[Jrick35]

I wonder, if Fantasy Football had been around at the time, if these same arguments would have been made when the league moved from 14 to 16 regular season games?

 

Or from 11 - 14 games for that matter?

 

The NFL is a business and right now, they do not make as much money, as a league, from Pre-season games as they do from a regular season game, so from a business standpoint adding 2 more regular season games makes sense.

 

I also agree with reducing the # of preseason games. These are just extended tryouts anyway except for week 3 when the starters get more work.

 

As for injuries due to more games, that would have to be looked at after the fact because there are an awful lot of injuries during the pre-season and regular season alike and most people stating that 2 more regular season games will add to the number of significant injuries probably haven't crunched any numbers to back that up. And since the league has increased the number of regular season games in the past, this could be researched.

 

And except in the case of a Season ending injury, an extended regular season might actually allow a team to give someone a little longer to come back from an injury rather than rushing them back, i.e. Mike Turner last year.

[MikesVikes]

I wonder if Goodell would complain about teams resting their starters for the final week or two of the regular season if they played 18? I thought he said that he was going to make it more attractive to not rest starters. This will do the opposite.

 

Btw, I heard the amount of increase in revenue that the league would generate in those additional games. I think that it is going to happen if that is anything remotely close to the truth. I don't think that I'd turn down a billion if I had the chance at it.