Expanding the regular season

[gregstephens]

So, they are kicking around a 17 or 18 game schedule. I like it if it shaves a game or two off the preseason. However, isn't 16 games hard on the bodies as it is? Look at the injuries that have abounded around the league (see Bengals) just over the past few seasons.

I think it further:

a)reduces the career expectancy of running backs

b)increases the need for all teams to switch to a quality two-running back system

c)cuts against a team like the Bengals that (apparently) has conditioning issues to begin with

d)calls for an increase for both the salary cap and the number of active players a team has to have on the roster

e)pumps up more revenue for the owners that not all of them (see SoP) will use for the good of the team

f)calls for an expansion of the post season to include eight teams per conference

g)puts the Super Bowl into early March

h)calls for an expanded draft, thus possibly diluting overall quality of players

i)calls for an expansion into two more cities (see LA)

Discuss.....

[BengalszoneBilly]

I personally don't see the NFLPA going along with this without some serious pay negotiations in regards to their members.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Here is some more insight into this expanded regular season issue. No surprise that money is the main factor...

Around the NFL: Money the real goal behind fewer exhibitions

Sunday, March 29, 2009

By Tom Silverstein, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

If the National Football League continues on its current path, exhibition games will take another step toward extinction.

And while that might come as good news for those tired of paying full price for half-baked games, it's not the only reason the league is considering adding more games that count to the schedule.

As in all things NFL, money is a factor.

As they departed the ritzy St. Regis Hotel in Dana Point, Calif., on the final day of their annual meetings this week, the owners left convinced that increasing the number of regular-season games to 17 or 18 would allow them to offer a better product that would attract more viewers, more advertising and a fatter network television contract, even during an economic downturn.

"I think the big feedback that we had is that we can do this and we can do this effectively," commissioner Roger Goodell said following the conclusion of the meetings Wednesday afternoon. "Depending on whether there are 17 or 18 [games], there are certain things they [owners] want to look into to make sure the quality of games stays strong.

"But I think what we heard very firmly is that we can get it done and continue to build the quality of our game."

The NFL has been playing a 20-game season since the merger in 1970, but until 1977 it was broken down into 14 regular-season and six exhibition games. Since '77, the number of exhibition games has been four and the only significant change has been that the 16-game regular-season schedule is now played over 17 weeks.

Goodell has been leading a discussion about the expanded schedule for more than a year, but with negotiations about to begin on the collective bargaining agreement and over-the-air network contracts set to expire after the 2011 season, the time was right for the league to expedite its plans.

The owners did not vote on whether to expand the regular season and won't until Goodell has a chance to meet with new NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith and network executives. The players would have to agree to the change and the networks would have to show they were willing to make a financial investment greater than the one that gets them 16 regular-season games.

Once considered a necessary tool for preparing for the regular season, exhibition games now are viewed as excess baggage by league executives.

Head coaches might disagree with that notion, but if it moves forward with an expanded schedule, the NFL will restructure its entire offseason, possibly asking the players to agree to more practice time before training camp begins.

Judging from the way the owners and coaches talked about it this week, however, it appears they're serious about pursuing it.

"It's a combination of things," Green Bay Packers president Mark Murphy said. "Players do a lot more training year round and come to camp in much better shape and teams don't play players the way they used to [in exhibition games]."

Switching to an 18-game schedule, which wouldn't be done until 2011 at the earliest, would provide a lot of logistical challenges for the NFL.

Some of them are:

The Super Bowl would be pushed back to mid-February.

Roster sizes would have to increase to account for more injuries.

A developmental league would need to be started so that the reduced amount of training camp could be made up by younger players during the offseason.

Training camps would begin later and the regular season might feature two bye weeks instead of one.

The injured reserve system would have to be addressed so that players could come back from injuries suffered early in the season.

The biggest challenge would be presented to coaches, who use a six-week, four-game [sometimes five] process to determine who should be on the roster.

[ArmyBengal]

So, they are kicking around a 17 or 18 game schedule. I like it if it shaves a game or two off the preseason. However, isn't 16 games hard on the bodies as it is? Look at the injuries that have abounded around the league (see Bengals) just over the past few seasons.

I think it further:

a)reduces the career expectancy of running backs

I believe you are right with this one, but I'm not really concerned as over 8 years they will have basically played an extra season under the old 16 game set up. By that time most teams are looking to move on to the younger guy who's not going on 30 years old.

b)increases the need for all teams to switch to a quality two-running back system

I think depth overall becomes more important and forces teams to do more in depth scouting (yeah I know) and reduces the project players being taken. I think they will have to make the late rounds count.

c)cuts against a team like the Bengals that (apparently) has conditioning issues to begin with

I don't know how to explain the injuries the Bengals suffer, but it would definitely force the issue of conditioning.

d)calls for an increase for both the salary cap and the number of active players a team has to have on the roster

Agree

e)pumps up more revenue for the owners that not all of them (see SoP) will use for the good of the team

If that is how the system gets set up, teams will find a way to abuse it.

f)calls for an expansion of the post season to include eight teams per conference

More playoff games ?? HELL YEAH !!!

g)puts the Super Bowl into early March

I don't necessarily think so, as they would start the season where the 3rd pre-season game would usually be played.

h)calls for an expanded draft, thus possibly diluting overall quality of players

I think with a wage scale that could possibly be put in place, you would see less players leaving college early unless they knew for sure they would go early in the draft. We "could" actually see a better product coming into the draft.

i)calls for an expansion into two more cities (see LA)

I think expansion is going to come in one form or another and I actually am looking forward to it. I would prefer to see it in places that don't already have 3 teams from that state, but understand the finances involved.

[Kazkal]

Ya I think cali has enough football teams how about a Oregon Football team ...The Portland Lumberjacks.... okay doesn't sound that good