Report: Owners have proposed 18 games with a 16 game limit for each player

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...r-each-player/

I fail to see how that is going to improve the actual product on the field...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fansince'76

I fail to see how that is going to improve the actual product on the field...

---

Goodell don't care about the product.

I thought the 10 minute OT in the name of player safety was beyond stupid. The NFL continues to one-up itself

LOL - the owners will do anything to max out the buckraking

The quality of the games will be degraded every week by at least some starters being held out - I know I would not be happy if I made my annual trip to Pittsburgh for a Steelers game and found out after paying for the trip and tickets that it was healthy scratch week for a number of key Steelers starters (I know players can miss games due to injuries but this is planning to put out an inferior product)

This will never happen but it confirms the game is all about the $$$ abovevall

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AtlantaDan

LOL - the owners will do anything to max out the buckraking

The quality of the games will be degraded every week by at least some starters being held out - I know I would not be happy if I made my annual trip to Pittsburgh for a Steelers game and found out after paying for the trip and tickets that it was healthy scratch week for a number of key Steelers starters (I know players can miss games due to injuries but this is planning to put out an inferior product)

This will never happen but it confirms the game is all about the $$$ abovevall

---

I'm afraid it's going to happen ... I hope you're right

If it comes with an expanded roster there'll be some positives. The expanded roster would give teams more chances to get a hit in a position and more chances to put them on the field. However, the administration of this proposal would be an absolute headache. And, I'll guarantee you there'll be another Pats* cheat rule coming out in a few years because of something to do with this element of the game.

To be honest, I'd be much more for an 18 game season and a second bye week with the last third of the season being divisional games vying for playoff spots. So, play the entire division once in the first 12 games, and then twice in November/December (I know, I sound like a broken record with that).

The NFL wants 18 games. The players want more guaranteed money contracts. Hmmm....how do we make this work?


Will be interesting if this is a blanket 16 game limit so we get Ben for 16 games, Dobbs for a game, and Rudolph for a game.


Just make the playoffs a 16 team elimination bracket instead of the 12 team divided conference format. Sort of a combination NCAA basketball/football playoff format. Would make those regular season games mean much more. AND it doesn't change the season or contract negotiations at all. The NFL makes more TV money because more games are nationally televised, AND playoff players make more guaranteed money because they will play more games. Not to mention the boost it would bring to the fantasy leagues.

Ok. Sure. Owners are going to sign off on 2 games a year without their franchise QB, star RB and WR, and All Pro line men.

Sound like a real good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Born2Steel

Just make the playoffs a 16 team elimination bracket instead of the 12 team divided conference format. Sort of a combination NCAA basketball/football playoff format. Would make those regular season games mean much more. AND it doesn't change the season or contract negotiations at all. The NFL makes more TV money because more games are nationally televised, AND playoff players make more guaranteed money because they will play more games. Not to mention the boost it would bring to the fantasy leagues.

---

Apparently some owners do want to expand the playoffs from 12 to 14 teams as another means of grabbing more $$$

A potential revenue-boosting alternative to the 18-game season, to some owners, would be increasing the NFL’s playoff field from 12 to 14 teams. Seven teams in each conference would qualify for the postseason instead of six. There would be one team in each conference given a first-round playoff bye instead of two. So there would be six opening-round postseason games instead of four.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...ede-marijuana/

I assume a concern is the more you expand the playoffs the greater the chance a .500 team or less gets in, which cheapens the requirement to have a decent regular season - that is the NHL and NBA way. Still not as open as the NCAA basketball tournament, which is a great three week experience that has rendered the regular season pretty much meaningless (with the consequent adverse impact on TV ratings & attendance for regular season college basketball)

So the trick is to expand the schedule without diluting the overall level of interest in the entire product of programming (regular season and playoffs)

Expanded the playoffs format is an awful idea for the product...Just awful awful awful

The regular season would mean almost nothing at this point and we would see too many bad team (team at 8-8 or worse) or disappointed team during the regular season in the playoffs

Even in the current format, sometimes some playoffs games have been unwatchable in the last couple years .... Like in 2017 we saw a Buffalo Bills team in the playoffs or the Miami Dolphins the year before .... Are you interested to see more playoffs games with bad team like that?

It hurts the product to see teams like that in the playoffs, but Goodell do not care about the product

Perhaps the dumbest idea in the world of sports ideas. If you want to extend the season two weeks, add two bye weeks...you can grab ad money that way.

Can’t wait to see teams make roster moves based on a second kicker and punter being added to the roster and then losing games because of it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polamalubeast

Expanded the playoffs format is an awful idea for the product...Just awful awful awful

The regular season would mean almost nothing at this point and we would see too many bad team (team at 8-8 or worse) or disappointed team during the regular season in the playoffs

Even in the current format, sometimes some playoffs games have been unwatchable in the last couple years .... Like in 2017 we saw a Buffalo Bills team in the playoffs or the Miami Dolphins the year before .... Are you interested to see more playoffs games with bad team like that?

It hurts the product to see teams like that in the playoffs, but Goodell do not care about the product

---

I think it would mean different things to different fans. There is some good and some bad as it is now, would be some good and some bad if it expanded as well. But the point of the conversation is expanding the season by 2 games. Expanding the playoffs by 2 games would be a better solution, IMO, than the format in the article. It is my opinion it would be better to get rid of the round 1 bye altogether as well. That is a HUGE advantage for those teams. Playing at home vs the lowest seeded team should be enough advantage for any championship caliber team. As for "bad teams" getting in, that is all relative to whether one of those teams is your team or not. Bills fans and/or Dolphins fans being interested in the playoffs(traveling to games, buying tickets, merch, etc) is better for the league than turning TVs off. If the Steelers had made the playoffs last season would you have watched with a rooting interest or not? Disappointing season and all you would have watched intently. That is the goal of any business as much as "the product".

Teams that finish in the first 2 seed in the conference deserve to have a big advantage .... Being great in the regular season deserves to be rewarded and mediocrity (like 8-8) does not deserve to be rewarded

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polamalubeast

Teams that finish in the first 2 seed in the conference deserve to have a big advantage .... Being great in the regular season deserves to be rewarded and mediocrity (like 8-8) does not deserve to be rewarded

---

I understand your opinion on the playoffs. Which proposal do you think is better for the NFL at large though? Regular season expansion as in the article, or expanding the playoffs? My thinking is expanding the playoffs is better for the league, players, and fans. Expanding the regular season is only good for the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Born2Steel

I understand your opinion on the playoffs. Which proposal do you think is better for the NFL at large though? Regular season expansion as in the article, or expanding the playoffs? My thinking is expanding the playoffs is better for the league, players, and fans. Expanding the regular season is only good for the league.

---

I would keep the same format for the regular season and the playoffs ... If the NFL has something right now that this is not a problem, this is the format in the regular season and the playoffs, even if it is not always perfect, but it's much better than the baseball format (the wild card playoffs games is so dumb, it killed the Pittsburgh Pirates by the way) or the hockey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polamalubeast

I would keep the same format for the regular season and the playoffs ... If the NFL has something right now that this is not a problem, this is the format in the regular season and the playoffs, even if it is not always perfect, but it's much better than the baseball format (the wild card playoffs games is so dumb, it killed the Pittsburgh Pirates by the way) or the hockey

---

OK. Seems your preference is to leave things the way they are. I think that is BETTER than expanding the regular season as proposed in the article. But if the NFL is looking to add games anyway regardless of our feelings, would you rather add regular season games(as proposed) or add playoff games(however that works best for your taste)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Born2Steel

OK. Seems your preference is to leave things the way they are. I think that is BETTER than expanding the regular season as proposed in the article. But if the NFL is looking to add games anyway regardless of our feelings, would you rather add regular season games(as proposed) or add playoff games(however that works best for your taste)?

---

If I have to choose between the two, I would add playoffs games, since add 2 regular season game with a limit of 16 games for each player make no sense for the quality of the product .... The fans who pay the big price for a ticket and also make the big trip to see a game would be the big losers, since it is possible you would not see the star players and the starting QB you want to see, even if they are healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polamalubeast

If I have to choose between the two, I would add playoffs games, since add 2 regular season game with a limit of 16 games for each player make no sense for the quality of the product .... The fans who pay the big price for a ticket and also make the big trip to see a game would be the big losers, since it is possible you would not see the star players and the starting QB you want to see, even if they are healthy.

---

100% agreed. Tell me how you would expand the playoffs under this scenario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Born2Steel

100% agreed. Tell me how you would expand the playoffs under this scenario.

---

Not many scenario.It will be one or 2 more teams per conference in the playoffs...For me if they are to expand the playoffs, my choice would be one more in each conference with the first seed with a playoffs bye.

2 teams per conference must be the max, otherwise it would be way too much

A perspective on why the players do not suck it up and agree to an 18 game schedule to grab their share of the increased $$$ since a 16 game schedule already messes their bodies up

The players’ union estimates a longer season would result in a windfall of new money for the league — up to $2.5 billion per year, according to the Journal, of which players would receive half — but would hurt players’ longevity. That’s crucial, according to NFLPA estimates, because the average NFL career is 3.4 years but would drop to 2.8 years with two more games each season. The minimum required service time for players to receive a pension and long-term health benefits is three years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...=.9abf0787ca79

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AtlantaDan

A perspective on why the players do not suck it up and agree to an 18 game schedule to grab their share of the increased $$$ since a 16 game schedule already messes their bodies up

The players’ union estimates a longer season would result in a windfall of new money for the league — up to $2.5 billion per year, according to the Journal, of which players would receive half — but would hurt players’ longevity. That’s crucial, according to NFLPA estimates, because the average NFL career is 3.4 years but would drop to 2.8 years with two more games each season. The minimum required service time for players to receive a pension and long-term health benefits is three years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...=.9abf0787ca79

---

Yet another reason expanding the playoffs vs the regular season makes more sense.

The players’ union estimates a longer season would result in a windfall of new money for the league — up to $2.5 billion per year, according to the Journal, of which players would receive half — but would hurt players’ longevity. That’s crucial, according to NFLPA estimates, because the average NFL career is 3.4 years but would drop to 2.8 years with two more games each season. The minimum required service time for players to receive a pension and long-term health benefits is three years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...=.9abf0787ca79

Another way to make more money at the players' expense. I'll side with the players on this one.

Sure would make the backup QB much more valuable...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silver & black

Another way to make more money at the players' expense. I'll side with the players on this one.

---

agreed.

if I'm the players union the only way I would agree to an 18 game season is if:

1) Goodell's power to be judge and jury is removed
2) the franchise tag is eliminated
3) both the salary cap and guaranteed money in contracts is increased dramatically

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silver & black

Another way to make more money at the players' expense. I'll side with the players on this one.

---

Yes, those dang poor and abused players... I bet the guys from the 70s and 80s feel bad for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DesertSteel

Yes, those dang poor and abused players... I bet the guys from the 70s and 80s feel bad for them.

---

If the 'new deal' means fewer players get their pension/long term health coverage, are you for that? It does happen in other professions I get that. And they may still get better treatment than the "70s and 80s" players but is this acceptable by the league? I will side with the players on this one as well, as others have said on here. After the Mike Webster story(among many others) I don't know how anyone can dispute long term player health care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Born2Steel

If the 'new deal' means fewer players get their pension/long term health coverage, are you for that? It does happen in other professions I get that. And they may still get better treatment than the "70s and 80s" players but is this acceptable by the league? I will side with the players on this one as well, as others have said on here. After the Mike Webster story(among many others) I don't know how anyone can dispute long term player health care.

---

Explain how fewer players get their pension? Also to say that today’s players may get better treatment is kinda funny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DesertSteel

Explain how fewer players get their pension? Also to say that today’s players may get better treatment is kinda funny.

---

I did not use the word "MAY" the way you describe.

If the league requirement is 3 years to qualify for long term health benefits, a career average of 2.8 years is below that mark. That means(to my reasoning) fewer player reach the 3 year mark and not meeting the requirement. Is this math wrong? Asking.

Come to think of it, this has nothing to do with playing an 18 game season or revenue earned from an 18 game season. Nope. Instead, this has 2020 written all over it. When the players are just about to give on a major issue but they need one thing from the owners, the 18 game season will be trotted out and nixed. The players will cheer they got great concessions and the owners will walk away snickering.