An 18-game season with 16-game player limits?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Cowboys' Jones: 18-game season would be safer

safer for whom?  his pockets?

 

[DCOrange]

42 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I like the increase rosters.  But increasing games is just showing you don’t give a crap about CTE or the player’s long term health.  

Of course it is.  It’s plastic faced Jerry Jones’ idea.

 

It's not increasing games for the players though, that's the whole point of this weird proposal. It allows the NFL to increase the regular season schedule to 18 games while increasing the amount of rest that players get and also not increasing the number of games each individual player plays in.

[dollars 2 donuts]

58 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

Don't know about this... There are superstars in the league that people pay to see play. If I am going to pay money to see JJ Watt, or OBJ, or any other non-QB superstar, I don't want to show up and realize they aren't playing. 

 

 

Spoiled elitist.

 

 

 

 

 

jk, drought!

[SinceThe70s]

I wonder if an 18 game season would dilute the playoff implications the last two weeks of the season.

 

Of course they probably already thought of that...we'll need more playoff teams/games. 

[MAJBobby]

39 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

And that’s why if the nflpa had any balls, they would strike.  They have so much power and they just take it from the owners. 

 

Because the rank and file need their checks. And why they wont strike 

Edited August 28, 2018 by MAJBobby

[Fadingpain]

1 hour ago, whatdrought said:

Don't know about this... There are superstars in the league that people pay to see play. If I am going to pay money to see JJ Watt, or OBJ, or any other non-QB superstar, I don't want to show up and realize they aren't playing. 

Not a bad point, but you routinely don't see stars play.  It's called "injury."

 

If this concept was worked into a much bigger revision of the entire season, including the elimination of pre-season or 2 or 3 of the pre-season games, I would be all for it.

 

I would also want to see the extra games front-loaded in the warm weather time of year, not tacked on the end so the Super Bowl is played in late February or some such.

 

Really cold weather games are usually not good.

 

 

[cage]

35 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

I like it....get rid of two pre-season games.

 

It would certainly make for some interesting strategy on the part of coaches.  I'm not sure it would work ultimately.  There's never been a sport where a great player is intentionally sat in that way that I can think of.... I"m not sure

[ddaryl]

Are they going to increase the roster size to 70 players which will increase payrolls considerably. If 51 players are guaranteed 2 games off then a roster of 60 is not enough.... Not when there are 22 - 24 positions on the field.. 21 positions if you subtract P , K , and QB

 

This idea is nothing more then someone tossing crap on the wall to see if it sticks.. 

 

I doubt players would be ok with sitting on the bench for 2 games if healthy, and they don't want to play more than 16.  

 

I don't support it

[dwight in philly]

Dumb . jesus. where do they find these idiots to come up with this? 

[DCOrange]

2 minutes ago, cage said:

 

It would certainly make for some interesting strategy on the part of coaches.  I'm not sure it would work ultimately.  There's never been a sport where a great player is intentionally sat in that way that I can think of.... I"m not sure

Not due to a mandate about how many games a player can play in, but resting star players in baseball and basketball are both pretty normal. Obviously they play in far more games though, so the importance of each individual game isn't as high.

[nucci]

Limiting players to 16 games is wrong. Do they get paid for the missed games...if going to 18 increase the roster and go with 2 bye weeks....will make for a longer season and shorter off-season to recover from injuries

[wagon127]

1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said:

Nope nope

 

I don’t pay 1000 bucks for season tickets to watch backups and a backup QB play when the starter is healthy 

 

those seem like fine Little league rules 

I don't believe they would rest all their starters the same game. Most likely spread it out over the season. Probably pay attention to the matchup, if the opponent is a weak offense, then they would rest several defensive starters, or vice versa.

Edited August 28, 2018 by wagon127

[whatdrought]

1 hour ago, Fadingpain said:

Not a bad point, but you routinely don't see stars play.  It's called "injury."

 

If this concept was worked into a much bigger revision of the entire season, including the elimination of pre-season or 2 or 3 of the pre-season games, I would be all for it.

 

I would also want to see the extra games front-loaded in the warm weather time of year, not tacked on the end so the Super Bowl is played in late February or some such.

 

Really cold weather games are usually not good.

 

 

 

Right, but injuries are unregulated acts of god. This idea is the intentional deprivation of stars during certain games. And you know it's going to be decided the day before the game so there will be no planning around it. 

 

 

And the very biggest problem with this idea is that the "any given sunday" reality of the NFL that we all know and love demands that the very best players available be on the field every time it's possible. Without that the game would loose something, I think.

[mabden]

2 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Just get rid of PS completely. 

 

Expand the rosters to 60, allow all 60 to be active on gameday. 

 

Keep a 10 man PS 

 

and go to 18 games. 

 

There easy. 

Agree.  Go to 18 regular season games and lose 2 preseason games but add roster spots of 60 players minimum plus practice squad to make up for increased injuries and player evaluations/cuts during those lost preseason games.  Now teams can keep their draftees and stash undrafted free agents on the practice squad without much risk.  Besides, most good coaches know who their day starters are outside of a few positions due to competition. 

 

OBTW, I do not like the idea of restricting players to 16 games.  

Edited August 28, 2018 by mabden
forgot main jist of post

[Dablitzkrieg]

This is a stupid idea.  You can't limit superstars' games played.  Imagine a team needing to win the last game or two, but because of the limits, he must sit?  Dumb

1 hour ago, dwight in philly said:

Dumb . jesus. where do they find these idiots to come up with this? 

This is simply the Greedy owners.  Apparently, it will generate close to 1 Billion dollars in revenue, approx. $31 million/NFL Team

[MAJBobby]

7 minutes ago, mabden said:

Agree.  Go to 18 regular season games and lose 2 preseason games but add roster spots of 60 players minimum plus practice squad to make up for increased injuries and player evaluations/cuts during those lost preseason games.  Now teams can keep their draftees and stash undrafted free agents on the practice squad without much risk.  Besides, most good coaches know who their day starters are outside of a few positions due to competition. 

 

OBTW, I do not like the idea of restricting players to 16 games.  

 

See i dont even want 2 PS games. Give me zero

[Fadingpain]

11 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Right, but injuries are unregulated acts of god. This idea is the intentional deprivation of stars during certain games. And you know it's going to be decided the day before the game so there will be no planning around it. 

 

 

And the very biggest problem with this idea is that the "any given sunday" reality of the NFL that we all know and love demands that the very best players available be on the field every time it's possible. Without that the game would loose something, I think.

My point simply is that we already accept that we don't always get to see the best players due to injury, so extending that to the 2 "sit" games is maybe not that big a reach.

 

I disagree about deciding when to sit people just before the games.  That would actually add a ton of interesting strategy to the whole thing.  When do you sit player X?  You would want to sort that out before the season even starts, so as to mitigate the damage of sitting the wrong guy at the wrong time.  But of course, injuries could and probably would play into that, such that the plan you drew up in August is messed up come November.  I.E., perhaps you sat a great player in week 2 b/c you were playing the worst team in the league and figured that was the best time to sit him.

Now you get to week 10 and he is injured!  He is going to be sitting anyway, but you already sat him, so you sat him for nothing.

 

How it would all play out remains to be seen, but there is room for some interesting tactics there for sure.

 

I don't know; I don't think the idea is horribly crazy, though I would suggest it is unlikely to become reality.

 

 

[mead107]

Hope not 

base ball should be shortened along with basketball. 

[PromoTheRobot]

You can extend the season by adding a 2nd bye week and having one bye week fall before a Thursday night game. Also add a third Wild Card playoff berth and give the bye only to the #1 seed.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

Nope nope

 

I don’t pay 1000 bucks for season tickets to watch backups and a backup QB play when the starter is healthy 

 

those seem like fine Little league rules 

 

...what happens if you get down to the wire and due to some breaks, you're still in the hunt, but already played some of your top dawgs the full 16?.....or even backing up a bit and in the stretch run, who sits and who plays again when you need the top dawgs?......