18 game schedule in 2012? (1 Viewer)

[EBF]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Aom1...slug=tsn-166308

An 18-game NFL regular season isn't reality yet, but it could be in effect for the 2012 season as early as Wednesday. As league owners continue to meet in Atlanta, expanding the schedule is among the major topics of discussion. ESPN reports that a formal vote will happen sometime this afternoon.

Previous reports indicate most owners are behind the measure, and the swelling support seems likely to push it through.

Any such move would require the approval of the NFL Players Association, but the owners are confident a deal can be reached. Helping their cause is league commissioner Roger Goodell, who is strongly behind adding two games to the current slate.

Goodell is among many who believe the four-game preseason is too long and is unfair to fans who pay regular-season prices to attend those games.

While Goodell is looking out for the fan, the players are wary of schedule expansion because of the extra physical toll it will take, increasing the chance of serious injuries. Coaches have cited the need for a month-long preseason to help them better evaluate the talent on their roster.

Another reason for the owners to wait on voting on the 18-game is current lack of a collective bargaining agreement between them and the players. So far, with the sides considerably apart, there is already the possibility of a lockout for the 2011 season.

The owners' next scheduled meeting is Oct. 12 in Charlotte, N.C.

Anyone else have a real problem with this? They already expanded the season once to 16 games, which is four straight months of football. Now they want to tack on another 2 weeks. How long until we're playing a 52 game season?

I thought this part of the article was pretty funny:

Goodell is among many who believe the four-game preseason is too long and is unfair to fans who pay regular-season prices to attend those games.

While Goodell is looking out for the fan...

Please. Goodell and the owners aren't looking out for the fans. They're looking out for their wallets. More regular season games = more ticket sales, more advertising revenue, and more concessions. This move is 100% about GREED and 0% about improving the NFL's product or looking out for the fans.

The NFL is the most popular sport in America. Its franchises are among the most valuable sports teams in the world. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I might have to switch to soccer in 2012.

 

[JHuber77]

Did you read the article? They are basically voting on an 18 game schedule and removing 2 preseason games. So there is basically no change except that the last 2 preseason games that are played now actually count. Teams basically know who they want and don't want by the last 2 preseason games anyways. The games are played regardless and injuries still happen.

 

[Winky the tunnel ferret]

At some point we'll have too many games. I don't think 18 is past that point.

 

[zadok]

I wouldn't mind 16 games regular season and only 2 preseason games, but the owners will never have less than 10 home games per year. So bring on the 18 game schedule!

 

[EBF]

Did you read the article? They are basically voting on an 18 game schedule and removing 2 preseason games. So there is basically no change except that the last 2 preseason games that are played now actually count. Teams basically know who they want and don't want by the last 2 preseason games anyways.

I'm not opposed to shortening the preseason. My problem is with adding more regular season games. Football is an extremely violent game and it's already pretty difficult for a lot of these guys to stay healthy for 16+ regular season games and playoffs. Adding two more games will only increase the toll on the players, increase the number of injuries, and water down the product. Part of what makes the NFL great in comparison to the NBA/MLB is that the season is relatively short, so every game has huge significance. Will two more games make a huge difference? Probably not, but this is a slippery slope. How long until they start pushing for a 20 game season? Then 24? Then 30? At some point you have to draw the line. I don't buy the idea that this move is for the fans. The NFL is already hugely popular in America. Fans love the product. The only people pushing for the extra two games are the greedy owners who want to pocket a few more millions. That's their right, but I think their product might eventually suffer if they keep making decisions that are driven by their wallets rather than a genuine desire to improve/maintain the quality of their league.

 

[zed2283]

If it's unfair to the fans to pay regular-season ticket prices for pre-season games, then why don't they just charge pre-season ticket prices for pre-season games...?

The coaches need that time to evaluate the players, and many of them won't get a fair shake due to this change.

I agree it's all about money. Bad idea.

 

[Godsbrother]

I am primarily concerned with the regular season extending through January and the post-season through the end of February. I am also wondering how a longer regular season might effect a player's physical and mental fatigue.

But as a season ticket holder I love the idea of not having to pay for 2 preseason games and this is great news from a FF perspective.

 

[identikit]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Aom1...slug=tsn-166308

An 18-game NFL regular season isn't reality yet, but it could be in effect for the 2012 season as early as Wednesday. As league owners continue to meet in Atlanta, expanding the schedule is among the major topics of discussion. ESPN reports that a formal vote will happen sometime this afternoon.

Previous reports indicate most owners are behind the measure, and the swelling support seems likely to push it through.

Any such move would require the approval of the NFL Players Association, but the owners are confident a deal can be reached. Helping their cause is league commissioner Roger Goodell, who is strongly behind adding two games to the current slate.

Goodell is among many who believe the four-game preseason is too long and is unfair to fans who pay regular-season prices to attend those games.

While Goodell is looking out for the fan, the players are wary of schedule expansion because of the extra physical toll it will take, increasing the chance of serious injuries. Coaches have cited the need for a month-long preseason to help them better evaluate the talent on their roster.

Another reason for the owners to wait on voting on the 18-game is current lack of a collective bargaining agreement between them and the players. So far, with the sides considerably apart, there is already the possibility of a lockout for the 2011 season.

The owners' next scheduled meeting is Oct. 12 in Charlotte, N.C.

Anyone else have a real problem with this? They already expanded the season once to 16 games, which is four straight months of football. Now they want to tack on another 2 weeks. How long until we're playing a 52 game season?

I thought this part of the article was pretty funny:

Goodell is among many who believe the four-game preseason is too long and is unfair to fans who pay regular-season prices to attend those games.

While Goodell is looking out for the fan...

Please. Goodell and the owners aren't looking out for the fans. They're looking out for their wallets. More regular season games = more ticket sales, more advertising revenue, and more concessions. This move is 100% about GREED and 0% about improving the NFL's product or looking out for the fans.

The NFL is the most popular sport in America. Its franchises are among the most valuable sports teams in the world. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I might have to switch to soccer in 2012.

R-r-r-r-r-r-ight

 

[Godsbrother]

The coaches need that time to evaluate the players, and many of them won't get a fair shake due to this change

Normally there are very few roster spots that are up for grabs during the preseason. I really don't think that is a problem.I am sure that roster sizes will increase if the regular season is expanded so this will result in more jobs for players.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

Did you read the article? They are basically voting on an 18 game schedule and removing 2 preseason games. So there is basically no change except that the last 2 preseason games that are played now actually count.

I think the starters who play the equivalent of one game (at best) in the four pre-season games combined will see it differently. And expect to be paid diifferently.And, I agree that the line that Goodell is doing this to look out for fans is pretty funny.

 

[PatsFanCT]

How is having more football games a bad thing? The rosters will expand and they'll all get an extra bye week. I'm all for it.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

The rosters will expand and they'll all get an extra bye week.

Listened to Cowherd with Herm Edwards this morning. They both said there had to be a second bye. But they disagreed on whether roster expansion dilutes the talent pool.

 

[Godsbrother]

They already expanded the season once to 16 games

The number of games in the regular season has varied throughout the history of the NFL. It wasn't until 1947 they standardized on a 12 game schedule and then expanded to 14 in the early 60s and then 16 in 1978.

 

[identikit]

How is having more football games a bad thing? The rosters will expand and they'll all get an extra bye week.



I'm all for it.

yep.

I'm on board.

 

[rzrback77]

Much shorter pre-season and more games is all good for fans and to make money for the league, the owners and the players. Fantasy seasons last longer.

Next step is to leagalize and tax gambling and then the economy is fixed as well.

 

[shader]

I think the writing is on the wall. This is going to happen, without question.

However, I think things can be done to minimize the physical impact that this will have on players.

1. No starters play in the pre-season anymore than 1 drive. Right now you have starters playing a full half of pre-season in one game, and usually a full quarter in the other. College football doesn't have pre-season games, why should the NFL? If you take out the 3-4 quarters of pre-season action that current players are getting, this really only ups their actual gametime by 4-5 quarters.

2. Starters need to start sitting down more when the games are out of hand. When a team is winning 35-7, the backup QB's, rb's, and OL need to be off the field. As it is, many starters continue to play. Much of this is due to the 45 man gameday rosters. Which brings me to my next point:

3. Abolish the ridiculous 45 man rosters. It's absolutely a terrible rule. Extend rosters to about 55 players, and let them all be eligible to play.

These changes would need to be made in my opinion to go along with the 18 game season. If they were made, I'd be all for it.

Edited to add: Extra bye week too. That would also help a ton.

 

[ThePhillyPhanatic]

...There goes all the records.

 

[shader]

...There goes all the records.

This is the one reason I don't really like it. We'll adjust though, like we always do.

 

[latrops]

Fine by me. I don't see much point in 4 preseason games. There is no perfect solution, but they've already put in a bye week. Add a few roster spots to each team/practice squad to offset some of the wear and tear concerns. Teams that make the Super Bowl play 19 or even 20 games...with the last few being the most intense, so it isn't as though players can't play 2 extra games.. Of course, 18 regular season games and 4 playoff games does seem a bit much..so it is probably a little tougher to win it all as a Wild Card team.

 

[Tau837]

I'm not opposed to shortening the preseason. My problem is with adding more regular season games. Football is an extremely violent game and it's already pretty difficult for a lot of these guys to stay healthy for 16+ regular season games and playoffs. Adding two more games will only increase the toll on the players, increase the number of injuries, and water down the product.

Part of what makes the NFL great in comparison to the NBA/MLB is that the season is relatively short, so every game has huge significance. Will two more games make a huge difference? Probably not, but this is a slippery slope. How long until they start pushing for a 20 game season? Then 24? Then 30? At some point you have to draw the line.

IMO there is a Chicken Little element to the bolded. This is not a realistic scenario IMO and thus not worthy of being cited in your argument.

I don't buy the idea that this move is for the fans. The NFL is already hugely popular in America. Fans love the product. The only people pushing for the extra two games are the greedy owners who want to pocket a few more millions. That's their right, but I think their product might eventually suffer if they keep making decisions that are driven by their wallets rather than a genuine desire to improve/maintain the quality of their league.

I'm a fan, and I like the move. I regularly watch regular and postseason games but I rarely watch preseason games. This will provide more quality football I will actually watch.I have a bit of apprehension about injuries, but as has been mentioned, injuries already occur in preseason games. What do starters typically play in preseason, maybe 5-6 quarters or so? 1 quarter in the first game, 2 quarters in the second game, 2-3 quarters in the third game, and none in the last game? Or close to that, anyway. This would probably mean they'd play 4 quarters or so in 2 preseason games. Plus two more regular season games. So we're talking about roughly 6 more quarters of play. I don't expect to see a significant increase in games missed due to injury due to this.

 

[Tau837]

How is having more football games a bad thing? The rosters will expand and they'll all get an extra bye week.



I'm all for it.

yep.

I'm on board.

 

[ThePhillyPhanatic]

...There goes all the records.

This is the one reason I don't really like it. We'll adjust though, like we always do.

It's a bit crazy but I think the NFL should consider creating new records. Like making season averages more important...1500 rushing yards in 12 games...average of 125 yards.1500 rushing yards in 14 games...average of 107 yards.1500 rushing yards in 16 games...average of 94 yards.1500 rushing yards in 18 games...average of 83 yards.

 

[Faust]

So what would the fantasy football schedule look like in a 18 game NFL season?

 

[Kleck]

How is having more football games a bad thing? The rosters will expand and they'll all get an extra bye week.



I'm all for it.

yep.

I'm on board.

Me too. I love the idea of an 18 game season.

 

[Superdbs]

The owners better be ready to pay the players a ####-ton more money if they put through an 18 game schedule. The players have a legitimate beef about there being more injuries-- even though it would still be 20 games *total*, most front line players right now are only playing 3 or 4 series for the first two preseason games, most of game #3, and not at all in #4, so of course there will be more injuries with two full extra games spread across 32 teams.

I think this is going to be a real sticking point in hammering out a new CBA. With the owners still getting full TV revenue even if there's no season next year, (how in the bloody hell did the networks agree to that?!) they have major clout and can wait the players out like they always do, but I think the players really dig in for a long fight this time. Wish there were a little more urgency from both sides to get something done instead of waiting for the inevitable stare-down next spring--

 

[ThePhillyPhanatic]

I think 18 games is a horrible decision. And for those of you complaining about so many players getting hurt, they'll constantly go down with an 18 game season and fantasy football will take a big hit whenever they do go through with this. If players are currently having a hard time fully resting in the off-season, two extra games aren't going to do them any good. Plus, you have college players adjusting from a 12 game season to an 16 game season right now. 12 to 18 games? Not going to help.

I hope no one believes that the wear and tear of two preseason games is the same as the wear and tear of two regular season games.

Simply eliminate 2 preseason games and keep the 16 game season.

 

[PatsFanCT]

I think 18 games is a horrible decision. And for those of you complaining about so many players getting hurt, they'll constantly go down with an 18 game season and fantasy football will take a big hit whenever they do go through with this. If players are currently having a hard time fully resting in the off-season, two extra games aren't going to do them any good. Plus, you have college players adjusting from a 12 game season to an 16 game season right now. 12 to 18 games? Not going to help.I hope no one believes that the wear and tear of two preseason games is the same as the wear and tear of two regular season games.Simply eliminate 2 preseason games and keep the 16 game season.

Two more games, one extra week off. Not a big deal. I think people on the "More players will get injured" bus are exaggerating a bit. Every game players get hurt, so adding two more is going to add more injuries, but you're not going to have double the injuries from playing two extra games. I don't remember the last time I saw an entire football team crawl off the field after winning the AFC Championship game because they played 18 games.They are much more conditioned to play 18 games now than they were to play 14 back in the 60's and 70's.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

Simply eliminate 2 preseason games and keep the 16 game season.

This is one option that has zero chance of happening. They are looking to increase revenue, not give money back.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

If it's unfair to the fans to pay regular-season ticket prices for pre-season games, then why don't they just charge pre-season ticket prices for pre-season games...?The coaches need that time to evaluate the players, and many of them won't get a fair shake due to this change.

They will almost certainly increase roster size, so they will get more than a fair shake, they'll get a permanent position.I am in favor of this if they add 1-3 more bye weeks (which would add a lot more $$ for them) to keep players healthier. I hate that is would taint the record books, but that already happened once in the quasi-modern age of football.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

If Goodell cares so much about the fans not wanting to pay regular season prices for an inferior product, then they should lower the prices for pre-season games. Or charge regular season prices for the playoffs and super bowl.

 

[kevinray]

I always really liked the way the opponents are picked each season. Any speculation on how these two extra opponents would fit into the schedule planning? I would like having two extra inter-conference games since you only play those teams once every 4 years currently.

 

[Doug B]

Two things I thought about when the 18-game rumblings first started:

a) Rosters have to expand -- and not by 3 or 4 players. Go with something like 60-65 active for game days.

b) Never happen, but: there could be a league rule that mandates players must each be declared inactive (but still receive game checks) for two regular-season games per season, even if healthy. That would mean no individual would play more than 16 games in a season despite an 18-game season. Of course, strictly applied, that would mean twice a year the Colts would have to roll out Curtis Painter at QB. So maybe each team could declare a few exemptions ... or maybe QBs, long-snappers, kickers, and punters could be exempted. I can think of a lot of tweaks.

 

[Doug B]

I am primarily concerned with the regular season extending through January and the post-season through the end of February.

It's already uncool that the Super Bowl is played in February. If the 18-game schedule is going to be done, it's got to start something like the second or third Sunday in August (whichever yields three regular-season games in August).

 

[Doug B]

Two more games, one extra week off. Not a big deal. I think people on the "More players will get injured" bus are exaggerating a bit. Every game players get hurt, so adding two more is going to add more injuries, but you're not going to have double the injuries from playing two extra games. I don't remember the last time I saw an entire football team crawl off the field after winning the AFC Championship game because they played 18 games.They are much more conditioned to play 18 games now than they were to play 14 back in the 60's and 70's.

These are good points. Maybe with an extra bye week and (much) bigger rosters, more guys can get needed rests within the season without resorting to league-enforced inactive weeks.

 

[identikit]

I am primarily concerned with the regular season extending through January and the post-season through the end of February.

It's already uncool that the Super Bowl is played in January. If the 18-game schedule is going to be done, it's got to start something like the second or third Sunday in August (whichever yields three regular-season games in August).

So I guess it's been uncool for decades for you?

 

[Doug B]

I am primarily concerned with the regular season extending through January and the post-season through the end of February.

It's already uncool that the Super Bowl is played in January February. If the 18-game schedule is going to be done, it's got to start something like the second or third Sunday in August (whichever yields three regular-season games in August).

So I guess it's been uncool for decades for you?

:facepalm:Fixed above.

 

[yabahos]

So what would the fantasy football schedule look like in a 18 game NFL season?

Well assuming that everyone gets 2 bye weeks you are looking at a 20 week NFL regular season. It does open up a nice option for 12 team leagues and 16 team leagues -12 teams - 2 conferences - play everyone in conference 2 times plus everyone in the other division once = 16 games with up to four weeks for playoffs. 16 teams - 2 conferences with 2 divisions each - Play everyone in conference 2 times and out of conference once = 15 games with up to five weeks for playoffs.8 teams - 2 conferences - Play everyone in conference 3 times and everyone out of conference 2 times = 17 games with three weeks for playoffs. I haven't come up with any nice clean options for 10 and 14 teams just yet.

 

[EBF]

IMO there is a Chicken Little element to the bolded. This is not a realistic scenario IMO and thus not worthy of being cited in your argument.

Based on what logic? It used to be a 12 game schedule. Now it looks like an 18 game schedule is imminent. If they can move from 12 to 18 then what will stop them from incrementally moving from 18 to 24? The same arguments will be raised and the greed/power of the owners will once again prevail.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

I always really liked the way the opponents are picked each season. Any speculation on how these two extra opponents would fit into the schedule planning? I would like having two extra inter-conference games since you only play those teams once every 4 years currently.

That's a good point. With 32 teams and 16 games, the math works out perfectly in terms of scheduling.

Maybe 18 games lends itself better to 8 divisions of 5 teams each???

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

b) Never happen, but: there could be a league rule that mandates players must each be declared inactive (but still receive game checks) for two regular-season games per season, even if healthy. That would mean no individual would play more than 16 games in a season despite an 18-game season. Of course, strictly applied, that would mean twice a year the Colts would have to roll out Curtis Painter at QB. So maybe each team could declare a few exemptions ... or maybe QBs, long-snappers, kickers, and punters could be exempted. I can think of a lot of tweaks.

That would be very interesting... I agree I don't see it ever happening, but it sure would add some strategy to choosing lineups.Although, that reminds me of another point I think is worth of discussing... An 18 game schedule would mean even more meaningless games at the end of the season. As it stands we usually have about 2 teams that have nothing to gain in week 16 and 17. I suspect, with an 18 game schedule, we'd have at least as many teams with nothing to play for in week 16/17 (assuming 1 bye) and several more with nothing to play for in weeks 18/19.

 

[aesclepius]

The great thing about adding two games is that they can now have 32 teams qualify for the playoffs.

 

[Funkley]

I hate it mainly because it all but guarantees a lock out in 2011. Do you supporters like it enough to lose the 2011 season?

 

[Yenrub]

I am not a fan of the 18 game schedule

I am not buy it's for the fans crap. Stop charging full price for preseason games. I would appreciate that more than the two regular season games. This move is being made so that the owners can get more money from the TV companies and probably trying not to pay the players more money

Sometimes less is more

 

[comfortably numb]

IMO there is a Chicken Little element to the bolded. This is not a realistic scenario IMO and thus not worthy of being cited in your argument.

Based on what logic? It used to be a 12 game schedule. Now it looks like an 18 game schedule is imminent. If they can move from 12 to 18 then what will stop them from incrementally moving from 18 to 24? The same arguments will be raised and the greed/power of the owners will once again prevail.

Heard Goodell in an interview, and he said that they have a 20 games schedule now, and that he wants to keep it that way.Something also about he has the ability to push for a 22 game schedule.meaning, i suppose 4 +182 +20

 

[ThePhillyPhanatic]

IMO there is a Chicken Little element to the bolded. This is not a realistic scenario IMO and thus not worthy of being cited in your argument.

Based on what logic? It used to be a 12 game schedule. Now it looks like an 18 game schedule is imminent. If they can move from 12 to 18 then what will stop them from incrementally moving from 18 to 24? The same arguments will be raised and the greed/power of the owners will once again prevail.

Heard Goodell in an interview, and he said that they have a 20 games schedule now, and that he wants to keep it that way.Something also about he has the ability to push for a 22 game schedule.meaning, i suppose 4 +182 +20

That's just idiotic. I don't understand why Goodell thinks adding anymore games is a good idea...other than more money. Personally, I'd like to see what it'd be like when the players give it their all each and every week...with the health and want to do so. If anything, that involves decreasing the number of games, not increasing them. There are plenty of teams who, in the past, have been horrific in the December as the season goes on. I'm a big Eagles fan and have no sympathy for the Cowboys but, for example, they, with the exception of last year, seemed to have wore down in December the past couple of seasons.Someone said the players are better conditioned for a 16 or 18 game season than decades ago. I somewhat disagree. Sure, they may be in better shape but there's no doubt that players are bigger and stronger than ever, resulting in more injuries. Ever watch Sports Science? The amount of force some of these guys can create nowadays is incredible. I doubt you'd see the same results forty years ago.

 

[atl3695]

I always really liked the way the opponents are picked each season. Any speculation on how these two extra opponents would fit into the schedule planning? I would like having two extra inter-conference games since you only play those teams once every 4 years currently.

That's a good point. With 32 teams and 16 games, the math works out perfectly in terms of scheduling.

Maybe 18 games lends itself better to 8 divisions of 5 teams each???

Right now only 2 games are decided by the order of your finish. Every team plays their own division (6 games), a division in their conference (4 games), a division in the other conference (4 games). The last two games you play the teams in two of the remaining divisions that finished in the same spot you did. The last two games can just add two teams of the other divisions with the same finish. This will actually add parity as teams that finish in first will have a much tougher schedule. As it stands now, now matter where you finish, 14 of your 16 games are already decided.

 

[fantasizing]

I just can't buy any of the arguments presented by those who oppose increasing the number of regular season games.

How do we know that 16 games is optimal in terms of minimizing injuries, importance of each game, fan interest ?

Has any study or analysis been done ?

For all we know, they should be playing only 8 games a year to increase the longevity of a professional american football player.

Who the hell knows.

As far as I'm concerned, they can play 18 games a year, or 24 or 32......

 

[Bri]

That's just idiotic. I don't understand why Goodell thinks adding anymore games is a good idea...other than more money. Personally, I'd like to see what it'd be like when the players give it their all each and every week...with the health and want to do so. If anything, that involves decreasing the number of games, not increasing them. There are plenty of teams who, in the past, have been horrific in the December as the season goes on. I'm a big Eagles fan and have no sympathy for the Cowboys but, for example, they, with the exception of last year, seemed to have wore down in December the past couple of seasons.Someone said the players are better conditioned for a 16 or 18 game season than decades ago. I somewhat disagree. Sure, they may be in better shape but there's no doubt that players are bigger and stronger than ever, resulting in more injuries. Ever watch Sports Science? The amount of force some of these guys can create nowadays is incredible. I doubt you'd see the same results forty years ago.

less preseason games.Other than-Because more games equals more chances that a fan can see a game. The more fans that experience it live, the better.I don't see how conditioning matters here. If they're practicing for an NFL coach late in the season, they're in shape. If there is injury concerns, Goodell and the NFLPA can get them larger rosters for depth.What if I turn this around and came right back at you and asked why was it a successful move to switch to a 16 game season years ago?

 

[ThePhillyPhanatic]

That's just idiotic. I don't understand why Goodell thinks adding anymore games is a good idea...other than more money. Personally, I'd like to see what it'd be like when the players give it their all each and every week...with the health and want to do so. If anything, that involves decreasing the number of games, not increasing them. There are plenty of teams who, in the past, have been horrific in the December as the season goes on. I'm a big Eagles fan and have no sympathy for the Cowboys but, for example, they, with the exception of last year, seemed to have wore down in December the past couple of seasons.

Someone said the players are better conditioned for a 16 or 18 game season than decades ago. I somewhat disagree. Sure, they may be in better shape but there's no doubt that players are bigger and stronger than ever, resulting in more injuries. Ever watch Sports Science? The amount of force some of these guys can create nowadays is incredible. I doubt you'd see the same results forty years ago.

less preseason games.Other than-Because more games equals more chances that a fan can see a game. The more fans that experience it live, the better.

I don't see how conditioning matters here. If they're practicing for an NFL coach late in the season, they're in shape.

If there is injury concerns, Goodell and the NFLPA can get them larger rosters for depth.

What if I turn this around and came right back at you and asked why was it a successful move to switch to a 16 game season years ago?

Good point but I just feel like players are getting injured more today. Then again, it could just be our access to their every movement.

 

[cvnpoka]

if anything they should be reducing games. for the sake of the players health, and for competition purposes, i hope this doesnt go thru.