Why 17 games is a bad idea

[eanyills]

36 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

 If we, as a species, didn't embrace change, we'd still be wandering naked in the warmer parts of the world, hiding from all the carnivores big enough to eat us, and grubbing/scavenging for whatever we could find to eat.  Where do you think change should have stopped?  With the use of fire?  With the domestication of the wolf?  With learning to cultivate crops?  With the invention of writing?    Where do you draw the line where you oppose more changes?   Every change brings positives and negatives, but generally, those changes make things "good" for things better in the long run.

 

 

That's a generalization that's totally unsupported by any facts.   Why do you think that just because a player makes big $$$ that he would opposed to sharing the largess from the NFL's pot of gold with his teammates?    NFL teams stress being "a band of brothers" rather than individuals, so it's more likely that opposition to a 17th game would stem from individual perspectives not from a general divide between the elite and the rest of the players.

 

FTR, since the "union leadership" is answerable through elections to the rank-and-file, why would they favor the relatively few players making huge salaries to the detriment of the majority?  If the NFLPA leadership opposes the new CBA, it's because it's not giving the rank and file good enough salary, health insurance, and retirement benefits.  

What the hell strawman are you prattling on about? I made no argument about what you’re writing.

 

I DID directly respond to a post about the player’s union having to vote on a 17th game. I’d also respond to what you think is unsupported by facts, which is generally (and I used that term) true and can be seen throughout the tenets of the NFLPA’s own prior contract preferences. This isn’t the place for that argument, though.

 

Don’t create strawman arguments. It’s intellectually dishonest. 

Edited February 23, 2020 by eanyills

[longtimebillsfan]

8 hours ago, eanyills said:

It’s not like the NFL can just add a 17th game against the wishes of the NFLPA. The player’s union has to sign off on it. Now, union leadership is generally weighted towards the most tenured/powerful members and maybe that leadership has the persuasive clout to tell its members, “***** you, we are/aren’t playing a 17th game” but the majority still has to vote in favor of playing an extra game to get it done.

 

I expect it will pass, because the majority of members are lower wage/shorter playing career guys who will benefit from an extra game check. That will be the players choosing to have “player safety take a back seat.”

I agree to a point, but if the league was truly concerned about player safety, a 17th game would not even have been proposed. 

[4BillsintheBurgh]

19 hours ago, NoSaint said:

good call, let’s do 15 games.

Haha, if only the union had the spine to do it. 15 games, 3 byes. Wouldn't mind seeing the super bowl on presidents day weekend either. Seems like in this day and age more players will be "Lucking" out.

[frostbitmic]

17 hours ago, djp14150 said:

 

Yet the team has played international sites

 

they could make that extra game an international site or neutral site

 

8 games inUK 

2 in germany

3 in mexico

2  in Canada 

2 in australia/Asia ... in November a game could be played at noon on Sunday locally and air at 8pm ET on Saturday night.  Thus could doa Monday night air game from there . Can do the late Monday night game or late ngoni Saturday game from China.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want to see games in Moscow, North Korea and Saudi Arabia.

 

The patriots vs the Cowboys in North Korea is especially appealing as is the beautiful blue turf of Boise St.

 

We've already tried Toronto and that failed

[Alphadawg7]

I think 17 games is unnecessary.  Its going to diminish all the records established at 16 games.  I get 16 games did the same to the record books when it was shorter seasons too, but that was the early years of the league.  Its been 16 games so long, whats the point of adding a 17th game other than a cash grab?  How does it make the league a better product?  

 

Looking at the seriousness of CTE cases, including looking at a guy like Reed in Washington who has been in concussion protocol for over 6 months and missed a whole season from it, adding more regular season games seems like a bad move.  

 

If they want more games, expand the playoffs to include enough teams to do one more round of the playoffs.  Have a week where 2 teams from each conference play each other to make the playoffs as the last seed.  Why subject the whole league to an unnecessary 17th regular season game?  

 

As a fan, I am all good watching a 17th game...but removing my selfish biased to watch more football, I think a 17th game brings nothing of value to the league other than more money to an already immensely rich and successful league that doesn't need the money.  It puts players at further risk...adds one more reg season game to get hurt in before the playoffs...and it skews the record books.  

 

I would pass on this and focus on getting more teams in the playoffs and one more playoff round where 4 teams play for the final 2 spots of the playoffs.  

[Mr. WEO]

19 hours ago, Steve O said:

So you're saying Whaley was right

 

“Most successful quarterbacks have that ‘it’ factor. (Manuel) has that ‘it’ factor,” Whaley said. “When he walks into a room, there’s a presence and people take notice. He’s going to be the face of our franchise, and it’s not too big for him.”

3 hours ago, longtimebillsfan said:

I agree to a point, but if the league was truly concerned about player safety, a 17th game would not even have been proposed. 

 

If the players were truly concerned, they wouldn't have even been bargaining with it.

[Beast]

The USFL played an 18 game schedule.

 

Joe Cribbs played 34 games in less than a calendar year at the RB position, carrying the ball 560 times for over 2,500 yards.

 

He lived.

Edited February 23, 2020 by Binghamton Beast

[Ga boy]

Pure strategery:  Play 1s for conference games, and others for non conference.  Also, change tiebreakers to minimize non conference games.  Also, give more weight for points scored in conference games.  I can’t do all the thinking.  Got ideas?
 

[Success]

One more excuse to drink.  I’m fine with it.

[Mr. WEO]

21 minutes ago, Ga boy said:

Pure strategery:  Play 1s for conference games, and others for non conference.  Also, change tiebreakers to minimize non conference games.  Also, give more weight for points scored in conference games.  I can’t do all the thinking.  Got ideas?
 

 

 

Every team will want to join the AFCE...

[SydneyBillsFan]

On 2/23/2020 at 5:30 AM, stuvian said:

As the NFL continues to tamper with its golden goose to the point of the game becoming unrecognizable I offer my opposition to its latest attempt at milking the cash cow dry.

 

The human body was not made for the pounding the game inflicts on its players. We already have a 30 percent rate of permanent disability among retired players. One more game will mean that none but punters and kickers will play a full season. This will weaken fan's relationships with stars and starters as the game evolves toward a platoon of unknowns. But the money you say?  One more game cheque won't matter if you're going to spend it all on painkillers and physio. We already have players retiring earlier now that CTE risks are in the public domain.

 

Where in the current schedule is the league going to insert the additional game?  After Christmas when home games in cold climates are a tougher sell?  Before labour day when the south is either unbearably hot or in hurricane season? How many more tweets of empty seats do we need to see before we understand that we have an oversupply? 

 

What makes the NFL great is that fewer games make each one meaningful. Watering down the product will make it indistinguishable from upstarts like the XFL. 

 

I disagree with this assessment on the wear and tear of playing 16 regular season games in the NFL.

 

For instance, the Australian rugby league competition (NRL) has a 22 game regular season and it is arguably more brutal given there are no time outs, 2 x 40 minute halves, defensive players are making an average of 35 tackles per game and, most notably - there are no pads or helmets.

 

The key, I think, is good rest and recovery - both between games and in the off season, as well as top notch medical staff and physios. The use of hydrotherapy is a key part of recovery, typically on the Monday morning after the game.

 

I for one think an 18 game regular season is optimal for the NFL, with a 2 game pre season. The off season is way too long and is only broken up by the draft. The extra 2 regular season games would provide a strong financial injection so as long as the players get their fair share of the financial pie I couldn't see them objecting.

 

Just my two cents.

[T master]

I believe along with the mention of a extra game there was also mention made of expanding the rosters to compensate for injuries that may happen & the players being as greedy as the owners say as long as your gonna pay me MO MONEY i'm in !!

 

The extra game per season i think might be to bolster games out of the country that way each team that does play a game out side the US won't be getting screwed by having to give up a game & the season ticket holders can have a full 8 home game schedule again .

 

As long as the owners get a bigger slice of TV revenues & the players get their slice it's gonna happen I'm not for it but it just facts money rules !! 

[akcash]

Make it 18... mandatory rest each player 2 games per season. Cut out 2 preseason games... This is my suggestion with about 0 thought.

[ganesh]

On 2/23/2020 at 12:55 AM, Mountain Man said:

It's going to be an international round within 5 years. They won't admit it, but that's the reason. 

It would be hard for all 32 teams to play an international game.  there are not enough locations.

2 hours ago, akcash said:

Make it 18... mandatory rest each player 2 games per season. Cut out 2 preseason games... This is my suggestion with about 0 thought.

will never work.

[JetsFan20]

I think the league needs to do something about parody first and foremost. It’s a big problem that roughly half the league hasn’t made the playoffs in the last five years (12 teams go per year). 
 

There are teams like the Bills who haven’t hosted a playoff game since the 90s! That’s a lot of lost revenue when you compare it to other teams. 

[akcash]

1 hour ago, ganesh said:

It would be hard for all 32 teams to play an international game.  there are not enough locations.

will never work.

(Not arguing) how come?

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

The CFL has been playing a 18 games schedule for over 10 years and I don’t see any issues 

[longtimebillsfan]

8 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

“Most successful quarterbacks have that ‘it’ factor. (Manuel) has that ‘it’ factor,” Whaley said. “When he walks into a room, there’s a presence and people take notice. He’s going to be the face of our franchise, and it’s not too big for him.”

 

If the players were truly concerned, they wouldn't have even been bargaining with it.

They are getting concessions from the league that they have been trying to get for a long time.  My point wad a lack of concern on the part of the owner's, not the players.   And I do believe the players are concerned with the CT issue. 

[Formerly Allan in MD]

On 2/22/2020 at 1:30 PM, stuvian said:

Where in the current schedule is the league going to insert the additional game?  After Christmas when home games in cold climates are a tougher sell?  Before labour day when the south is either unbearably hot or in hurricane season? How many more tweets of empty seats do we need to see before we understand that we have an oversupply?

One less preseason game.  The fourth one has become quite meaningless.

[Mountain Man]

4 hours ago, ganesh said:

It would be hard for all 32 teams to play an international game.  there are not enough locations.

There is easily enough. 

 

4 to 6 in London 

1 or 3 in Mexico City

1 to 3 in Germany (which actually had far higher attendances and team numbers than the UK in the NFL Europe days) 

1 to 3 in China. 

1 each in Spain and Netherlands who both sustained NFL Europe teams.

1 in Brazil and one of the Oceania cities like Sydney

Plus Canada if they want to go that route again

 

All of the above have history with links / rumours 

 

Plus they would put single games in new markets to test them. 

 

And that even discounts Dublin which seems to be going down the College football route

 

They'd easily find the locations 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2020 by Mountain Man

[ganesh]

8 hours ago, akcash said:

(Not arguing) how come?

Let's look ta possible sites...London,  Berlin,  Mexico City and Toronto are possibly the 4 international sites that the NFL is looking at (and where players will probably agree to play).  How do you break up the 17th game schedule among those four cities...since we have 32 teams having to play week 17...that is 4 games in each city...I don't think the NFL owners will want to gve up that many games to a neutral site.

[Hardhatharry]

1 minute ago, ganesh said:

Let's look ta possible sites...London,  Berlin,  Mexico City and Toronto are possibly the 4 international sites that the NFL is looking at (and where players will probably agree to play).  How do you break up the 17th game schedule among those four cities...since we have 32 teams having to play week 17...that is 4 games in each city...I don't think the NFL owners will want to gve up that many games to a neutral site.

They do... They share revenue.

[ganesh]

Just now, Hardhatharry said:

They do... They share revenue.

yeah..but now they have to share that revenue not just with 32 owners, but with 4 sites who are hosting 4 games each. 

[Hardhatharry]

8 minutes ago, ganesh said:

yeah..but now they have to share that revenue not just with 32 owners, but with 4 sites who are hosting 4 games each. 

They make more money off of one international game then they would with a home game. The NFL knows what it's doing don't worry about the money they make.

 

TBH the owners already have this worked out so it is a non issue 

Edited February 24, 2020 by Hardhatharry

[Mr. WEO]

8 hours ago, longtimebillsfan said:

They are getting concessions from the league that they have been trying to get for a long time.  My point wad a lack of concern on the part of the owner's, not the players.   And I do believe the players are concerned with the CT issue. 

Then why do they keep hitting eachother in the head?

 

Again, the players have been negotiating the new CBA with 17 games for 9 months.  Too late to pretend it’s a “min-starter”.

[nucci]

On 2/22/2020 at 1:43 PM, SC BIlls Fan said:

With 17 games they will cut one of the preseason games. So it works out the same as a regular season.

that's not an even trade off....most vets rarely play in preseason. Can't compare a preseason game to regular season

Edited February 24, 2020 by nucci

[badassgixxer05]

1 hour ago, nucci said:

that's not an even trade off....most vets rarely play in preseason. Can't compare a preseason game to regular season

They do play in playoff games though. When's the last time you saw a whole playoff team just blow up with injuries because they played that 17th game? Sure another game does mean more risk, but isn't a dooms day change that some are trying to make it out to be. 

[nucci]

4 minutes ago, badassgixxer05 said:

They do play in playoff games though. When's the last time you saw a whole playoff team just blow up with injuries because they played that 17th game? Sure another game does mean more risk, but isn't a dooms day change that some are trying to make it out to be. 

that wasn't my point...dropping a preseason game for a regular season game is not an even trade

[badassgixxer05]

2 minutes ago, nucci said:

that wasn't my point...dropping a preseason game for a regular season game is not an even trade

I know. I was just making a point that it doesn't have to be.

[nucci]

6 minutes ago, badassgixxer05 said:

I know. I was just making a point that it doesn't have to be.

ok

[Cripple Creek]

On 2/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, Steptide said:

I'm fine with 17 games. Actually I've said it shoukd be 17 vs 18. I'd like to see the NFL let teams activate their entire rosters though. Let more guys play and take some stress off the key guys 

Yeah, especially because McDermott can't get away from his formula when it comes to game day activations.  He botches that too many times.  Make 'em all active so he has one less thing to worry about.

 

[row_33]

only so many bites can be taken out of cookie before it's finished

 

[RiotAct]

On 2/22/2020 at 2:25 PM, Mountain Man said:

It's going to be an international round within 5 years. They won't admit it, but that's the reason. 

Bills vs. Jags 2024:  Ghana. ?? 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

On 2/24/2020 at 1:35 AM, Mountain Man said:

There is easily enough. 

 

4 to 6 in London 

1 or 3 in Mexico City

1 to 3 in Germany (which actually had far higher attendances and team numbers than the UK in the NFL Europe days) 

1 to 3 in China. 

1 each in Spain and Netherlands who both sustained NFL Europe teams.

1 in Brazil and one of the Oceania cities like Sydney

Plus Canada if they want to go that route again

 

All of the above have history with links / rumours 

 

Plus they would put single games in new markets to test them. 

 

And that even discounts Dublin which seems to be going down the College football route

 

They'd easily find the locations 

 

 

 

They said it would be against the other conference.  In year 1 the AFC hosts the extra game, in year 2 the NFC hosts the extra game.  Would be rotating based on divisional finish, excluding the division that you are already playing.  So the idea is to continue to increase parity by forcing the best teams to play another hard game.  Makes getting that single first round bye a bit harder for an NFC team if you now have to play say, the AFC east, and you finished first so you have to play the chiefs too.

Edited February 25, 2020 by dneveu

[stuvian]

On 2/22/2020 at 1:44 PM, Limeaid said:

 

This is exaggeration and my debate instructor taught me exaggeration is used when the argument is weak.

 

There is reason for inactive players.  Players are those who will take time to develop.  In addition this allows teams to carry injured players who will not go on IR.  In old days teams used to cut those players so they could fill slot;  they still do with injury settlements but this way the player can heal and play again for team.

 

Reports state they will be increasing roster size and practice squad size. We will need to wait to see if true.

Your debate instructor must have been hot if you're still quoting her. Did anything go on after school that is material for a "would ya?" Teacher thread? 

[Buffalo716]

On 2/22/2020 at 5:03 PM, Zerovoltz said:

@Aussie Joe hit on it already....the Patriots have played ALOT of extra games over the last 2 decades...they are fine. 

 

I want to touch on "player safety"  .....I call BS on that.  If the concern here was for the safety of players, then you have them play ZERO games of pro football.  It's a rough, dangerous, phyiscaly game that exacts a toll on the player.  Everyone knows that going into the deal.  No one is forcing anyone to play football, and if you agree to go out and play the game, there is X number of dollars that you'll be paid.  Just about everyone who is capable of playing pro football, make the choice to accept the possible consequences.  That's not to say effort shouldn't be made to find better helmets or consider different ways to do things....but "player safety" is just a negotiating term.  Football by it's nature is unsafe...they are negotiating to play an unsafe game.  It's really.....the NFL wants to add a 17th game, wich will make them more money...and in excahnge for the players agreeing to it...we'll ease up marijana testing, and share more of the pie.  That's what it comes down to......player safety?  whatever.

 

Third....I mentioned here a long time ago when it came up....and the media has said so...and it's been said in this thread as well.....the 17th Game would be a non division game at a nuetral site.  Most correctly point out that it really allows for more international games....but I think the idea of nuetral site is brilliant on the part of the NFL.  As it has gotten more difficult to get people to pay for expensive tickets at stadiums when you can stay home.....especially if your team sucks.....then have a game at a big college stadium....it would sell out due to the novelty of it....and in alot of places, fans that have a hard time making the trek, might go if it's closer to home....

 

Examples....and you could do a ton of these before you ran out combos and places to play

 

Denver VS Seattle, Boise Idaho.

Cleveland VS Detroit, Ann Arbor Michigan.

Chicago VS Indianapolis from South Bend.

Kansas City VS. Minneapolis from Lincoln, NE

Dallas VS Chargers from Albequeque

New Orleans VS Miami from Tuscaloosa

Buffalo VS NY Giants ....(you guys tell me...Carrier Dome, West Point...Yankee Stadium....IDK!)

Philly VS Pitt from Happy Valley

Redskins VS Baltimore from Blacksburg, VA

Tampa VS Tennesee from Athens, GA

San Francisco VS Cincy from Tokyo

Houston VS LA Rams from Salt Lake City

 

 

Or, as a KC fan....just these possibilities alone are interesting

 

KC Vs Chicago in St. Louis

KC Vs Dallas from Fayetteville, AR

KC Vs Minnesota in Iowa City, IA

 

And so many others. 

 

You rotate these around all over the place.....you tell me that a game between KC and Dallas in Fayettevill wouldn't sell out or be a big draw in TV?  It's like printing money.....and staying engaged with out of town fans.

 

And...Buffalo...I don't know the area....but as far as regional fan engagement....what would you do?  Toronto?  Montreal?  Syracuse?  Erie?  I am sure there are places Bills fans would travel to or who live in the area and would go to a game every other year or 2 or 3. 

 

Those aren't bad suggestions but you need an enhanced license or passport to cross the boarder.. Toronto is doable distance but I still don't even have what I mentioned so I wouldn't be going 

 

As for Montreal, wayyyyy too far. Carrier Dome , Penn State would probably be most sensible option for neutral site game

On 2/23/2020 at 6:04 PM, SydneyBillsFan said:

 

I disagree with this assessment on the wear and tear of playing 16 regular season games in the NFL.

 

For instance, the Australian rugby league competition (NRL) has a 22 game regular season and it is arguably more brutal given there are no time outs, 2 x 40 minute halves, defensive players are making an average of 35 tackles per game and, most notably - there are no pads or helmets.

 

The key, I think, is good rest and recovery - both between games and in the off season, as well as top notch medical staff and physios. The use of hydrotherapy is a key part of recovery, typically on the Monday morning after the game.

 

I for one think an 18 game regular season is optimal for the NFL, with a 2 game pre season. The off season is way too long and is only broken up by the draft. The extra 2 regular season games would provide a strong financial injection so as long as the players get their fair share of the financial pie I couldn't see them objecting.

 

Just my two cents.

That is actually what makes it safer. The techniques they use have been refined for that

 

Football players technique has gone to hell in the last 20-25 years because they have so much equipment

 

So people hit with their head and snap necks, they hit with the crown of their helmet and get concussions.. they fly like a missile into people's knees and ankles

 

The false protection has always made football players very reckless and unsafe

[nedboy7]

I think Coronavirus is a bigger problem. 

[ILBillsfan]

On 2/22/2020 at 12:30 PM, stuvian said:

As the NFL continues to tamper with its golden goose to the point of the game becoming unrecognizable I offer my opposition to its latest attempt at milking the cash cow dry.

 

The human body was not made for the pounding the game inflicts on its players. We already have a 30 percent rate of permanent disability among retired players. One more game will mean that none but punters and kickers will play a full season. This will weaken fan's relationships with stars and starters as the game evolves toward a platoon of unknowns. But the money you say?  One more game cheque won't matter if you're going to spend it all on painkillers and physio. We already have players retiring earlier now that CTE risks are in the public domain.

 

Where in the current schedule is the league going to insert the additional game?  After Christmas when home games in cold climates are a tougher sell?  Before labour day when the south is either unbearably hot or in hurricane season? How many more tweets of empty seats do we need to see before we understand that we have an oversupply? 

 

What makes the NFL great is that fewer games make each one meaningful. Watering down the product will make it indistinguishable from upstarts like the XFL. 

So basically every team now plays what all the teams playing in the wc week...meh 

 

Show me data teams that continually play in the playoffs have more injuries

[Talley56]

Two years later and we have completed a 17-week season.  Was it good?  Bad?  Buffalo's "extra" game was against Washington whom we blew out so that's a positive.

[bobobonators]

Today was super exciting. I loved it. Was following numerous games very closely.