John Gianelli Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 This article quotes Doug Flutie and Jim Kelly on the grind of an 18-game season. (And remember, optimists, we could be talking about a 21-game season!)My link Flutie says it would be "ridiculously difficult." But Jimbo, you didn't really say "imagine how many fans would show up to a Week 19 mean-nothing game in January in wintry Buffalo," did you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 This article quotes Doug Flutie and Jim Kelly on the grind of an 18-game season. ... But Jimbo, you didn't really say "imagine how many fans would show up to a Week 19 mean-nothing game in January in wintry Buffalo," did you? I'm SURE he meant because everyone knows the Bills would have the #1 seed throughout the playoffs all wrapped up by then .... GO BILLS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 This article quotes Doug Flutie and Jim Kelly on the grind of an 18-game season. (And remember, optimists, we could be talking about a 21-game season!)My link Flutie says it would be "ridiculously difficult." But Jimbo, you didn't really say "imagine how many fans would show up to a Week 19 mean-nothing game in January in wintry Buffalo," did you? 69,848 1/3/10 Anyway, there is no 18 game season on the horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 HEY He spelled 2 words wrong in that article !!! Sorry just trying to be like a true Bills fan !!! Hope this reaches the ones it's intended to reach !! Thanks for the link it was a good article !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills(70) Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 This article quotes Doug Flutie and Jim Kelly on the grind of an 18-game season. (And remember, optimists, we could be talking about a 21-game season!)My link Flutie says it would be "ridiculously difficult." But Jimbo, you didn't really say "imagine how many fans would show up to a Week 19 mean-nothing game in January in wintry Buffalo," did you? All the more reason to have 2 ready players at the QB position. Sorry, but I'm pro schedule expansion. And with that expansion should also come a roster expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafter Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 All the more reason to have 2 ready players at the QB position. Sorry, but I'm pro schedule expansion. And with that expansion should also come a roster expansion. Good luck with that. We have a hard enough time finding 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Buffalo Irishman Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 All the more reason to have 2 ready players at the QB position. Sorry, but I'm pro schedule expansion. And with that expansion should also come a roster expansion. I never thought of it that way. That would make sense. How many players do you think? Of course if this was to happen. IMO, I like it the way it is. Good luck with that. We have a hard enough time finding 1. That goes for the whole team.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Why is this still being talked about? Ownership took it off the table early in negotiations. Players didn't want it; most fans didn't want it. Problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Why is this still being talked about? Ownership took it off the table early in negotiations. Players didn't want it; most fans didn't want it. Problem? I'm willing to bet that most 70% or more of season ticket holders want it, or at least one of the ridiculous pre season games removed or not have to pay the full price for the charade of the pre season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I'm willing to bet that most 70% or more of season ticket holders want it, or at least one of the ridiculous pre season games removed or not have to pay the full price for the charade of the pre season. I'd be happy just getting the Toronto game back....grrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I'm willing to bet that most 70% or more of season ticket holders want it, or at least one of the ridiculous pre season games removed or not have to pay the full price for the charade of the pre season. I think at least 70% of season ticket holders (me included) want the preseason reduced to 2 games so i don't have to pay extra for those meaningless games. That doesn't mean I want 18 regular season games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills(70) Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) I never thought of it that way. That would make sense. How many players do you think? Of course if this was to happen. IMO, I like it the way it is. I can understand when you say you like it the way it is. It's very difficult for sports fans to except change, but over the course of 40+ years as an NFL and NHL fan here in Buffalo, I've learned to get used to it. I would think bringing the roster up to 61 players should be an ample number to suit an 18 game season. Just keep the "inactive quarterback" rule in place and run with it. Why go up from 45/47 to 61? Well, it allows for an additional number of available players in case of injury. The games currently dress 45 (actually, it's 46 due to the "inactive quaterback" rule) and 53 on the roster. If you go to 61 and allow 52 or 53 to dress, you allow the teams more options in case of injury in a longer season with talent ready players that can actually participate with the team and feel more integrated in the system. You go to 18 game seasons, you also should expand the NFL draft to 9 rounds. Make it a 3 day event with round 1 on Friday, rounds 2, 3 and 4 on Saturday and rounds 5 through 9 on Sunday. Going this route puts alot more emphasis and raises the importance of rounds 2, 3 and 4, making the second day of this type of draft just as exciting as the first day for the first round. Then there is the question of what to do with the 2 extra games, are they going to be against inner-conference opponents or opposing conference? I say make them opposing conference, so, in effect, you would have the following layout: 6 games in division (2 per opponent given 4 teams per division, you play 3 teams twice a season) 6 games in conference and 6 games out of conference, this way the teams get to see more opposing conference opponents annually, and if for example, a game let's say between the Bills and the Panthers in the regular season takes place and was close and exciting, and both of those teams were favorites in their respective conferences to make the Super Bowl and they do, it adds an element of pay back or further conference rivalry situation. In short, it widens the seasonal story line and may actually create some mini outer conference rivalry's. I would like to see the season ending in Late Feb., that still gives teams plenty of time for the off season and gives players plenty of time for the off season as well. Just my opinion on it though. Edited March 24, 2011 by Bills(70) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I thought the 18 game season proposal would do away with the last two preseason games. The season would be extended into August, not into January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills(70) Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I thought the 18 game season proposal would do away with the last two preseason games. The season would be extended into August, not into January. That sounds reasonable as well, although with the example I gave on an expanded roster situation, I would think you'd want to keep the preseason games intact to allow the coaching staff to get a handle on the larger roster situation. Merely speculative talk of course, but absorbing 2 preseason games may be the way to go as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChevyVanMiller Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I thought that the interesting part of the article was the players complaints about the difficulty in dealing with year-round training and added games. Maybe Coach Levy with his "Club Marv" approach really was on the money after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Why is this still being talked about? Ownership took it off the table early in negotiations. Players didn't want it; most fans didn't want it. Problem? Ah, the spin believer. It was taken off the table to or thru 2012, but was open for more negotiation (to be agreed upon). It was not given up upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 few notes i couldn't squeeze into that piece, which i can expand upon here. -- Flutie suggested that an 18-game regular season would work best with two bye weeks. -- as i noted in the piece, an expanded schedule means bye bye to having one running back carrying the load. and there is a serious belief one quarterback will not likely make it through healthy during such a campaign. -- to the point of playing into January, it's more than likely the NFL would like the Super Bowl to be held in February, when there is a downtime in sports (though i'm not sure what they would do during a Winter Olympic year.) that said, with an expanded schedule, games will either be played in the big heat of August or in the blustery cold of January in some markets. the heat's not condusive to players, who have had difficulty with heat stroke during training camp. and the cold is not condusive to fans following teams with nothing to play for. -- as has been noted here, the NFL pulled back on its proposal to expand the season in its last offer. that doesn't mean it's off the table. the NFL proposed keeping the status quo for two more years. and the NFL has also stated it may pull the last proposal it made once talks start up again. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 -- as has been noted here, the NFL pulled back on its proposal to expand the season in its last offer. that doesn't mean it's off the table. the NFL proposed keeping the status quo for two more years. and the NFL has also stated it may pull the last proposal it made once talks start up again. jw The owners pulled it off the table because the union wouldn't allow it on the table. Keeping the status quo for two years is another way of keeping the issue alive, even if it is down the road. The players are not going for the deal under any circumstances because it is unsafe and creates more risks that jeopardizes the length of one's career and the long term health after one's career. The owners can bluster all they want. The deal that was on the table is not going to be diminished if they want a negotiated deal. What the players give up they will get back from the owners in some form. What the owners give up they will get back from the players in some form. In the end the teeter-totter will be balanced. From what I understand the framework for a deal is in place. The last minute offer made by the owners while the players were leaving the table did demonstrate some real movement. Assuming the judge lifts the injunction and orders the parties back to the table the chasm is at a manageable level where a deal can be made. Am I being too optimistic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I think at least 70% of season ticket holders (me included) want the preseason reduced to 2 games so i don't have to pay extra for those meaningless games. That doesn't mean I want 18 regular season games. Yes, either way works for me. I hate paying for preseason games. I never ever go to them.....But, we know they are not going to reduce it from 20 games (16 + 4) to 18 games (16 + 2) because it's lost revenue. So, I want the 18 game schedule bad. The weird part of all this to me was that for years and years, talk radio and fans all talked about wanting more regular and less preseason. Now that the owners proposed it, everybody is against it, because a few media members came out against it....We're such lemmings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Yes, either way works for me. I hate paying for preseason games. I never ever go to them.....But, we know they are not going to reduce it from 20 games (16 + 4) to 18 games (16 + 2) because it's lost revenue. So, I want the 18 game schedule bad. The weird part of all this to me was that for years and years, talk radio and fans all talked about wanting more regular and less preseason. Now that the owners proposed it, everybody is against it, because a few media members came out against it....We're such lemmings. Well then, maybe you should not only question talk radio, but those that participate in it. The bottom line is that an 18 game schedule was not sought by the owners for the fans. It was for the profits, all while they also sought a lessening of the players share of revenue. Pretty much a double edged sword. Then throw in the wear an tear on the players. This isn't a video game, the beatings they take are real. Even if the owners vote to expand rosters, again, it would only further dilute what the current players get. It's a loss, loss for the players, short a simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts