BuffalothruMyVeins Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Hey, I've had an interesting (to me) idea in mind, and wanted to share it, here, with you guys, and see what different spins you guys could foresee, that I didn't anticipate. Obviously all of this is hipothetical, it would never happen, but it is fun to think about. I'm interested in how a sport's gameplay would change, if the rules/ makeup were altered significantly. If the NFL changed from a 16 game season to 18 or even 20, I really don't foresee a noticeable change in gameplay or roster management, maybe just an extra bye week, which would have the super bowl played in mid February... Which I'm actually okay with. In a 20 game season, maybe the first bye weeks will be between weeks 4-8, and then the second will be between 11-15, with all teams that are on bye in week 4 getting their second one week 11, the ones on bye week 5 will get week 12... Etc... To keep a team from getting a short straw and having to go from week 4 with their first bye, to week 15 with their second. What I'm thinking about, though, is a DRASTIC change. If the NFL changed their schedule to have, say, 60 or 82 games, as the NHL and NBA have, how much would that change everything? Obviously things would not remain as they are now, but how different would they be, and in what capacity would the change happen? First, how the schedule would probably look- right now, the NFL has the shortest schedule of all the other sports, obviously with the amount of games, but also with just how long they are active on the calendar. They only play from about the 1st or 2nd week in September until the end of December, and then 1 month of playoffs, for 5 months. The NHL and NBA go from around Halloween till nearly June for almost 7 months, and MLB is beginning of April till the first couple days of November, for 7+ months. One way of making these games feasible is to give them more calendar months to play in. I prefer the idea of pulling the season's start earlier into the summer, instead of later into the winter, as I think a season that ended in mid March would give too much of an advantage to northern teams, who would have the whole winter to play. So we will start the NFL season on July 4th, Independence Day. Would be a great day to start it, and would absorb the market share almost exclusively enjoyed by MLB after then NHL/NBA end until NFL originally began, as MLB being the only thing going on. The super bowl will continue to be played at the beginning of February, which will now make the sport active for 7+ months. The Pro Bowl game will now be played at the mid-season to 2/3rds point, so as to allow a week off for most players, but also to make it more exciting for fans instead of being buried at the end of January, when nobody really cares. I kinda like showcasing it on Thanksgiving, but that might be a little TOO late. Maybe Halloween. With this time period now consisting of 28 weeks, let's, for the sake of math, make the season a 50 game season. That will allow you to have 5 bye weeks, plus the Pro Bowl game week. Other than the bye games, they will play 2 games per week. This will obviously be a real drain on the players... But that is where the change I was interested in, comes in. I would increase game day roster size to 65, and get rid of the inactives. Change the IR rules to more of an MLB type system, where you have a 15, 30, and 90 day IR. You could not play 50 games in 7 months as a 340lb DT, but would this player adapt and lose 60 lbs, in order to handle the rigors, or would they stay on the roster, but be a mostly "situational" player, only brought in for 4 or 5 plays per game, in either goal line situations on offense or defense, as most likely the linemen will be at least 20 lbs lighter and this type of player would be a specialty type player, like a closer. I would think that teams would likely carry double the amount of offensive and defensive linemen with those extra 12 roster spots, as I think the best way to get through this is to have some sort of rotation going, to keep people fresh. I don't know what that would look like, though. Would it mean that your first team OL would get every other week off, or every 3rd week off, or would they just rotate individual pieces and keep parts of the first team OL or DL on the field most of the time. I basically like this scenario for what it would do to player size-conditioning-usage. The idea of a rotation, whether it's the trench guys, or if it's having a 2 QB rotation, or asking players to 2-way on offense and defense (likely as a WR as CB, or TE as LB). Other than the player's union being completely against this, what other issues do you see coming of this? What tweaks from the game we know would there be, that you can foresee? Sorry for the length, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobu Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Can I get a Cliffs notes version of that post please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Let's ask Darryl Talley how he feels about a 50 game season. These guy's bodies are pushed to the limit with a 16 game schedule. Even a guy like Kyle Williams will feel it every day he gets out of bed the rest of his life. I could see them maybe some day going to an 18 game schedule... along with similar changes as you presented (bigger rosters, modified IR rules, additional bye). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 my eyes hurt.. Perhaps you're underestimating the significant injuries in this game -many of which take a calendar year to heal. The other Leagues you reference have multiple 'lower Leagues' to draw from. How many football minor leagues have been successful? 82 games?? Yeesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalothruMyVeins Posted November 20, 2015 Author Share Posted November 20, 2015 If you HAD to figure out a way to get 50 games out of the players, how could you mitigate the damage done to players? The base of the game is a contact sport, so how do you protect the players, if you had to figure out a way, without making it a flag football league, or lining the field with mattresses. Do you make a strike zone on all players from the mid thigh to chest? Will narrowing or widening the field lead to less contact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Sorry for the length, by the way. I doubt she'll mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 If you HAD to figure out a way to get 50 games out of the players, how could you mitigate the damage done to players? The base of the game is a contact sport, so how do you protect the players, if you had to figure out a way, without making it a flag football league, or lining the field with mattresses. Do you make a strike zone on all players from the mid thigh to chest? Will narrowing or widening the field lead to less contact? You could really think outside the bun and instead of having them play on astroturf, completely replace the field with a field-sized swimming pool. It would dramatically cut down on injuries - especially on kickoffs and punt returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 I didn't read all of this but I'll chime in and say there's absolutely no way the league or the player's association would be ok with that many games. Too many injuries and guys need time to heal. One thing that I think will happen soon is that there will be "spring ball" like a NFL development league for guys trying to make the NFL. The NFL really needs a minor league system. Some guys develop slower than others. They might be missing out on a lot of guys who are immature at 21-22 but fully developed at 25. Also, there are a lot of guys who can't cut it in college for one reason or another (not making grades or not getting playing time). With some extra time on the field these guys might become players. I think a minor league for the NFL will give us more football to watch plus help find more talent for the league I say start the minor league schedule a few weeks after the Super Bowl to bridge that gap between the then and the draft. So it wouldn't really be Spring time but it would go until the Spring. And make all players draft eligible so you might see the best players in the minors get picked ahead of some of the college guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) 16 game season with one bye per team is perfect IMO The number of teams that make the playoffs is also perfect and should not be increased The only problem i have is having 4 divisions of 4 teams in each conference with each getting a guarateed playoff spot and home playoff game which creates a situation where a team that wouldnt even win the wild card not only gets a playoff spot but also gets a home playoff game. The Panthers made the playoffs at 7-8-1 last year because their division was terrible while the Eagles at 10-6 did not. Edited November 20, 2015 by Max997 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 You sure Buffalo is the only thing pumping through those veins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) You sure Buffalo is the only thing pumping through those veins? That was more about how much I dislike Newton than anything else. I would lose my mind if the Bills lose out on a playoff spot bc a team with 2.5 less wins just happened to play in a bad decision which I could see happening with whoever wins the AFC South Edited November 20, 2015 by Max997 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 What you are talking about would require fundamental changes in the game regarding contact, physicality, etc. That is the only way players would have a chance of playing that many games. It would involve changing from tackle football to touch football, or close to it. Look, it really is simple. Tackle football is an extremely violent, full on collision sport. Always was and always should be in my opinion. Those that do not wish to play it, or have their kids play it, certainly have the right to opt out. Otherwise just let it be, caveat emptor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalothruMyVeins Posted November 20, 2015 Author Share Posted November 20, 2015 I'm not sure if you guys understand what a hypothetical situation is. I'm not proposing these changes as though they would improve the game. I am proposing a different system simply to see how the game would change based on them. Would the players get smaller, because of playing 3x more games? How could the fundamental principles of the game be altered in order to allow for this type of demand, without making it flag football? This is a brainstorm exercise that I've wondered about, not a suggestion FOR change, but what would happen IF change. Please only respond if you have the required "equipment". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 This is probably what they'll do when the NFL turns into the NFFL (National Flag Football League) after tackle football is outlawed in the name of player safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpberr Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Like tv shows, I believe a shorter season with fewer teams would improve the product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihilarian Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Perhaps if it became "flag" football or touch. But then who would watch it? I think today's NFL games are almost much the same sport as the ancient Roman gladiators who fought in the arena, except now its not a fight to the death. Well, maybe it feels like it is for some games. Fans love the violence the of the hits, the speed of the game on offense, and defense. One of my favorite players was Ronnie Lott because if he got a clean shot at you from a run... the resounding hit echoed throughout the stadium. Needless to say that player on the other side of the hit would be looking over his shoulder the rest of the game. Just ask Ickey Woods Someone recently posted that the NFL took off because of fantasy football, and I say that's BS because the game was becoming the nations number one sport long before fantasy football even existed. What you are talking about would require fundamental changes in the game regarding contact, physicality, etc. That is the only way players would have a chance of playing that many games. It would involve changing from tackle football to touch football, or close to it. Look, it really is simple. Tackle football is an extremely violent, full on collision sport. Always was and always should be in my opinion. Those that do not wish to play it, or have their kids play it, certainly have the right to opt out. Otherwise just let it be, caveat emptor. What he said, and no one would watch flag or touch football. The current NFL players already have a very difficult time lasting out a 16 game season, and in the end its almost about which team had the fewest injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strive_for_five_guy Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 For one ticket prices would go down on a per game average, although season tickets would probably cost more bc players playing a longer season. Average salaries would also go down bc teams would need more players. Stadiums probably would not be filled every game bc attending more than one game per week is probably too taxing on many fans. Also, overlap with other sports would be greater too. Essentially, quality of the product would suffer. And this hardly considers the wear and tear on players bodies that others have mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 What I'm thinking about, though, is a DRASTIC change. If the NFL changed their schedule to have, say, 60 or 82 games, as the NHL and NBA have, how much would that change everything? I'd rather see MLB change their schedule to 16 games. That would be intense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 I'm not sure if you guys understand what a hypothetical situation is. I'm not proposing these changes as though they would improve the game. I am proposing a different system simply to see how the game would change based on them. Would the players get smaller, because of playing 3x more games? How could the fundamental principles of the game be altered in order to allow for this type of demand, without making it flag football? This is a brainstorm exercise that I've wondered about, not a suggestion FOR change, but what would happen IF change. Please only respond if you have the required "equipment". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts