jjakq27 Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 I heard that the NFL might change two of the preseason games into regular season games and play a total of 18 games per season. With the number of minicamps and off-season workouts, the feeling is that teams don't need as much time to get physically ready or to assess players. Obviously, increased TV and ticket revenues are a major factor also. I think they might have to expand the rosters beyond 53 in order to have sufficient depth in case of injury. Other than that I can't think of many other drawbacks. If I am paying top dollar for a ticket, it should count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPW Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Where did you hear this ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 That proposal has been floating around for years. From what I understand, though, the coaches don't think 2 preseason games is enough. OTOH, given that the fourth preseason game is typically a joke, where the starters play the first series and sit, I think there would be less oppostion to axing that and adding a real game in instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted August 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Where did you hear this ?It was up for consideration back in 2003. I heard one of the local sports-talk guys discussing it today during lunch.http://football.about.com/b/a/024329.htmI tried to find something more current but could not. However, I thought it might be worth throwing out there as a topic of discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 i'd perfer not 2 more games = more chance injury before the bowl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPW Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Where did you hear this ?It was up for consideration back in 2003. I heard one of the local sports-talk guys discussing it today during lunch.http://football.about.com/b/a/024329.htmI tried to find something more current but could not. However, I thought it might be worth throwing out there as a topic of discussion.Thanks ...I am not too sure that this would work either, it seems that a lot of players are rather worn down by the end of the season as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who? Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Well I'd definitely love an 18 game schedule, but for the players sake I really don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPW Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Well now they are talking about this on 1360 Homer to.Lance is saying like "who wouldn't be for it". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted August 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Well now they are talking about this on 1360 Homer to.Lance is saying like "who wouldn't be for it". That's where I heard it. Jeff Piecoro mentioned it before noon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckj414 Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Nah, I think a 16 game schedule works well for pro football. By game 16 we know who the contenders and the pretenders are. Lets have some mercy on these guys, football is brutal enough as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clevelandbengal Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 Also what about the sacred records of the game. What if a team went 16-0 but lost game #17 that wouldnt be fair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.