18 games season concept

[tailgater]

You have set up a straw man.

I never said that the move to 18 games and 2 byes was about what the fans wanted rather than increasing revenue.

The change is about increasing revenue, as well it should be. The players will have their percentage of a larger revenue pot.

Apparently you are baseball fans who doesn't want a longer nfl season. I ahve one sport I care about: nfl football. 2 weeks of exhibitions and 24 weeks of the regualr season and playoffs is fine with me. Personally, I don't think that the fans will be upset with the extra weeks of meaningful football to replace the exhibition games.

Has the team done a poll of paying customers? How many season ticket holders prefer to replace 2 exhibition games with 2 regular season games? How many fans want to shorten the season and wait longer in the offseason for football to begin?

Good points. Sure I'd like to see more games, but not be forced to go to up to 5 games in Jan-Feb at Gillette. If they do the humane thing for us and try to schedule some of those games on the road, it's a loss of HFA for the Pats.

 

[Deus Irae]

There are three choices
A) Keep the current schedule and deal with the revenue situation, likely resulting in a work stoppage because of the need for lower player compensation.
B) Change to a 2 and 16 schedule and further decrease revenue.
C) Change to a 2 and 18 schedule and increase revenue.
D) Your additional option.

Since you have your personal poll of 100, which do you favor?

Personally, I favor increasing revenue by converting exhibition game to regular season games, plus having two bye weeks. This would give 24 weeks of meaningful nfl football, plus a 2 week preseason (plus scrimmages if needed).

There is no need for lower player compensation that is the result of a 16 game schedule. The compensation percentage is going to be an issue regardless of the number of games. That makes option a a complete non-issue.

You can get rid of one exhibition game and keep everything else the same. The money loss will be minimal and there will still be 3 games to get teams ready. Unfortunately, despite all the talk of "greedy" players, the owners would be too "greedy" to surrender that revenue.

 

[mgteich]

Everyone is greedy to surrender revenue. You really believe that total revenue is irrelevant as long as the percentage is the same. ????????????? I would rather have the same percentage of a larger revenue pot.

Are you really saying that switching two games to being regular season games won't increase total revenues now and in the future?

My position is imple, perhaps simplistic. MORE REVENUE IS GOOD FOR THE OWNERS AND THE PLAYERS. It is ALWAYS better to be negotiating when the revenue pot is increasing. Do you disagree?

There is no need for lower player compensation that is the result of a 16 game schedule. The compensation percentage is going to be an issue regardless of the number of games. That makes option a a complete non-issue.

You can get rid of one exhibition game and keep everything else the same. The money loss will be minimal and there will still be 3 games to get teams ready. Unfortunately, despite all the talk of "greedy" players, the owners would be too "greedy" to surrender that revenue.

 

[mgteich]

Consider that tonight could be the first game of the regular season! We could even add a second bye without adding weeks to the end of the season, or we could add ONE week.

Good points. Sure I'd like to see more games, but not be forced to go to up to 5 games in Jan-Feb at Gillette. If they do the humane thing for us and try to schedule some of those games on the road, it's a loss of HFA for the Pats.

 

[mgteich]

Tonight could be game one

Or our season could be starting on Sunday. The extra bye would probably add an extra week to the end of the season, or not.

But DI tells me that ALL of his 100 friends would rather that this be an exhibition game.

 

[Rob0729]

My only suggestion is make the Super Bowl the day before Presidents' Day. It sucks that as I get older, Super Bowl parties break up at half time because friends with kids have to head home because there is school the next day. That week is February vacation in this state, but all schools across the country are closed that Monday.

 

[tailgater]

Consider that tonight could be the first game of the regular season! We could even add a second bye without adding weeks to the end of the season, or we could add ONE week.

Then you run into the problem of a real short offseason, particularly for the teams that go deep into the playoffs.

The SB would be when - Mid to late March? There will be plenty of players that wouldn't be available for training camp, never mind the start of the regular season.

The NFL would have to agree to drop a lot of the mandatory camps, perhaps cancel any activity in May-June, just to give the coaches and players a chance to recover from an extended season and a shorter offseason.

 

[Deus Irae]

Everyone is greedy to surrender revenue. You really believe that total revenue is irrelevant as long as the percentage is the same. ????????????? I would rather have the same percentage of a larger revenue pot.

I believe that you keep changing the arguments. The problem with the revenue percentage is not games related. The problem with the revenue percentage is that the owners gave the players too much of a percentage, of too large a piece of the overall pie, for their comfort. Adding games doesn't address that issue.

Are you really saying that switching two games to being regular season games won't increase total revenues now and in the future?

No, and I've never stated, or implied, anything close to that. The move to 18 games is all about money. That's been my point, actually. The crap about "It's what the fans want" is just that. It's crap. There's been no clamoring for an 18 game season by some huge percentage of the fan base. What there's been is a clamoring for the elimination of exhibition games that charge regular season price for tickets to watch guys who'll never play in the league. The league makes big coin on those exhibition games, because they don't have to pay the players the same money for playing in those games, and the take is higher for them as a result. It's not going to give that up without finding a way to bring in even more coin, because the billionaires want to bank coin just as much as the millionaires do.

My position is imple, perhaps simplistic. MORE REVENUE IS GOOD FOR THE OWNERS AND THE PLAYERS. It is ALWAYS better to be negotiating when the revenue pot is increasing. Do you disagree?

Naturally, because, as you note, your position is simplistic. However, it's not the point of what I've been saying, so there's really no need to get into it.

 

[moosekill]

Re: Tonight could be game one

Or our season could be starting on Sunday. The extra bye would probably add an extra week to the end of the season, or not.

But DI tells me that ALL of his 100 friends would rather that this be an exhibition game.

I doubt that you could ask 100 people any question and have them all agree, so I think he might be exaggerating a bit.

 

[moosekill]

The players aren't going to accept two extra regular season games without getting paid more, AND the owners don't get to keep all the gate proceeds from regular season home games the way they do for preseason games.

So while there would almost certainly be more money from TV contracts for a longer season, I can't imagine the extra would be 100% profit for the owners.

In all likely hood, the players will have little or no choice in whether or not they accept those two extra games. They can ***** about it, but if the owners implement it, the players choice will be, play 18 games or play in the CFL.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Tonight could be game one

I doubt that you could ask 100 people any question and have them all agree, so I think he might be exaggerating a bit.

I wasn't exaggerating at all. I was surprised at it, because you can't get 100 people to agree that the sun heats the Earth. More than 100 people talked about it, and not one was in favor of the 18 game schedule. It's only anecdotal, but it's really happened. That's a mix of people from Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Florida.

 

[moosekill]

That's the big problem with going to 18 games.

Right now, the schedule is about as fair as it can reasonably be (every team plays four games against teams that won their division, four against second-place, etc.).

Going to 18 games would have to unbalance that. I assume the only fair way to do it would be something like having 1s/4s play 1s/4s and 2/3s play 2s/3s, or vice versa. [mgteich's solutions, while "pretty," would both require three extra games, though.]

Actually, I would consider the schedule to be the smallest of the problems. Just pick up a second division to play, solved. Is that the best way? who knows but it certainly solves the problem.

A much bigger problem is what happens if the day before President's day is Valentine's Day.

 

[Deus Irae]

In all likely hood, the players will have little or no choice in whether or not they accept those two extra games. They can ***** about it, but if the owners implement it, the players choice will be, play 18 games or play in the CFL.

Since it will be in the CBA, this is simply incorrect. The players can simply say "no". In all likelihood, however, the combination of more money and union weakness will lead to the 18 game season becoming a reality. Money often makes people act against their own self interests.

 

[moosekill]

Re: Tonight could be game one

I wasn't exaggerating at all. I was surprised at it, because you can't get 100 people to agree that the sun heats the Earth. More than 100 people have talked about it, and not one was in favor of the 18 game schedule. It's only anecdotal, but it's really happened. That's a mix of people from Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Florida.

Lol, I asked 9 people and everyone thought it was a great idea, I don't have 100 friends. I was going to ask you to become my 10th friend, but if you do, then my 100% pro 18 game poll drops to 90%, so sorry.

 

[moosekill]

Since it will be in the CBA, this is simply incorrect. The players can simply say "no". In all likelihood, however, the combination of more money and union weakness will lead to the 18 game season becoming a reality. Money often makes people act against their own self interests.

Except for the whole, the owners declare an impasse, implement their own rules and then let the player's union take them to court. Which at least a couple of writers has thought was by far the most likely outcome.

Of course, the players can still decide not to play, but I have a feeling the owners will have no problem finding football players willing to play 18 regular season games.

 

[mgteich]

You underestimate the legal position of the players. Without a CBA, the nfl would likely lose its anti-trust protections rather quickly. Their "rules" such as free agency would be gone. Draftees would be free to sign with any team. If the teams colluded to not allow this, then they would lose in court.

Except for the whole, the owners declare an impasse, implement their own rules and then let the player's union take them to court. Which at least a couple of writers has thought was by far the most likely outcome.

Of course, the players can still decide not to play, but I have a feeling the owners will have no problem finding football players willing to play 18 regular season games.

 

[moosekill]

I got the information from a link someone here posted a while back, I'll see if I can find it and relink it.

 

[Pats726]

More is simply NOT BETTER....that is usually the case..and here BIG time. And what happened to the international games that Goodell was pushing months ago..are they now off the table?? OR shall they NOT mention them at all...trying to push 18 without mentioning this aspect..which I THINK is important....HIDE it and then later BRING it back up...
I would keep it all the same..and MAYBE add an international game..making it 17...and 2 byes.. BUT the preseason games are needed...MAYBE NOT by the fans..but by coaches..younger players.. A LOT of evaluation goes on in these games..so I THINK that aspect is completely overlooked by many.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Actually, I would consider the schedule to be the smallest of the problems. Just pick up a second division to play, solved. Is that the best way? who knows but it certainly solves the problem.

Again, adding a second division means 19 games, not 18. And if you only add two games, there's no good way to do it without returning to the bad old days of unbalanced schedules (e.g., there was a stretch where the Patriots played nine consecutive games against the Squeelers in Pittsburgh).

 

[DropKickFlutie]

The core problem has been charging fans insane prices for preseason games.

The solution to this, is NOT to add 2 more regular season games.

Roger Goodell is on a hot streak of poor judgement and bad decisions.