Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

No. I think the 18 games would shorten careers even more. Players have a tough enough time playing most of the games now. I love football as much as anyone and would love to see it all year around. If it is about money and making more for the owners why dont they take over the Arena League and the Canadian League as a developmental leagues and have the teams play in the Cities or have them wear there uniforms. I know I would root for a team wearing the Burgundy and Gold. I dont care who is playing. Take the strike of 82, we had no bodies playing but we still rooted for them. Arena could play in after the super bowl and the CFL could play after that and then the big show would be on.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

It's a terrible idea.

At the end of the season most players are dinged up. adding two more games will force the players to play two more games injured.

It's pathetic to hear Goodell talk about concussions and player safety and then he turns around and wants them to endure more punishment.

Please don't ruin a good thing!

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

players are saying no and i'd have to agree for multiple resons. it's not broken and doesn't need fixing...

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

Here's a PFT case for a 17 game season. I still think this, rather than 18, would be better.

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/27/a-case-for-17-games-not-18/]A case for 17 games, not 18 | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;724379]Dan Patrick: With the first nine months of the Baseketball postseason out of the way, the playoff picture is starting to emerge.
Kenny Mayne: So, with last night's victory over Boston, next week the Milwaukee Beers must beat Indianapolis in order to advance to Charlotte. That's in an effort to reduce their magic number to three.
Dan Patrick: Right, and then the Beers can advance to the National Eastern Division North to play Tampa.
Kenny Mayne: So, if the Beers beat Detroit and Denver beats Atlanta in the American Southwestern Division East Northern, then Milwaukee goes to the Denslow Cup, unless Baltimore can upset Buffalo and Charlotte ties Toronto, then Oakland would play LA and Pittsburgh in a blind choice round robin. And if no clear winner emerges from all of this, a two-man sack race will be held on consecutive Sundays until a champion can be crowned.[/quote]

LMAO. :laughing2 Good stuff tryfuhl.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;724337]Let's take the players and owners out of it and just think about it for our own selfish desires. Tell me you wouldn't enjoy watching the Skins another two games a year...[/quote]

At the end of last year we lost to a San Diego team that had in their back ups. One of the worst games ever. I still watched it cause I'm a hard core fan but I can't imagine casual fans would want to watch games like that. It was pure garbage and adding two games will only increase more games like this one..... where a real good team has things wrapped up and doesn't play anyone.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;724266]Well if that's the case why don't we make it a 52 game schedule make Football a year round sport.[/quote]

Sounds good to me. Then we wouldnt have to watch college sports, the NBA, or the NHL because the NFL is over.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

How 'bout the league, owners, and players make sure we have a damn season in 2011 and then worry about having more games.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

I personally could care less if they have an 18 game season or not..

I do know this though,if they do go with 18 game schedules...They better add at least a 7th wildcard team if not an 8th.

Otherwise,you're going to have 12-6 teams missing the Playoffs.
And that's not acceptable..

You've already had an 11-5 patriots team miss the playoffs..10-6 Browns and many others... In a 16 game schedule...

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

Expanding the playoff field is the next logical step especially with a longer season.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=aceinthehouse;724531]I personally could care less if they have an 18 game season or not..

I do know this though,if they do go with 18 game schedules...They better add at least a 7th wildcard team if not an 8th.

Otherwise,you're going to have 12-6 teams missing the Playoffs.
And that's not acceptable..

You've already had an 11-5 patriots team miss the playoffs..10-6 Browns and many others... In a 16 game schedule...[/quote]

Ugh... the 11-5 team missed it, but an 8-8 team got in. It's not a question of more playoff spots, it's being able to win your division. If you can't do that you might get stuck looking in, like the Pats did that year. I would rather see that, even if it's the Skins, then see a 8 and 10 (in the 18 game format) getting into the playoffs ever.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=Mattyk;724539]Expanding the playoff field is the next logical step especially with a longer season.[/quote]

What if instead of expanding the field, they actually got rid of the Wild Card Round? I know that there is absolutely no way the NFL would "give back" playoff revenue, but it's just a thought. Do away with byes and only allow division winners into the playoffs. That said, the NFL would probably do away with byes and add 2 more WC teams.

Anyway, I don't see the problem with an 18 game schedule. I'm sick of people acting like players are on the brink of death when the 16 game schedule ends. Everyone's saying, "the players' bodies can't endure 18 games"...I'm saying that's BS. Will there still be injuries? Sure, but I don't think football injuries only happen when players are worn down. Two games tacked onto the end of the season could shorten careers, sure, but I'm not buying the idea that because guys are nicked up, the game will somehow greatly suffer.

The playoffs usually have some pretty good games, those are games 17-19/20, I rarely see those games suffer because of the extra wear and tear on the players. I know, the intensity is different, but you get the point.

I'm pretty noncommittal on the issue other than to say, more games would make my favorite sport relevant for a longer period of time, I'm just bothered by this idea that players can't take an 18 game schedule because I believe they can.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

Also, Sirius has speculated about the trade offs that would have to occur regarding the CBA if an 18 game schedule were put into place: (Off the top of my head I've heard them say)

1. OTA's go away
2. Staggered mandatory reporting dates for training camp. i.e. If you're a veteran you come later (this would allow for the coaches to evaluate "fringe" players)
3. Scrimmage schedule (would basically take the place of the lost preseason games)

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

I don't like it. Keep it at 16 games. I'd be fine with 4 preseason games, but as a concession to the players, why not reduce the game time? Instead of 15 minute quarters, why not 10 minutes? Or 12 minutes? Theoretically, that would reduce the chances of injuries (one of the complaints of the NFLPA). You could also eliminate overtime in preseason.

Boom. Everybody's happy.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

The league isn't going to cut back on anything that would reduce their ad dollar potential.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

I think that Florio and clue have a pretty solid compromise

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/27/a-case-for-17-games-not-18/]A case for 17 games, not 18 | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

Not sure if the stats have changed or not, but a professional football players on average live 6 years less than the average Joe Watching Football Guy.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=Mattyk;724655]The league isn't going to cut back on anything that would reduce their ad dollar potential.[/quote]

~~~~~~
Yep! One thing I learned from working the league a couple of years is, that it is a business first. Anything to bring in a little more revenue they are going to consider.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

I'm against the 18 game schedule... much too long and injuries will be even a bigger factor on which teams make the playoffs and which ones don't. And they will be playing real games in August in 100 degree weather... much too hot for football. I say cut the preseason games to two and keep the 16 game schedule as is. I would prefer the preseason games to start on Labor day weekend with the real games starting in mid-September.

Although, I'm not sure about any argument against the 18 game schedule due to records.. NFL used to be 12 games long and then 14 games long way back when.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

[quote=Mattyk;724655]The league isn't going to cut back on anything that would reduce their ad dollar potential.[/quote]

You're probably right about that... but have you seen all the empty seats at these preseason games? I don't know what the average NFL attendance is for the preseason games but the stadiums look at least half empty.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

^ apparently a study showed that the attendance at NFL games this year could be a record low.. Most people enjoy the game at home as much as going to the stadiums. I'm in a big time college town so OU games are always sold out, from what I hear most redskins games are as well.. Is that true? Bcuz on TV sometimes it doesn't appear that way.

Re: 18 Game Schedule.. Good or Bad?
 

yes, all skins games are sold out as all regular seats are held by season ticket owners

premium seats are not included

a lot of people show up late, a lot of the club seats are owned by companies/agencies, etc