Should the NFL extend their regular season? (1 Viewer)

Should the NFL extend their regular season?

  • Yes! Extend it to 18 games.

    Votes: 15 37.5%
  • Yes, but make it even more than 18 games.

    Votes: 5 12.5%
  • No, 16 games is enough.

    Votes: 19 47.5%
  • Hell No! In fact, make it shorter! The players can only take so much!

    Votes: 2 5.0%

  • Total voters
    40

CK SatGuy

Thread Starter
Formerly ckhalil18
Feb 7, 2011
4,023
112
The Motor City
There have been (or at least were) some rumors that the NFL could extend to their season to 18 games starting next year. What do you guys think? Is 16 games enough or should they extend it? Or should they make it shorter instead??? Feel free to vote.:)
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
182
South Florida
There have been (or at least were) some rumors that the NFL could extend to their season to 18 games starting next year. What do you guys think? Is 16 games enough or should they extend it? Or should they make it shorter instead??? Feel free to vote.:)

There is no doubt in MY mind this will happen because the owners want that money. The question is, will they give up one of their preseason games to do so?
 

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,879
549
Florida
simple answer for me. no. i don't want a mash unit of a team playing out there. even with the 16 game schedule there are times this is still the case.
 

CK SatGuy

Thread Starter
Formerly ckhalil18
Feb 7, 2011
4,023
112
The Motor City
In my opinion, I wouldn't mind if the NFL extended the season, but only if the extra games involved are inter-conference match-ups (NFC vs AFC). Think about this: An NFL team only plays 13 different opponents per season (Considering that same team plays their division rivals twice). Out of those 13 teams, 9 of them are from the team's same conference and only 4 are from the other conference. I could see the league extending the season to possibly 19 games if they use the 4th rule of their scheduling formula for the opposing conference: The current rule: "Each team plays once against the other teams in its conference that finished in the same place in their own divisions as themselves in the previous season, not counting the division they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games)."
The New rule: Each team plays once against the other teams in its conference that finished in the same place in their own divisions as themselves in the previous season, not counting the division they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games) AND once against other teams in its opposing conference that finished in the same place in their own divisions as themselves in the previous season, not counting the division they were already scheduled to play. (three games)
In this case, if that rule went into effect this year, for example, the Lions, who finished in 3rd place in their division, would also be playing the Dolphins, the Browns, and the Texans this year, since they finished in 3rd place in their divisions last year as well, along with the AFC West teams.
At least with this new rule that I made up, the schedule would be more balanced conference-wise, 9 teams in the same conference and 7 (as oppose to 4) in the opposing conference.
 

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
13,597
7,826
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Yes. More football please.

They've made changes to help with player safety and longevity, I think this will make more sense in a year or two when the success of those efforts can be properly measured.

5 days off on the bye, only 14 padded practices all year, no more two-a-days and reduced length of practices, etc in addition to the rules designed to provide for a safer game on the field. It's still violent and injuries will happen, we'll see if the sum of these changes is effective and can help pave the way to an extended season.
 
Last edited:

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
13,597
7,826
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
No. It means more injuries.

I think injuries are the aberration to player careers though, the drum that is always beat is 'the average career of an NFL player is...', not 'the number of times a player is injured...'. Maybe it should be? Or maybe the two should always be mentioned together. How many careers are ended each year because of injuries? How skewed is that number by players who just don't make it and fade away?

If they can make the game safer, the players fresher and over 18 games would have fewer injuries than we had last year prior to all the new offseason and practice changes, would you be against expansion?
 

Bodo Fenrirsson

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 21, 2009
14,052
2,596
Grovetown,GA
The CFL plays 18 games per season,have been for years,& they don't seem to have a horrific rash of injuries. Of course the offensive lines & defensive lines have to be a yard apart instead of face to face like American football & their collective bargaining agreement concerning practice time makes the NFL's present CBA look absolutely Spartan.
 

Mets82

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 5, 2008
2,322
7
conn.
I think they should go to 18 games as well. If your worried about injuries, then tell the teams to play football and try to kill each other. Enforce stricter rules, like the helmet to helmet rule. Get rid of 2 preseason games to make it 18 game schedule. And if your worried about injuries and fatigue and stuff, get rid of the Thursday night game. Just start the week on Sunday, Saturday after the college football season, and have the Sunday night game and Monday Night Football and thats it.
 

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,879
549
Florida
getting rid of the preseason games makes no sense to me. the starters barely play in those games. this year was the exemption because of the lockout. preseason is more for those who aren't starters but may become , 2nd stringers,special teams players and so on.
 

dangue

Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 29, 2007
4,887
1,225
SF Bay Area
rey_1178 said:
getting rid of the preseason games makes no sense to me. the starters barely play in those games. this year was the exemption because of the lockout. preseason is more for those who aren't starters but may be , 2nd stringers,special teams players and so on.

As a season ticket holder who is forced to pay full price for these sub standard preseason games every year, I'd be in favor of replacing two preseason games for two regular season games. That way I only have to pay for one meaningless and generally poorly played game.

Despite this, I understand the value of preseason, so it could stay the way it is if teams stopped bending over their fans for preseason games.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,879
549
Florida
I hear what you're saying and I agree.they shouldn't force these games on season ticket holders.



As a season ticket holder who is forced to pay full price for these sub standard preseason games every year, I'd be in favor of replacing two preseason games for two regular season games. That way I only have to pay for one meaningless and generally poorly played game.

Despite this, I understand the value of preseason, so it could stay the way it is if teams stopped bending over their fans for preseason games.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 

BillD1984

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 9, 2008
14,816
388
MA
simple answer for me. no. i don't want a mash unit of a team playing out there. even with the 16 game schedule there are times this is still the case.

This. The NFL is a war of attrition as it is, IMO adding two more meaningful games is asking for trouble.
 

meStevo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Aug 20, 2004
13,597
7,826
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
The team that won the super bowl last year played 19 regular season and playoff games I think? Every team is fighting every season for the right to play more games, ironicly.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
 

yaz96

Baby, It's Cold Outside
Dec 22, 2005
12,829
0
Front Range, Colorado
simple answer for me. no. i don't want a mash unit of a team playing out there. even with the 16 game schedule there are times this is still the case.

No. It means more injuries.

Nah, injuries are just as likely in preseason games.

They should just reduce preseason by 2 games and add 2 regular games. Still for a total of 20 games. This is what they wanted to do this year.
 

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,879
549
Florida
Nah, injuries are just as likely in preseason games.

They should just reduce preseason by 2 games and add 2 regular games. Still for a total of 20 games. This is what they wanted to do this year.
They are but since the starters don't play much in preseason the odds are low.that's how I see it anyway . Was this put in the new CBA as a possibility? I dont remember
 

Users who are viewing this thread

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

Latest posts

Top