HT02 Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 As a Bills season ticket holder I hate having to pay full price for pre-season games. Owners don't want to give up the ticket revenue by eliminating the games and in fact want to gain additional network TV money by adding regular season games. The players for very good reasons don't want to play more games for the same salary and shorten their careers. My solution which is a win for everyone is this. Add the two additional games BUT... all players are only eligible to play in 16 games. The roster could be expanded from 53 to 61 (making the practice squad guys eligible to play) It is a win all around. As a fan/ticket holder I get real games for the money I am spending. Plus we all have the added fun of questioning our coaches decisions about who to sit and when. WGR will be buzzing about whether we should sit out our QB (versus Detroit when we would still have a chance to win or versus New England on the road when we are likely to lose anyway) Owners get additional revenue from TV without significant additional expense although they would have to pay the practice squad players at least the NFL minimum. Players would get additional time off during the season to heal injuries and part of the added network TV money goes into the pool to raise salaries.
Mr. WEO Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 So you don't want to pay for preseason games but you think it would be better to pay for games that would include practice squad guys and a backup QB? Anyway, there doesn't need to be a solution because there is no longer an 18 game problem.
papazoid Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 i'm a season ticket holder also......i don't like paying full price for a pre-season game(s) either. i have a fix that i'm very surprised all NFL teams haven't already done. cut pre-season prices in half and raise regular season tix by a lil over 10%......same revenue....lol
Buftex Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 As a Bills season ticket holder I hate having to pay full price for pre-season games. Owners don't want to give up the ticket revenue by eliminating the games and in fact want to gain additional network TV money by adding regular season games. The players for very good reasons don't want to play more games for the same salary and shorten their careers. My solution which is a win for everyone is this. Add the two additional games BUT... all players are only eligible to play in 16 games. The roster could be expanded from 53 to 61 (making the practice squad guys eligible to play) It is a win all around. As a fan/ticket holder I get real games for the money I am spending. Plus we all have the added fun of questioning our coaches decisions about who to sit and when. WGR will be buzzing about whether we should sit out our QB (versus Detroit when we would still have a chance to win or versus New England on the road when we are likely to lose anyway) Owners get additional revenue from TV without significant additional expense although they would have to pay the practice squad players at least the NFL minimum. Players would get additional time off during the season to heal injuries and part of the added network TV money goes into the pool to raise salaries. So, how would you feel, say, if the Bills are 8-6, battling it out for a playoff spot, but with 4 games left in the season, they have to go to their backup QB for 2 of the last 4 games? That would suck. I don't like your solution at all...it sounds like a loser to me...it is the same proposal that Tom Brady's agent made. It is silly...if you think that 18 games is too much for one guy to play, all year, than you just don't go to 18 games. Players don't want it, and it seems like fans are kind of ambivilant about it. The only ones who really benefit are the owners. If the owners want to make more money by extending the season, they can cut two pre-season games, start the season a week earlier, add another bye week into the season for each team (giving them 2 byes)...that way, owners get their precious advertising dollars for two more weeks. As a fan, I honeslty could live with the Bills having 2 bye weeks during the season. I am going to tune in whenever they are playing...
bmur66 Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) The owners know a 18 week schedule will never fly with the players. It's just a bargaining chip they threw out there. That is how collective bargaining works. Edited March 24, 2011 by bmur66
PromoTheRobot Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 This is not that bad an idea though coaches would hate it, and probably the TV networks who would hate getting the game where Tom Brady and Peyton Manning had to sit.. You'd have to plan to rest every player twice a seasons so you'd have to really think about matchups. PTR
Buftex Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 This is not that bad an idea though coaches would hate it, and probably the TV networks who would hate getting the game where Tom Brady and Peyton Manning had to sit.. You'd have to plan to rest every player twice a seasons so you'd have to really think about matchups. PTR I thought the main impetus behind the 18 week season was Goodell being embarassed by the quality of "pre-season exhibitions", which received negative feedback from fans and media. The NFL, of course, would never think about making the games cheaper than regular season games for fans, as it would be a decrease in revenue. To increase revenue, the soloution for the owners is to have the players suit up for 2 more regular season games, and add two more full weeks of 4 or 5 network advertising for regualr season games. I just think shortening the exhibition season to two games, starting the season a week earlier, and adding a second bye week to each teams schedule is the most logical way to go.
jumbalaya Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 As a Bills season ticket holder I hate having to pay full price for pre-season games. Owners don't want to give up the ticket revenue by eliminating the games and in fact want to gain additional network TV money by adding regular season games. The players for very good reasons don't want to play more games for the same salary and shorten their careers. My solution which is a win for everyone is this. Add the two additional games BUT... all players are only eligible to play in 16 games. The roster could be expanded from 53 to 61 (making the practice squad guys eligible to play) It is a win all around. As a fan/ticket holder I get real games for the money I am spending. Plus we all have the added fun of questioning our coaches decisions about who to sit and when. WGR will be buzzing about whether we should sit out our QB (versus Detroit when we would still have a chance to win or versus New England on the road when we are likely to lose anyway) Owners get additional revenue from TV without significant additional expense although they would have to pay the practice squad players at least the NFL minimum. Players would get additional time off during the season to heal injuries and part of the added network TV money goes into the pool to raise salaries. Why not just use replacement players for two games? Whoops that is the plan for all of 2011.
Wayne Cubed Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 As a Bills season ticket holder I hate having to pay full price for pre-season games. Owners don't want to give up the ticket revenue by eliminating the games and in fact want to gain additional network TV money by adding regular season games. The players for very good reasons don't want to play more games for the same salary and shorten their careers. My solution which is a win for everyone is this. Add the two additional games BUT... all players are only eligible to play in 16 games. The roster could be expanded from 53 to 61 (making the practice squad guys eligible to play) It is a win all around. As a fan/ticket holder I get real games for the money I am spending. Plus we all have the added fun of questioning our coaches decisions about who to sit and when. WGR will be buzzing about whether we should sit out our QB (versus Detroit when we would still have a chance to win or versus New England on the road when we are likely to lose anyway) Owners get additional revenue from TV without significant additional expense although they would have to pay the practice squad players at least the NFL minimum. Players would get additional time off during the season to heal injuries and part of the added network TV money goes into the pool to raise salaries. It's an interesting take. Do you go all out for those first 16 games, and try to guarantee a playoff spot? Maybe going 14-2 or 13-3? And then just sit your best guys at the end, like what usually happens when a team is guranteed a playoff spot. Which kinda sucks if your a season ticket holder anyways. You pay full price to watch the back ups do clean up work, while your starters sit, because your team is already in the playoffs. Or do you try to judge each match up and determine what you can win with or without? How long before the game would you have to announce whos sitting and who's playing? If it's like the injury report, teams would have a heck of a time game planning. Not to mention it makes finding talent in the later part of the draft all that more important. Probably wouldn't happen, but it's interesting.
papazoid Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 I thought the main impetus behind the 18 week season was Goodell being embarassed by the quality of "pre-season exhibitions", which received negative feedback from fans and media. The NFL, of course, would never think about making the games cheaper than regular season games for fans, as it would be a decrease in revenue. To increase revenue, the soloution for the owners is to have the players suit up for 2 more regular season games, and add two more full weeks of 4 or 5 network advertising for regualr season games. I just think shortening the exhibition season to two games, starting the season a week earlier, and adding a second bye week to each teams schedule is the most logical way to go. i like where your headed......add a second bye week, spreading 16 games over 18 weeks. more regular season TV ad revenue without added injuries and an extra week to heal. shorten the pre-season to two games....BUT START the regular season TWO weeks earlier.
PromoTheRobot Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 i like where your headed......add a second bye week, spreading 16 games over 18 weeks. more regular season TV ad revenue without added injuries and an extra week to heal. shorten the pre-season to two games....BUT START the regular season TWO weeks earlier. How about adding a wild card play-in round? Adding a 3rd wild card team and make the 6th and 7th seeds play each other in an extra week of the playoffs to advance. There! You've added yet another week to the season! PTR
1B4IDie Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 Thats an interesting idea. It would be hard though when Baltimore is fighting for the division but has to sit Flacco and Ray Rice because they both have 16 games. I think a far simpler plan is just add 1 more game. 3 pre-season games, and 17 regular season games. I like this for the fact that there will no more .500 seasons (unless there is a tie) You're either 8-9 or 9-8. Only winning seasons and losing seasons.
bmur66 Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 How about nobody changes a darned thing. Leave it the way it has always been. It ain't broke so don't fix it. There is always someone who wants to lead the charge, changing something for the sake of change. That person is usually gone by the time everyone realizes why things were the way they were.
beerme1 Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 No offense dude but was this an original thought or do you copy it word for word almost from what Mike Ditka said about two weeks ago? As a Bills season ticket holder I hate having to pay full price for pre-season games. Owners don't want to give up the ticket revenue by eliminating the games and in fact want to gain additional network TV money by adding regular season games. The players for very good reasons don't want to play more games for the same salary and shorten their careers. My solution which is a win for everyone is this. Add the two additional games BUT... all players are only eligible to play in 16 games. The roster could be expanded from 53 to 61 (making the practice squad guys eligible to play) It is a win all around. As a fan/ticket holder I get real games for the money I am spending. Plus we all have the added fun of questioning our coaches decisions about who to sit and when. WGR will be buzzing about whether we should sit out our QB (versus Detroit when we would still have a chance to win or versus New England on the road when we are likely to lose anyway) Owners get additional revenue from TV without significant additional expense although they would have to pay the practice squad players at least the NFL minimum. Players would get additional time off during the season to heal injuries and part of the added network TV money goes into the pool to raise salaries.
HT02 Posted March 24, 2011 Author Posted March 24, 2011 No offense dude but was this an original thought or do you copy it word for word almost from what Mike Ditka said about two weeks ago? Never heard Ditka mention it, I thought of this solution two-years ago when I trying to find a solution to the problem of paying for two game I have no intention of ever attending and usually end up selling them on stubhub for $5-10 bucks a piece after paying $65 ea. i'm a season ticket holder also......i don't like paying full price for a pre-season game(s) either. i have a fix that i'm very surprised all NFL teams haven't already done. cut pre-season prices in half and raise regular season tix by a lil over 10%......same revenue....lol Yeah I thought of that too, I also like it because it would allow people who can't afford to attend a regular season game a chance to go. I might even go with making the tickets $10 general admission, spread the difference out on the game tickets and it would probably actually increase revenue because it would put more people in the stadium paying for parking and buying concessions.
JohnC Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 How about adding a wild card play-in round? Adding a 3rd wild card team and make the 6th and 7th seeds play each other in an extra week of the playoffs to advance. There! You've added yet another week to the season! PTR That is an excellent suggestion that a number of people associated with the sport have suggested. It makes a lot of sense. It is a good compromise for the owners and players with respect to the issue of adding two games to the season.
HT02 Posted March 24, 2011 Author Posted March 24, 2011 This is not that bad an idea though coaches would hate it, and probably the TV networks who would hate getting the game where Tom Brady and Peyton Manning had to sit.. You'd have to plan to rest every player twice a seasons so you'd have to really think about matchups. PTR I agree 100% coaches would hate it, because we'd all second guess them and it's why we'd all love it lol. You're right about the games without Brady or Manning but we all know we'd watch our teams anyway right? Look at the mess Ralph has put out on the field for the last 10 years and we watch every single week. I actually pay for the honor! The networks would rather have the stars playing but they would love to have the extra two games even without them. Plus think about the added interest in the pre-game shows with speculation about whether Aaron Rogers would start or sit? Drive the gamblers nuts too. So you don't want to pay for preseason games but you think it would be better to pay for games that would include practice squad guys and a backup QB? Anyway, there doesn't need to be a solution because there is no longer an 18 game problem. Yes I think games that count with 95% of the starters playing would be more interesting than exhibition games with starters going at 1/2 speed for 1/3 of the game do you disagree? Again my solution isn't perfect but i believe it gives something to all parties (owners more money, players more money + additional jobs and fans get what they actually pay for a real contest)
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 I don't see what the big deal is with 18 games. Get rid of two worthless preseason games and replace them with regular season ones.
beerme1 Posted March 24, 2011 Posted March 24, 2011 Never heard Ditka mention it, I thought of this solution two-years ago when I trying to find a solution to the problem of paying for two game I have no intention of ever attending and usually end up selling them on stubhub for $5-10 bucks a piece after paying $65 ea. Well maybe he ripped off your idea then lol!
.thumb.png.7c40145b679a5d0fc95be2194c7e2328.png)
Recommended Posts