PDA

View Full Version : NFL Switching to 18 Regular Season Games...


revefsreleets
03-26-2009, 12:28 PM
Looks like even a blind squirrel finds a nut on occasion. This is a Goodell initiative, one of the few with merit. They'd drop two preseason games and add two regular season contests.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9374904/Goodell-wants-NFL-season-to-be-17-or-18-games

fansince'76
03-26-2009, 12:35 PM
More games that count, perhaps as early as August 2011....

Just in time for the lockout! Woohoo! :tt03:

The_WARDen
03-26-2009, 01:17 PM
How does the Players' Association go along with this? Does everyone salary go up 12% by playing in 2 more games then?

trauben
03-26-2009, 01:23 PM
Although I'll admit to going through some severe football withdrawal following the Pro Bowl, the Pens cover the gap till mini camps just fine.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" Goodell! :banging:

steelreserve
03-26-2009, 02:31 PM
Oh, so this is probably part of Goodell's big push for playe safety, right?

I mean, because if I was worried about too many injuries because the sport is so rough, the first thing I'd do would be to add 15% more full-speed games. ... wait a minute ... UNLESS it really is just about the money! :scratchchin:

Seriously, why doesn't Goodell just come right out and say, "We're making this change out of pure greed, and we made the 'player safety' changes out of greed too because we want to favor flashy finesse teams." Way to go, sackbreath.

lilyoder6
03-26-2009, 02:50 PM
and according to roger.. he said he won't discuss about lengthning the season until there is a new cba

Preacher
03-26-2009, 03:14 PM
Oh, so this is probably part of Goodell's big push for playe safety, right?

I mean, because if I was worried about too many injuries because the sport is so rough, the first thing I'd do would be to add 15% more full-speed games. ... wait a minute ... UNLESS it really is just about the money! :scratchchin:

Seriously, why doesn't Goodell just come right out and say, "We're making this change out of pure greed, and we made the 'player safety' changes out of greed too because we want to favor flashy finesse teams." Way to go, sackbreath.

:rofl:

I guess the American education system still teaches logic in someplaces!!!

:applaudit::applaudit::applaudit:


Does Commissar good-deal think we won't understand?

T&B fan
03-26-2009, 03:36 PM
I heard some radio guy ( ESPN or FOX )say he thought it was a no brainer to add more games and he thoought if there was to be a poll it wolud be 100% for more games ...:banging:
I think it so the radio guys get 2 more weeks of real talk instead of the bull **** that come out of there mouth .

St33lersguy
03-26-2009, 04:23 PM
Roger Goodell= a**hole

Hines0wnz
03-26-2009, 06:14 PM
Not sure I like this change. :noidea:

fansince'76
03-26-2009, 06:19 PM
Not sure I like this change. :noidea:

I can see one positive - it essentially renders the "19-0" trademark meaningless. :chuckle:

OneForTheToe
03-27-2009, 01:10 AM
How does the Players' Association go along with this? Does everyone salary go up 12% by playing in 2 more games then?

This is exactly how they plan to fix the problems with the union - by charging more to the networks to televise more games. The problem is that the league will almost certainly have to increase the roster size beyond 53 players now which will cost the owners more as well.

Plus, I know we hate preseason games, but how do you make a decision about young players with only two preseason games? A decision will have to be made actually after one game in some situations.

Galax Steeler
03-27-2009, 04:08 AM
The nfl players alrady get tired by the end of the season and adding 2 more games will make it worse before the playoffs.

revefsreleets
03-27-2009, 11:29 AM
Hmmmm...I guess I'm the only one that likes this idea.

It's more like adding 1 game. The starters for most teams play pretty significantly in the at least 2 of the 4 preseason games. The yonger players trying to make the squad play at 110%, and there's not a huge drop-off in talent to begin with, so I don't think it will make a big impact on either safety or wear and tear.

steelreserve
03-27-2009, 12:29 PM
I can see one positive - it essentially renders the "19-0" trademark meaningless. :chuckle:

Yeah, but on the other hand, so did getting their asses kicked in the Super Bowl.

lilyoder6
03-27-2009, 12:38 PM
but i'm guessing that if the season would be extended that other owners would want to have more playoff teams

fansince'76
03-27-2009, 01:02 PM
Yeah, but on the other hand, so did getting their asses kicked in the Super Bowl.

Yep, but choking their asses off in the SB didn't keep the egotistical jagoffs from pursuing it anyway.

Likewise, the Patriots didn't go 19-0 — the New York Giants won Super Bowl XLII and dropped the Patriots to 18-1. Still, The Smoking Gun reported that the Patriots have not dropped their trademark requests....

....Why not cancel the request?

"It has not been paramount in our discussions," said Stacy James, the Patriots' executive director of media relations. "There hasn't been any new activity. We would have to take formal action to withdraw it."

James says a paralegal sent in a correction to a typographical error in the original filing. The Smoking Gun called that "a clear indication that the organization remains committed to securing the marks (perhaps Bill Belichick & Co. are anticipating perfection in the 2008 season)."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-04-27-trademark_N.htm

If the new standard of "perfection" to shoot for would be 21-0, then the arrogant assholes' trademark truly would mean dick, and the fee they surely paid to trademark it would be wasted money and the effort to secure it would be a wasted one. I'm all for extending the regular season to 18 games based on that alone.

steelreserve
03-27-2009, 06:26 PM
Makes me wonder whether if another team went 19-0, the Patriots would demand royalties for stealing their idea.

But anyway, this is where you and I probably disagree. You say you'd like to see their trademark rendered useless by the season being lengthened .. I say I'd like to see it rendered useless by their stadium getting nuked.

Give It To Abercrombie
03-27-2009, 08:05 PM
This is exactly how they plan to fix the problems with the union - by charging more to the networks to televise more games. The problem is that the league will almost certainly have to increase the roster size beyond 53 players now which will cost the owners more as well.

That is what I am thinking. It's a way to generate more money for the league so there isn't as much (note I didn't say 'any') bitching at the bargaining table for the next cba. And there damn well better be one. I quit watching baseball because the league f'd it up. I'll stop watching football too.

Plus, I know we hate preseason games, but how do you make a decision about young players with only two preseason games? A decision will have to be made actually after one game in some situations.

There's been talk of a developmental league since NFL Europe, XFL, Arena League, etc are all either dead or dying. That would give the young guys a place to play. You would think they have to expand the roster from 53, but that doesn't mean players 54+ would get any real time to develop, just pick splinters out of their ass.

Give It To Abercrombie
03-27-2009, 08:09 PM
Hmmmm...I guess I'm the only one that likes this idea.

It's more like adding 1 game. The starters for most teams play pretty significantly in the at least 2 of the 4 preseason games. The yonger players trying to make the squad play at 110%, and there's not a huge drop-off in talent to begin with, so I don't think it will make a big impact on either safety or wear and tear.

I see your thinking, but they only play any real time in preseason games 3 and 4. So do you play them heavy in games 1 and 2 now and have 3 and 4 become real games so they play 100%? That's adding beatings. Plus, don't they need extra time prior to the preseason to prepare? Thats two more weeks of prep time they lost. They probably can take it, overall, the extra beating. I just don't think its worth it.

Give It To Abercrombie
03-27-2009, 08:11 PM
I heard some radio guy ( ESPN or FOX )say he thought it was a no brainer to add more games and he thoought if there was to be a poll it wolud be 100% for more games ...:banging:
I think it so the radio guys get 2 more weeks of real talk instead of the bull **** that come out of there mouth .

I listened to it, it was Fox. Sean Farnham (sp?). They did the poll and it came out almost 50/50. I usually like the guy but he was pissing me off, saying anyone who would vote no must be out of our minds. Didn't want to hear any arguments people had when they called in.

T&B fan
03-27-2009, 09:08 PM
I posted this before but here gos

this is what driver Dale Earnhardt Jr. said about Nascar adding more races ,

"What's happened is we have saturated the market with race after race after race," Earnhardt said at Texas. "The NFL, they do such a great job. I hate to keep comparing to them and using them as examples but they do the best job. They give you just enough to keep you wanting more. The season ends before you want it to. You get just enough to get excited and then it's all over and there's such a long wait. The model works."

hes right