Heidenreich Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I voted yes. While I do understand the health concerns, and I know exactly where the players are coming from, I would love to have 3 more weeks of hanging out and watching football. I am TOTALLY against adding more teams to the playoffs. 37% of the teams make it already. 2 more makes it 43%. That's too many teams, and it makes the regular season less important than streching it out. I know it's not close to hockey or NBA territory, but only quality teams should make the playoffs. The seventh best team in the conference usually isn't....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tris Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Fine. So if we're ACTUALLY worried about a couple extra games affecting players' health, then why isn't anyone asking for a shorter post-season. Because it's exciting football. No one cares when it's playoffs, hence why I think people don't genuinely care about player's health, it's just a good point of discussion if you're on that side. I think people just don't want to increase the risk past what is already the tolerable limit. We are already chewing up the players and spitting them out with a 50 year old life expectancy - lets not accelerate that issue for the sake of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allannis Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 There seems to be a meme from the owners that the fans want an 18 game schedule.My opinion is that we fans don't want to be charged full price for a preseason game but also want to keep the 16 game schedule. I am hoping this poll will actually reach someone in the organization who can inform the owner of the feelings of the Redskins fan base. we are charged full price for preseason games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Well, thanks for being a man and stepping up to admit it. I really didn't know who I was referring to, just remembered the conversation.Now check out the poll and tell me that you're right. Fans have very real reasons to oppose the 18-game schedule. And its not just because we pretend to be worried about the players' health. Yea I'm not really trying to call anyone liars or whatever, I just think people naturally get ahead of themselves. And a sports fan is more involved in the NFL than they are any other sport. Following every move to the point where they're making decisions as is if they were actually part of the football team. There are very real reasons to oppose an 18-game schedule, I just thought that view was reserved for the players/labor. Even for fans, yes, the injury concern, and the watering down of the game are very real reasons I guess. But I think they're both a hell of a stretch(especially 'watering down of the game), and I think the benefit of seeing more football would be worth it, easily. Easy for me to say, I know, but I am just a fan. And I will say It wouldn't kill me if it stayed 16 games forever, that's fine. I'm not THAT 'for' an 18 game season. I was just surprised at how many people were against it. ---------- Post added February-24th-2011 at 05:24 PM ---------- I think people just don't want to increase the risk past what is already the tolerable limit. We are already chewing up the players and spitting them out with a 50 year old life expectancy - lets not accelerate that issue for the sake of money. It is unfortunate that it's for the sake of money. It's certainly for the sake of the fans too, even if the owners don't know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allannis Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 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. If we are so worried about players heath,we should make it a non-contact sport, maybe flags or something. Make it a penalty if the linemen acually make contact with each other.I mean if their health is the issue,why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 If we are so worried about players heath,we should make it a non-contact sport, maybe flags or something. Make it a penalty if the linemen acually make contact with each other.I mean if their health is the issue,why not? Is there a specific reason why you have to act like a jackass and purposely take what he said to the furthest reaches of exaggeration? Or is that just your personality? Because it doesn't help make any kind of point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manny555 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Is there a specific reason why you have to act like a jackass and purposely take what he said to the furthest reaches of exaggeration? Or is that just your personality?Because it doesn't help make any kind of point. I agree. Let's stay on topic here. 18 game season, to me, doesn't seem that much longer. If you think about it, Preseason games are usually for guys on the bubble. We still get charged full price for an inferior product. As far as the players health, I don't mean to sound offensive but they get paid alot of money. They could always choose to retire to shorten their career. Now that could be another discussion. Because essentially it would mean that instead of players playing 10-15 years (using a generic number), they play 7-10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxinFish29 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I agree. Let's stay on topic here. 18 game season, to me, doesn't seem that much longer. If you think about it, Preseason games are usually for guys on the bubble. We still get charged full price for an inferior product. As far as the players health, I don't mean to sound offensive but they get paid alot of money. They could always choose to retire to shorten their career. Now that could be another discussion. Because essentially it would mean that instead of players playing 10-15 years (using a generic number), they play 7-10 years. Agreed. People don't realize that these guys get paid millions upon millions. Their life expectancy after football is short? Cry me a river. What about police/firefighters and other careers that have a short life expectancy after they retire? And they do it for next to nothing. Not trying to start a whole different debate, just trying to show that shouldn't be part of the decision in another 2 games to their season. I pay full price for 2 preseason games, so of course I would rather see one of those be a real game. As for watering down the game, were not talking about 30 games or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gutlead74 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The compromise for 18 games with the players is said to be less off season work. More games less training equals more injuries. Mark my words there will be a ton of season ending injuries in the first few games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrepDC Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Maybe I'm just impartial because I've given myself, and other players, concussions while playing. The crowd loved the hit, and so did I, but I understand the brutality of what some just consider entertainment. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE football, but sometimes I don't think fans look at the bigger picture. Very few people in this thread acknowledged the post that showed the example of the damage done to these men. Very few people have acknowledged the many NFL alumni with serious health concerns after retiring. I think that the players already put enough on the line for our entertainment, and if they don't want two more games, it should be a closed case. F entertainment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allannis Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Is there a specific reason why you have to act like a jackass and purposely take what he said to the furthest reaches of exaggeration? Or is that just your personality?Because it doesn't help make any kind of point. WOW can't take a joke. Is making personal attacks part of your personality? The point is slamming well trained bodys into each other is going to cause dammage . Some players don't even make it to the NFL before they get permanently damaged, some even get hurt in the preaseason,for a game that does'nt count. So changing 2 preseason games into games that count is a bad idea to you because [ at least partly] players have more of a chance to be injured. I don't agree, I don't think changing 2 preseason games into games that count will make that much of a difference. And in the end we all know that salarys will be adjusted in the long run. Now excuse me while I go on acting like a jackass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 nope. dont want to see the redskins go 6-12 now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allannis Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 nope. dont want to see the redskins go 6-12 now.. :ols: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportjunkie07 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 there are a lot of varying yet good opinions in this thread for either argument. i support the 16 game season. here are a couple reasons why. all of the records would be rewritten. take time to think about this. it would be harder for a person to break brett farve's streak, yet easier to break brady's 50 passing tds in a season. it already happens in sports enough. do you want your grandchild saying in 30 years that player X's contributions werent important cuz he played in the 16 game era?. consider this with redskin players like art monk. his success will be seen as less important. dont buy what the owners have to say, or for that matter, what the players have to say. most people do not want an 18 game season; the owners spew this lie as a bargaining chip for themselves. generally, people will do what helps them out the most. owners will do what profits the owners. the same goes with the players. a lot of the fans that want an 18 game season are season ticket holders anyways. you guys knew that you were paying for preseason went you bought the tickets. an 18 game season will benefit the season ticket holders, so you will find that a lot of them are for it. case in point. some changes that i would like to see are an increase in wildcard teams. its just my opinion, but, 12 of 32 teams isnt enough playoff teams for me. this would increase revenue and allow a lot more fans to not have to "give up until next season" so soon. also, i would like for their to be a rivalry week each year. i would love to kick the **** outta the ravens every year. an afc team picks the closest nfc team and they play on rivalry week. yeah, the ravens are good, and we'd have to play them every year, while the cowboys got to play the texans. but who cares, itd be fun, and the difficulty would be cyclical anyways. ---------- Post added February-24th-2011 at 09:03 PM ---------- The compromise for 18 games with the players is said to be less off season work. More games less training equals more injuries. Mark my words there will be a ton of season ending injuries in the first few games. at first there would be. then people would realize what they had to do to make it through a longer season. more compact, less artificially enhanced players would come to be seen as the best players because theyre bodies would be able to take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I am all for a 20 game season with 3 byes and NFL football over 23 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I voted yes, if for the only reason but to be on the winning side when this mess is over. Also a players health only matters to me during gameday. Players health and health concerns regarding the game should be decided upon by themselves, family members and their unions CBA not fans on a message board. Thus eighteen weeks of football is well worth it to the League, TV Networks and especially me. Lets not get it confused, while football maybe a gladiator type sport the players aren't forced to participate. If one chooses to play a sport that has a close to 100 percent injury rate, in some form or fashion, then they obviously decided the consequences were worth the risk. May sound cold but that is the reality of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'd be fine with 16 but I'd be just as happy to see 18 as well. The only downside to the extra games is the skins could lose more games per season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxinFish29 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 nope. dont want to see the redskins go 6-12 now.. awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 No. Football is already too heavily dependent on which teams are healthy enough to make a run, with the Packers being a glaring exception (though I think they found talent they didn't know they had in some cases like at running back). Maybe if they added two more bye weeks it would be workable but I'd still lean towards now. 16 games is plenty for football and I like that division games count so heavily. Anything to water that down I just can't support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I don't want an 18 game season because I don't think it is necessary. What is wrong with football the way it is right now? Why continually expand the season just because it used to be shorter...in the 70's. It isn't at the point yet, but if you add a few more games and make it 18...maybe it'll be 20 in a few years...it cheapens the importance of each game. I don't like to sit down and watch baseball games or hockey games because they play their games multiple times per week and it doesn't really mean all that much if they lose. I love to sit down and watch Redskins games because every game is important and winning or losing means a lot to the team you follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flock53 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I still refuse to believe that 2 measly games will affect the quality of the game, or water it down whatsoever. I think it's ridiculous and a result of over-thinking this whole situation. I mean really. It's 2 games. No, I'm not ignorant as to how the season goes, and how things are toward the end of the season, etc. It's more football for us to watch, and I think that's all there is to it. The guys aren't going to just start taking naps on the field (like Albert) in games 17 and 18. It's the most intense sport in the world, every second of it. How in the world is everyone so sure this would affect the quality. I really am baffled. INJURIES ACROSS THE BOARD, meaning more 2nd and even 3rd stringers playing on Sundays. It will happen and to all teams. Like I said, winning a championship shouldnt come down to whos got the best depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins55 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Dan Patrick had an interesting idea on his show a few weeks ago....The NFL is looking for more revenue and wants to add two more regular-season games. This will mean two more weeks of TV revenue the league says it needs to make the deal work. Ticket revenue will be a wash, since they’ll shrink the preseason by two games. Here’s how the NFL can get that extra revenue without having to deal with the health risks of an 18-game regular season: 1. Add a second bye week to the regular season. 2. Add two playoff teams in both conferences. This way the NFL gets two more weeks of television revenue. It also adds interest by brining two more teams into the postseason. The extra bye won’t hurt the competitive balance of the league. And the playoffs would be just as exciting. interesting way to please both sides of the table. Now I can definitely roll with that! But something tells me the owners dont want that either. The players would'nt mind having 8 playoff teams and an extra bye week. ---------- Post added February-25th-2011 at 02:17 AM ---------- Judging by the poll, it seems wrong to say that the fans want an 18 game season. However, judging by the responses, you might still say that season ticket holders want it. I cant understand why season ticket holders would want it? The fans barely come to games now unless they are big matchups. So why do we want to see a half empty stadium watching second stringers at the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsenic Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 18 regular season games with only 2 preseason games. extra scrimmage games. for dessert, i'll take expanded rosters, please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 There are a couple things that need to happen to make the season stretch to 18 games: the rosters quite obviously would need to be expanded quite a bit based upon how destructive the game is already. The pre-season trimmed down to 1 or 2 games max (can someone explain its present length to me?). I'm for it but the league already does a piss poor job regarding its care of players so I'd rather see that improved first. On the other hand I'm a gambling fiend and I'd love to have two more weeks to win money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabR Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I will pass on the 18 game season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.