18 Game Regular Season In The Works?

[SBbound]

Owners won't like this....

What they will like though is 3 more weeks of TV money, and the players will get 2 more weeks of salary. TV money is huge.

[Panamamike]

we already have thurs night FB. The NFL will really hurt their on field product with this idea. I think it comes from a brain storming session but has little practical chance of becoming a reality. So with injuries etc....who wanta to watch back up qbs, and off the streat centres and 3rd string left tackles protecting franchise QBs? As an owner that would make me nervous. It is a realy bad idea.

The only way to do it is 2 bye weeks for each team.

[Blue Thunder]

Another thought I just had is to just have three evenly spaced bye weeks. Then you have a 16-game, 19-week season. Cut the preseason to two weeks to make it fit into the same time frame. The owners get their longer season (more TV revenue) and the players still only have to play 16 games and get more rest along the way. I could see this maybe being the end result of the players and owners bargaining efforts.

Group 1 = off weeks 5, 9, 13
Group 2 = off weeks 6, 10, 14
Group 3 = off weeks 7, 11, 15
Group 4 = off weeks 8, 12, 16

[Panamamike]

Another thought I just had is to just have three evenly spaced bye weeks. Then you have a 16-game, 19-week season. Cut the preseason to two weeks to make it fit into the same time frame. The owners get their longer season (more TV revenue) and the players still only have to play 16 games and get more rest along the way. I could see this maybe being the end result of the players and owners bargaining efforts.

That has more merit than the idea from the article.

[Canmore]

Another thought I just had is to just have three evenly spaced bye weeks. Then you have a 16-game, 19-week season. Cut the preseason to two weeks to make it fit into the same time frame. The owners get their longer season (more TV revenue) and the players still only have to play 16 games and get more rest along the way. I could see this maybe being the end result of the players and owners bargaining efforts.

Group 1 = off weeks 5, 9, 13
Group 2 = off weeks 6, 10, 14
Group 3 = off weeks 7, 11, 15
Group 4 = off weeks 8, 12, 16

This is really interesting and makes more sense than the article. Might start week 4 and finish week 15 giving 4 weeks with full schedules before the playoffs.

[Blue Thunder]

I just now sent this email to Roger Goodell (and forwarded it to the NFLPA as well). We'll see if they read it and respond. I figured it was worth a shot. Let me know what you guys think.



A Detailed Plan For an 18-Game Season That Should Work For Everybody

Mr. Goodell,

I believe that I have a plan for the NFL schedule that could make all parties happy. Please indulge me by reading the entire email as I hope that you will find this to be true as well.

Part A - Schedule length and bye weeks

You could implement an 18-game, 21-week schedule with three evenly spaced byes during the season. Since the owners seem sold on an 18-game schedule with more traveling to neutral sites involved, it only makes sense for the players to have more time during the season to recover. If you cut the preseason to two games, then this would only add two weeks onto the end of the year time wise.

Bye weeks could be grouped like this:

Group 1 = off weeks 4, 9, 14

Group 2 = off weeks 5, 10, 15

Group 3 = off weeks 6, 11, 16

Group 4 = off weeks 7, 12, 17

Group 5 = off weeks 8, 13, 18

No bye during weeks 1-3 and weeks 19-21

Part B - How to determine the opponents for the two new games

For the two new games, I recommend that you think regionally and create two non-conference "rivalry" games. One of the games would be an international rivalry game and the other would be a "hometown" rivalry game. The rival team matchups would be the same from year to year, therefore building an actual rivalry between the two teams. Here's an example...

The Cowboys (NFC) two rivals would be the Texans (AFC) and the Chiefs (AFC). The Texans would also add the Saints as their second rival, the Saints add the Titans, etc. Alternate years between international and hometown games. I have added a list of my recommendation for the rivalries at the bottom of this email.

Cowboys vs. Texans (in San Antonio year 1, Austin year 3, Waco year 5 and international in years 2, 4, and 6)

Cowboys vs. Chiefs (in Norman year 2, Tulsa year 3, Stillwater year 5, and international in years 1, 3, and 5)

If the Cowboys happen to be playing the AFC West in that year's rotation, then they just play the Chiefs twice - or the Texans twice if they play the AFC South. Teams already play two games per year against their divisional opponents, so doubling up against their regional rival once each every four years shouldn't be an issue.

By utilizing college stadiums, you can truly make NFL fandom even more widespread and more regionally effective. Also, by using geographically close teams, many Cowboys fans that live in Dallas would be willing to drive a few hours to Austin or Norman to see their favorite team beat the hated Texans or Chiefs. Many fans in Austin or Norman would get the opportunity to see their favorite NFL team play in their hometown. Who wouldn't like that?

Imagine the Lions and Browns alternating games in Ann Arbor, Columbus, Canton, and East Lansing... the Saints and Titans alternating games in Baton Rouge, Knoxville, and Oxford... you could use anywhere from 2 to 4 host cities based on the realistic options located between the two teams.

Part C - When to schedule the rivalry games

This would mean that there would be 16 international games and 16 rivalry games each season. The three evenly spaced byes would make scheduling issues more easily solvable, especially if you use the Thursday night, Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Monday night time frames wisely.

International games could be scheduled during the week before a bye, either on Sunday morning (Eastern hemisphere host city) or Sunday or Monday night (Western hemisphere host city) and regional rivalry games could be scheduled for Thursday nights after a bye in order to work around the college stadium that is being used, especially if you can't find a week when that host college team is on the road. It sounds like a lot until you remember that each team is only affected twice and there are only 32 total games of this manner.

If you schedule the 32 games during the fifteen bye weeks (weeks 4 through 18), that would mean that you would have three rivalry games for two weeks and two rivalry games for the other thirteen weeks. Which week is which would be left up to the availability of the venues that are being used. If scheduled efficiently, you would only have one week in which there would be two international games.

This would also allow the beginning (Weeks 1-3) and end of the season (Weeks 19-21) to be used strictly for more conventional games as teams strive to get off to a fast start and/or finish the season strong. You could have two of the first three and two of the last three be divisional games with the other two divisional games somewhere towards the middle of the season, making all parts of the season (early, middle, and late) important.

Part D - Positives for everyone

The owners should like this as there would be more revenue being generated by both a longer TV contract (21 weeks versus 17) and a percentage of the extra gate money from the rivalry games, both regional and international. As things currently stand, due to the international games, there are always a couple of teams that only have seven true home games. This new schedule would even the playing field by allowing each team to keep their all eight of their home games and everyone is expected to travel internationally once a year.

The players should like the three evenly spaced bye weeks, which would allow for more rest time during the season. Players that have a sprained ankle, for instance, would have more opportunities to let it heal instead of having to play injured and running the risk of aggravating the injury further. This could also lead to players having a longer career overall since they wouldn't be playing injured as often. You could also allow more IR-Designated to Return slots as there would be a greater chance of return due to the longer season. If you expand the rosters by a few players to help with the longer season, this would create more jobs (making the players happy). Most of those added players would probably be playing for the league minimum, so it shouldn't negatively affect the increased salary cap much (again making the owners happy). Players should see a general increase in compensation since they are playing 18 games now instead of 16 and they aren't being arbitrarily forced to sit out for two of those games. No one needs to sit out at all if they don't want to.

The networks would be happy because a longer season means more football games, which means more ad revenue. Also, NFL games usually receive relatively high ratings, so more games means more frequently high ratings.

The league would benefit from the popularity of being physically present in so many new markets (both foreign and domestic). That could mean a LOT of great things for the NFL.

The fans would benefit from two more games from their favorite team and the opportunity to travel (both locally and abroad) twice a year to watch their team play in a different setting if they so desire. The smaller-market fans have a more realistic opportunity to see their relatively local NFL team play once a year in a city much nearer to them.

I hope that you receive this email in the spirit that it was intended. I love football and the NFL and I want to help to see it be the most successful version of itself that it can be. Thank you for your time and consideration.



Respectfully,


Blue Thunder (I used my real name here though)

Team		Rival #1		Rival #2
Arizona	=	Denver	&	Houston
Atlanta	=	Tennessee	&	Jacksonville
Baltimore	=	Washington	&	Carolina
Buffalo	=	Philadelphia	&	Detroit
Carolina	=	Cincinnati	&	Baltimore
Chicago	=	Indianapolis	&	Pittsburgh
Cincinnati	=	Minnesota	&	Carolina
Cleveland	=	Detroit	&	Green Bay
Dallas	=	Houston	&	Kansas City
Denver	=	Arizona	&	San Francisco
Detroit	=	Cleveland	&	Buffalo
Green Bay	=	Cleveland	&	Pittsburgh
Houston	=	Dallas	&	Arizona
Indianapolis	=	Chicago	&	Minnesota
Jacksonville	=	Atlanta	&	Tampa Bay
Kansas City	=	Seattle	&	Dallas
Las Vegas	=	Seattle	&	LA Rams
LA Chargers	=	LA Rams	&	San Francisco
LA Rams	=	LA Chargers	&	Las Vegas
Miami	=	New Orleans	&	Tampa Bay
Minnesota	=	Indianapolis	&	Cincinnati
New England	=	NY Giants	&	Philadelphia
New Orleans	=	Miami	&	Tennessee
NY Giants	=	NY Jets	&	New England
NY Jets	=	NY Giants	&	Washington
Philadelphia	=	New England	&	Buffalo
Pittsburgh	=	Green Bay	&	Chicago
San Francisco	=	Denver	&	LA Chargers
Seattle	=	Kansas City	&	Las Vegas
Tampa Bay	=	Jacksonville	&	Miami
Tennessee	=	New Orleans	&	Atlanta
Washington	=	Baltimore	&	NY Jets

The list of rivals above isn't perfect. For instance, I would like to see the Eagles and Steelers as rivals, but this was the best overall geographic fit that I could come up with.

[dmac_bolt]

According to Andrew Beaton of the Wall Street Journal, NFL owners have proposed an 18-game regular season with a caveat that no player would be allowed to compete in more than 16 games.

The NFLPA has been reluctant to stretch the regular season beyond its current 16-game schedule due to injury concerns, but putting a cap on how many games a player can suit up for would be a fair compromise. Per Beaton, extending the regular season by two games could increase league revenue by $2.5 billion while potentially adding $15 million to each team's salary cap. Choosing when to sit players would also add an interesting layer to coaching decisions. It's unclear how much (if any) traction this idea has, but it's not the worst idea the NFL has ever come up with.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-bil...ks-11562859817

The 16 games max per player part is absurd. What are you fielding the other 2 games? Teams generally don't even carry 10 OL, to pick just one obvious flaw. Isn't that a little league rule?

the added two game would be the competitive equivalent of PS scrub games and shouldn't factor into standings for which team is best/better for the playoffs. Which is what we already don't like. $15M salary cap add is less than a 10% add to the 2019 $188M cap. Maybe they can play 7-on-7 while they are at it.

[Fleet]

The 16 games max per player part is absurd. What are you fielding the other 2 games? Teams generally don't even carry 10 OL, to pick just one obvious flaw. Isn't that a little league rule?

the added two game would be the competitive equivalent of PS scrub games and shouldn't factor into standings for which team is best/better for the playoffs. Which is what we already don't like. $15M salary cap add is less than a 10% add to the 2019 $188M cap. Maybe they can play 7-on-7 while they are at it.

I dont know man. Im merely posting the news to be discussed. I agree with you. You will need to expand the PS. And stash a PK/P and LS on there as well.

[Steve]

I would actually like to see the NFL expand the entire roster to something like 60, and do away with having only 45 active players on game days. In fact, I think they need to consider something like that even if they stick with the current 16 game season. NFL rosters are not designed to develop players. They are designed to have enough active players to play a modern NFL game in terms of O, D and ST. There are not really any developmental spots on it, and PS guys don't get to play.

There are so many young players who simply cannot get on a roster because they are a backup with little special teams potential. Malcolm Floyd kicked around for several years, mostly because he couldn't get active on game days unless there was an injury. He finally took an offseason to spend the time to learn to cover and be part of the ST, and he got activated each week and eventually replaced Chris Chambers (and then he never played ST again).

[richpjr]

I would actually like to see the NFL expand the entire roster to something like 60, and do away with having only 45 active players on game days. In fact, I think they need to consider something like that even if they stick with the current 16 game season. NFL rosters are not designed to develop players. They are designed to have enough active players to play a modern NFL game in terms of O, D and ST. There are not really any developmental spots on it, and PS guys don't get to play.

There are so many young players who simply cannot get on a roster because they are a backup with little special teams potential. Malcolm Floyd kicked around for several years, mostly because he couldn't get active on game days unless there was an injury. He finally took an offseason to spend the time to learn to cover and be part of the ST, and he got activated each week and eventually replaced Chris Chambers (and then he never played ST again).

I really HATE the 45 active player rule. I just don't buy the competitive advantage argument. If a player is on the active roster he should be able to play. If he is banged up and cannot suite, so be it. If they are really that worried about it, expand the number of players you can put on IR and shorten the time to when you can bring them back.

While I am at it, if I were king of the NFL I would also not allow teams to poach players off of another team's practice squad.

[Panamamike]

I really HATE the 45 active player rule. I just don't buy the competitive advantage argument. If a player is on the active roster he should be able to play. If he is banged up and cannot suite, so be it. If they are really that worried about it, expand the number of players you can put on IR and shorten the time to when you can bring them back.

While I am at it, if I were king of the NFL I would also not allow teams to poach players off of another team's practice squad.

That poaching has given a lot of players an opportunity and a career. I would vote against that proposal.

the xoncussion protocol to me dictates the game day roster should be expanded.

[richpjr]

That poaching has given a lot of players an opportunity and a career. I would vote against that proposal.

the xoncussion protocol to me dictates the game day roster should be expanded.

When I am king, you won't get a vote!

I do like an expanded roster but getting both the players association and the owners to agree to it makes me think it will be a tough sell.