[NFL] 16 or 18 Games?

Should the NFL go to 18 games?


  • Total voters
    49
18-game NFL season could mean a new TV partner, permanent date for Super Bowl

18-game NFL season could mean a new TV partner, permanent date for Super Bowl | Company Town | Los Angeles Times

Clearly, a longer season would give the NFL some juice to try to get the networks to pay more for rights. The NFL's current deals with CBS, NBC, ESPN and Fox are set to expire in 2014. The league takes in about $3.1 billion annually for those deals, another $1 billion annually from DirecTV for the Sunday Ticket package and $400 million a year from its own NFL Network.
With a longer season, the league could even consider carving out yet another television package of games. Currently, the NFL Network carries eight games in the second half of the season on Thursday and Saturday nights. The NFL could add one game to that package and create another nine-game package for games in the first half of the season that it could sell to itself or to another cable or broadcast network.


As for whether an 18-game season would mean an earlier start or later finish: If recent history is any guide, the NFL wants to take over February. The Super Bowl always used to be played in mid- to late January, but over the last 10 years, the game has mostly taken place in February. Adding two regular-season games could push the Super Bowl into mid-February and give the NFL a chance to make the three-day Presidents' Day weekend a permanent home for its biggest event. No doubt there are plenty of football fans who overdo it on Super Bowl Sunday and wouldn't mind having Monday off.


This could be Versus' big chance to really breakthrough outside of simply the NHL and some fringe events.
 
Even THIS would work for me. 2 preseason and 16 regular games.

But the owners would never give up that money now that they get it, reminds of some sat companies, eh? ;)

I like THIS best, 2 Pre season games, add a week or two to the start of training if they need to and KEEP it at 16 games.

Owners have to be flexible SOMEWHERE.
 
It won't be on ESPN either, ever. It won't be on a pay channel, it will diminish the advertising revenue too much. It will be 'ESPN on ABC' at the most, if they want to brand ESPN on the Super Bowl (if they haven't done this already).

The Viking game last year (the most watched telecast in cable history) had over 15 million people watching.

The Super Bowl had more than 105 million.

Would it be the most watched telecast in cable history? Sure, but it will never be on pay TV, there's too much in advertising to be made.
 
Yup !

But they normally do decent in the pre season.
Maybe they should petition the NFL to go to a NO preseason schedule where ALL games count. :D
That's because only the teams that suck try to win in pre-season, in order to generate interest from the fans.

The teams that are good, coast thru pre-season in order to not get anyone hurt.
 
That's because only the teams that suck try to win in pre-season, in order to generate interest from the fans.

The teams that are good, coast thru pre-season in order to not get anyone hurt.

Small market and bad teams are also trying to sell regular season tickets, along with teams with poor fan support even if they are doing well (the Chargers regularly have blackout problems).

There's also a case that can be made for momentum, but with all the personell switching and the 4th game that's generally a played mostly with players that wont make their respective teams, there isn't much momentum to be had IMO.
 
Make games 3 & 4 count , but let them keep the roster limitations the same, as if it were exhibition season.

Interesting idea. Still gives teams time to feel out their players, and they make final cuts same as now.

I think the Players Union will demand a larger roster size if they go to 18 games anyways.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts