Lori Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Quad injury. No link yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Quad injury. No link yet. With all the mounting injuries in general can you imagine how bad it would get injurywise if the NFL played an 18 game season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 With all the mounting injuries in general can you imagine how bad it would get injurywise if the NFL played an 18 game season? Ya, but it would give the guys who were injured early more time to return! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Quad injury. No link yet. Link yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 23, 2009 Author Share Posted November 23, 2009 Linky from the PBPost, Tim's old stomping grounds. And yeah, if they ever did go to an 18-game season, I think they'd have to expand the rosters. Still not sure it's worth the added abuse -- even if they cut preseason games to compensate, most of the veteran players aren't seeing much action in the practice games anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 IMO, an 18 game schedule just further dilutes the talent, and subsequent play, on the field. It would also also favor the larger market teams, because they'd have more money available to add the extra players to the roster that the league would almost certainly have to allow. Which would, in turn, further widen the gap between the small and large market teams. Of course, it would lead to increased TV revenues, so it's all good. So, by all means, it should be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts