IrepDC Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 With an 18 game schedule, including playoffs, you are literally doubling the amount of games a rookie coming into the league has ever played in his life. These aren't robots, and this isn't a video game. I enjoy watching the game, but I know how physically demanding a season can be. To want more games is seriously ignoring the already apparent health concerns that come after retirement. I agree with the players that it's mighty funny how the NFL claims to be cracking down for the safety for it's players, but they want these guys to run full speed into each other two extra weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetThePointsSoar Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Thanks for starting this thread HSF but I get the impression that the current owner is pretty well insulated from the voice of the fanbase. Well said. Granted 102 people is a tiny sampling and there could be some massive variance, but EIGHTY-SIX percent right now in a resounding, NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I didn't. I think the number is good for scheduling. If you added 2 games, you have to find where to add those games. If they did add the games, they would have to be intra conference games. I couldn't see say us having to play Baltimore every year, when the Vikings would get the Bills. We currently play the 4th place teams (Carolina and Minnesota) along with the NFC West. I could see both 4ths and 3rds playing each other and both 1sts and 2nds playing each other. In this case we would add Detroit and Tampa Bay to our schedule. Adding two games would be nothing to the schedule makers. You just add an additional game against the two divisions that you only play once against now. Right now each team plays 6 games against their own division, 4 games against a division in the opposite conference, 4 games against a division in the same conference and one game each from the other two divisions in their conference. You just add a game each against the two divisions you only play once against. Don't see a problem. I really can't understand the stance of keeping it as it is now. The number of games that teams are playing is going to remain the same. Only one week is going to be added to the season (a second bye week). And instead of having to pay for 2 preseason games you only have to pay for one, which is huge in my book, particularly if one of those games is the 4th preseason game. I know some of it is just bargaining but I don't understand why the players union fights certain issues like a rookie pay scale. I would think the majority of players would benefit from the available wages being spread out instead of the vast majority of the rookie payroll going to a handful of first rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truant Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Nope.Not only are the preseason games essential for team building and development I enjoy watching the them. People who dislike the quality of play during preseason better prepare themselves. I'm certain that smart coaches that are out to playoff hunt early will use there last few games as defacto preseason games. I don't think coaches ever mail it in. In today's win now NFL coaches can't afford to have the team give up at the end of the season, lest they want to be looking for a college assistant job. ---------- Post added February-24th-2011 at 06:40 PM ---------- With an 18 game schedule, including playoffs, you are literally doubling the amount of games a rookie coming into the league has ever played in his life. These aren't robots, and this isn't a video game. I enjoy watching the game, but I know how physically demanding a season can be. To want more games is seriously ignoring the already apparent health concerns that come after retirement. I agree with the players that it's mighty funny how the NFL claims to be cracking down for the safety for it's players, but they want these guys to run full speed into each other two extra weeks. I don't disagree with your points, but why not contract to ten games then? I think a lot of people are adverse to change. The NFL used to play 10, 11, 12 game seasons. The quality of the game didn't diminish as Football has overtaken Baseball as our country's most hallowed sport. I just don't see how 16 regular season games is the unicorn magical numbers for regular season games during an NFL season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outlaw Torn Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 If it ain't broke don't fix it applies here imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tris Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Normal 65 year old, deceased 45 year old NFL player, 73 year old bower with dementia pugilistica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psu2008 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 If it ain't broke, don't tinker with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I don't think coaches ever mail it in. In today's win now NFL coaches can't afford to have the team give up at the end of the season, lest they want to be looking for a college assistant job I didn't say they would mail it in. Unless you view the preseason as mailing it in. Look at what Shanny did in a 16 game season. He evaluated his team/QBs. Imagine what coaches would do once they're out of the playoffs hunt and a roster full with young players to develop that weren't given the chance during preseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Not at all. I'd rather they add 1 minute to each quarter. Games are too short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Nope.Not only are the preseason games essential for team building and development I enjoy watching the them. People who dislike the quality of play during preseason better prepare themselves. I'm certain that smart coaches that are out to playoff hunt early will use there last few games as defacto preseason games. I'm always excited for preseason games but not nearly as excited as for regular season games. But that's only because I'm so starved for football I'll watch anything, even the scrimmages they used to televise. But you can't be serious that you prefer 4 preseason games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetThePointsSoar Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I don't disagree with your points, but why not contract to ten games then? I think a lot of people are adverse to change. The NFL used to play 10, 11, 12 game seasons. The quality of the game didn't diminish as Football has overtaken Baseball as our country's most hallowed sport. I just don't see how 16 regular season games is the unicorn magical numbers for regular season games during an NFL season. While that's a valid point, Truant, you can use the same logic to keep continuing. Why not go to a 36 game season and play games on Wednesday's too? I'm being facetious obviously, but at some point, you have to find that sweet spot. I think this poll, and even if you polled a much larger sample, proves the point that the overwhelming majority of fans think that 16 games IS that sweet spot, and the "unicorn magical number". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrepDC Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I don't disagree with your points, but why not contract to ten games then? I think a lot of people are adverse to change. The NFL used to play 10, 11, 12 game seasons. The quality of the game didn't diminish as Football has overtaken Baseball as our country's most hallowed sport. I just don't see how 16 regular season games is the unicorn magical numbers for regular season games during an NFL season. I'm not advocating less games, because I understand there is going to be a certain rise in demand once you get to the professional level. But at the same time, when is enough enough? I say 16 is the magical number because that's where we are right now- leave it alone. Refer to post #31 to see what's already happening to these players. Yes they chose to play this game, but are we really going to have men crippled at 40 years old for our entertainment? And yes, adding two more games does increase those odds of players getting hurt. Like I said, these are human beings, not robots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I vote no, keep it at 16 games. If the owners get their way and we go to 18, I think one or two of the "meaningless"* pre-season games should be dropped. *I find in hard to believe good coaches would call those games "meaningless". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrepDC Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The argument that they will expand rosters doesn't even make sense, because in the same breath they say take away two preseason games. You're giving coaches more talent to evaluate and two less games to do it. This 18 game thing doesn't add up from any angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truant Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 While that's a valid point, Truant, you can use the same logic to keep continuing. Why not go to a 36 game season and play games on Wednesday's too? I'm being facetious obviously, but at some point, you have to find that sweet spot. I think this poll, and even if you polled a much larger sample, proves the point that the overwhelming majority of fans think that 16 games IS that sweet spot, and the "unicorn magical number". I see your point. Obviously there is a tipping point. But the same concerns existed when we expanded in the past. Granted, we have more medical knowledge about long-term damage to players... but that seemingly supports a condensing of the season to protect players long-term. There has to be a middle ground and 16 games may be it. But I'll ask this question... if we did expand to 18 games for the regular season, does anyone see themselves not watching those two extra games? Whether we say we prefer it or not, the demand is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flock53 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Yes. Solely for the selfish reason of me wanting to see more football. You would see more Redskin football if we were any good and make the playoffs. The human body cant take 2 more games. NO WAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truant Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The argument that they will expand rosters doesn't even make sense, because in the same breath they say take away two preseason games. You're giving coaches more talent to evaluate and two less games to do it. This 18 game thing doesn't add up from any angle. See post #5. I don't see it as a perfect scenario, but a developmental league would allow player development. Larger rosters and an extra bye week would cut the amount of stain on player's bodies. It would be rare to have starters on special teams because teams could afford to have guys on the roster that are specifically special teams guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 really, am surprised too much football for people? for me the season seems to fly way too fast versus baseball which lingers forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flock53 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 See post #5. I don't see it as a perfect scenario, but a developmental league would allow player development. Larger rosters and an extra bye week would cut the amount of stain on player's bodies. It would be rare to have starters on special teams because teams could afford to have guys on the roster that are specifically special teams guys. Didnt they try a "developmental" league called NFL Europe and fail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 You would see more Redskin football if we were any good and make the playoffs. The human body cant take 2 more games. NO WAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bigger rosters and more depth would be needed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Bigger rosters and more depth would be neededAgreed. If we want quality football, I think we'll HAVE to see more rotations into the ballgame, if we go with 18. Not just on defense either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 With an 18 game schedule, including playoffs, you are literally doubling the amount of games a rookie coming into the league has ever played in his life. These aren't robots, and this isn't a video game. I enjoy watching the game, but I know how physically demanding a season can be. To want more games is seriously ignoring the already apparent health concerns that come after retirement. I agree with the players that it's mighty funny how the NFL claims to be cracking down for the safety for it's players, but they want these guys to run full speed into each other two extra weeks. Ummmmmm, why is it so hard for you guys to comprehend that they are already playing that many games anyway. The rookies are the ones who play the majority of the four preseason games now. So this isn't adding anything addition for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flock53 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Bigger rosters and more depth would be needed So what, if a starter or stud goes down, it wont matter if you have an expanded roster, it would be filled by what is called street free agents anyway----THATS "good" football. Winning a SB shouldnt come down to how good your depth is. Goodell sucks, hes trying to hard to be Rosell or Tagliabu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I see your point. Obviously there is a tipping point. But the same concerns existed when we expanded in the past. Granted, we have more medical knowledge about long-term damage to players... but that seemingly supports a condensing of the season to protect players long-term. There has to be a middle ground and 16 games may be it. But I'll ask this question... if we did expand to 18 games for the regular season, does anyone see themselves not watching those two extra games? Whether we say we prefer it or not, the demand is there. I watch the preseason games Given the current annual schedule for an NFL team (which is now 12 months), how would you find the extra 3-4 weeks needed here without reducing the quality of the games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetThePointsSoar Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I see your point. Obviously there is a tipping point. But the same concerns existed when we expanded in the past. Granted, we have more medical knowledge about long-term damage to players... but that seemingly supports a condensing of the season to protect players long-term. There has to be a middle ground and 16 games may be it. But I'll ask this question... if we did expand to 18 games for the regular season, does anyone see themselves not watching those two extra games? Whether we say we prefer it or not, the demand is there. And you're absolutely right. However, I think that's partly because we're in that select group that are so diehard that not much could shake us away. I just fear that it's a slippery slope, and I speak from experience because years ago I was a casual fan of the NBA, but the exact moment when they took the already too long playoffs and extended it to 7 game series all the way through the playoffs for "more revenue" is when I walked. To this day, I haven't watched more than 10 minutes of NBA action outside of the NBA Finals or highlights on Sportscenter. So my point is that, although the NFL could do little to ever lose you and I, I think they're not taking into account that they may very well lose some of the casual fans. EDIT: On a side note, I do COMPLETELY agree with the developmental league, wish that would become a reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.