Pros & cons of an 18-game season

Jayme - I merely meant that it would add another variable into judging a player's career in relation to his peers and generations previous. There's already been enough change in the game in the Super Bowl era to render it nearly impossible, and adding two more games just creates even more necessity to try to used mathematics and manipulation to even the playing field for comparisons.

I think the single greatest change to the game came post-2003 after the Manning vs. New England debacle and the resulting tightening of the rules that have inflated the passing game since then. When it comes to comparing statistically great passing seasons, give me Marino's 1984 season considering the state of the league at that time over Manning's or Brady's record breaking seasons.

Pros- the dual thousand yard backfield will become a common occurrence. In fact, a necessity. So, the table for that measure of incentive should be reached more often, and the number one spot will see greater rewards for exceeding 1,200 plus yards, etc.

The theme I think we all keep hitting on is the injury concern, and how it will extrapolate over a career. Going hand in hand with that is also the rehab concern, no?

Brady goes down in Week 1 with the worst injury (arguably, right?) a guy can get, ACL, which instantly starts the clock on the typically mandatory 1 year sit out time. As soon as he's carted off, he's got 52 weeks before his next game, and what, 40 weeks before he's semi-healthy and practicing again? How does the extra two games affect that timetable? Faster rehabilitation = sloppier rehabilitation?

I know these guys have careers to think about, but they also have lives after football to think about too. l

I thought Dan made a great point too, about having to asterisk the different eras, or how a lot of purists will want to regarding the 14-16-18 game seasons. He's right: 16 games feels just fine.

The consideration of an 18 game schedule sucks and is only based in increasing revenues and expansion into the foreign market...it has NOTHING to do with the fans, or the players. The current system is PERFECT...except for the need to better preserve the players' current and future health. If Goodell wants Euro games, simply indemnify those clubs forced to play for their lost home games. With such a revenue-driven agenda, I fear Goodell will transform the NFL into the NBA, ie., a league that values money over the quality of the sport as a whole. How does that help the fans?

I agree with Jack that it has to be an even exchange of preseason games for fans. As a season ticket holder at Lambeau, I'm not thrilled about additional games in January unless it's a playoff game. Just sayin'. However, that plays out to a logistic nightmare at Lambeau Field as well as currently the two preseason games are split between green and gold package holders, where the green package has 6 regular games + 1 preseason, gold package has 2 regular games + 1 preseason. Which package gets the dreaded preseason game and which package gets the additional regular home game?

I like the idea of 18 games, however I understand your player perspective but you have no consideration how this affects the teams finances.
This would be negative to the teams if they had to increase players salaries for teams that sell out pre season games at full price (ie Packers). They would not gain any revenue and potentionally lose revenue at the same time increasing player costs. During preseason games in Green Bay, (and probly many other cities), fans who attend pre season games tend to be fans who dont have season tickets, and they tend to spend more money on jerseys etc than fans who have season tickets. By limiting pre season games to possibly only 1 home game, you would be cutting your fans who only have access to pre season tickets. As a season ticket holder myself, it would help me, but it would hurt the potential revenue for the team and limit access to games to those fans who dont have season tickets.
Teams of course who dont sell out preseason games at full price would see an increase in revenue.
I like the idea of the 18 game season, however I think it would hurt the finances for many teams if they have to increase salaries. Im sure this will be addressed in the new CBA.

Great Story

I think the most interesting take on this is from the AFC GM. It's true that it will have a huge impact on strategy on how you evaluate players. It's hard enough to keep McNabb and Westbrook healthy for a 16 game season...I can't imagine what the extra 2 games would lead to.

I think it is coming, it's a money thing. More games mean more NFL network commercials and bigger TV contracts.

I agree with all of your stipulations, the extra bye week I think is needed, as well as expanding rosters.

The problem will become rookies. Less wrok in the offseason is what Players say they would need, GM's and Coaches need more to evaluate players without those 2 games. If Goodel wants to solve the preseason problem make it illegal for teams to force them onto season ticket packages and let the market decide their worth. If people still pay full value to go, it's their own fault.

I hate the 18 game season idea. I don't think any real football fans want to see more injuries and less preparation, just to get two more weeks of football games. But we will see it, it will be bad for the game, but good for the short term money. And that's what all leagues go for.

Fans stop complaining about the pre-season the moment the regular season begins. When is the NFL going to realize that their business is NOT broken. A 16-game schedule played out over 17 weeks fits nicely into the fall season. Adding two more games moves the start of the regular season up into August where attendance will be affected by fan's family vacations. Or it will extend the season well into January where really cold weather affects games northern cities. Then of course the Super Bowl won't be played until after Valentine's Day. This is way too long of a season in my estimation.
The NFL is forgetting a maxim used in show business for years - "always leave them wanting more." There is no need to satiate every whim of a fan or an owner. The games are a weekly event for every fan. The playoffs captivate the nation and the Super Bowl gets the attention of the world. The friggin draft is a national event for gawds sake! What about having the most popular sport in America and the best run league in the world don't you like NFL?
Don't mess with the product. It's perfect just the way it is.

As someone who has been to the fourth preseason game of the year before, it's not as interesting, so I wouldn't mind seeing the preseason shortened to two games. You would have to had team scrimmages to training camp, which some teams already do. An 18-game schedule would make it a necessity.

Active Rosters need to be expanded. What's the point of a 53-man roster when all of them can't play in a game. Make everyone on the 53-game roster eligible to play, expand the practice squad to 12 players to give teams more room for their rookies they aren't able to properly evaluate during the shortened preseason.

Schedule changes: This is actually a simple change. Add a second bye after the 1st half of the season is over. Keep the current format with rotating between divisions in both conferences. The only change would be the "divisional place" games. As it is, the 1st place team from one year plays the 1st place teams in the divisions of their conference they do not already play. This gives only 2 opponents each year that is determined by finish. If you make all 1st and 2nd place teams play each other and all 3rd and 4th teams play each other (or some other combination, but I prefer this one), you now get 4 teams determined by the results and that's where your 17th and 18th games come from.

Injury Changes: Time to mirror MLB a little. Add x-weeks IR to fullseason IR. Keep the PUP the same as it is because, if I'm not mistaken, it's in place for injuries that existed before the regular season started. Once the season starts, teams should be able to place an injured player on IR without losing the player for the year. Say you've got a 4-week IR in addition to fullseason. During Week 4 a player injures a hamstring enough that means he'll miss a couple of games. You can put him on the 4-week IR, meaning he will not be able to play in the teams games the next four weeks minimum. To replace him on the Active Roster, you can move a player up from the practice squad. If and when the injured player returns, the player who replaced him can be returned to the practice squad, or another move depending on the situation. Teams can also transfer their players to fullseason IR if the injury is deemed to be more severe than originally thought. This would be like IR is currently, meaning the player no longer counts towards the Roster in any way.

As for pay, existing contracts would need to be prorated as mentioned in the article. Any contract signed after the installation of the 18-game season would be for 18-games.

We love the NFL because every game in the 16 game schedule means so much in the standings. I feel adding 2 more games will eliminate some of the suspense we enjoy so much. I really don't see any good reason for the 2 additional games. It appears to me like a $$ grab by the owners. How does that improve the league? More games = more injuries. The system that is currently in place has been a huge success for many of years. Please don't change it. It's PERFECT.

I'm all about what's best for the team. I would rather continue to see 16 games then watch my team fall apart in the playoffs. I just feel right now 4 games is working, why mess with it? The first game is basically easing into it, the second and third games are "live" goes and the fourth game is an opportunity for the last few guys to try to make the team; not to mention anyone who is being cut to have some game film available for other teams. We're talking about player's careers here and not just the business.