NFL Intent on Lengthening Season

[Pats726]

I will think the league is serious about this when they start addressing related issues to a longer season....expanding rosters and changes in teh IR rules....AND most important talk about a developmental league. IF/when they start serious talks about that...WHEN that happens...the league will REALLY be serious about it all. Slicing away the developmental and evaluating of young players is extremely important and needs to be addressed.

 

[Tunescribe]

I really have a healthy dislike for Goodell. What evidence does he have that the fans want 18 regular-season games? Every time this subject comes up, it seems a solid majority wants to keep it at 16. The players don't want 18.

 

[Ian]

I really have a healthy dislike for Goodell. What evidence does he have that the fans want 18 regular-season games? Every time this subject comes up, it seems a solid majority wants to keep it at 16. The players don't want 18.

I don't think he cares about evidence. I think he knows we'll watch all 18 regardless, and obviously there's more television revenue involved since the PreSeason games aren't on CBS or Fox, they're usually on the local affiliates. Plus I think they want to move the games "world wide" (London, etc) and adding two games allows the owners to make back revenue that would be lost if the team loses a home game for it.

 

[Tunescribe]

I don't think he cares about evidence. I think he knows we'll watch all 18 regardless, and obviously there's more television revenue involved since the PreSeason games aren't on CBS or Fox, they're usually on the local affiliates. Plus I think they want to move the games "world wide" (London, etc) and adding two games allows the owners to make back revenue that would be lost if the team loses a home game for it.

Ian, perhaps you can offer some insight on this: Did the owners give Goodell marching orders when he was hired to be this proactive? I've never seen a commissioner in any pro sport propose so many initiatives with such (potentially) far-reaching impact. It's not like the NFL wasn't prosperous to begin with. But if the owners told him to "see what you can do to make us more money," I can understand why he's doing what he's doing. He just seems to have undue influence and control over changing the game's fabric.

 

[Ian]

Ian, perhaps you can offer some insight on this: Did the owners give Goodell marching orders when he was hired to be this proactive? I've never seen a commissioner in any pro sport propose so many initiatives with such (potentially) far-reaching impact. It's not like the NFL wasn't prosperous to begin with. But if the owners told him to "see what you can do to make us more money," I can understand why he's doing what he's doing. He just seems to have undue influence and control over changing the game's fabric.

I don't know, but it appears that with the state of the league's financial situation (which they've been claiming for a while now are not good) it just seems like he's trying to do as much as he can to increase interest in the league (hence the London Games and the talk of a second) along with revenue. Obviously if you're looking to make more money, that works for the owners. Whether or not it's best for the players or the fans is a different story.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Ian, perhaps you can offer some insight on this: Did the owners give Goodell marching orders when he was hired to be this proactive? I've never seen a commissioner in any pro sport propose so many initiatives with such (potentially) far-reaching impact. It's not like the NFL wasn't prosperous to begin with. But if the owners told him to "see what you can do to make us more money," I can understand why he's doing what he's doing. He just seems to have undue influence and control over changing the game's fabric.

Roger's background is in marketing. His lipservice to the integrity of the game is really only geared towards it's increased broad based marketability. He could care less what the product on the field turns out to be, from a quality (football purists) standpoint, just that it sells better.

The Players and even most coaches seem to be less than luke warm to this idea, and even fans seem to be split for purely logical reasons. Any ownership backing he's getting is likely coming from the small market teams who don't make much money on their preseason as is. The big market clubs do, and since they get to pocket that they will have an issue with adding more to the revenue pool from which teams will only get 40% (or less for the top money makers who have to contribute even more of their profit to the low revenue teams as part of the bailout they agreed to in that last CBA). Unless we're talking so much more money it's not worth arguing about...

Ergo this may basically ultimately be a means to selling more overseas games which currently adversely impact big market home teams revenues and season ticket holders good will. And I really think that is what this is all about. Because even Goodell couldn't be as dense as he sounds when he talks on this proposal about how the players are already playing in and being paid for those weeks... What he really wants is more (new) overseas capacity with which to market/leverage his product to the networks, satelite and cable companies. It's not so much more games as a broader audience for them to broadcast to to drive increased advertising revenue for the league and it's various broadcast partners.

If the product on the field suffers, so be it as long as the bottom line expands. That is Goodell's legacy in a nutshell. His ultimate goal probably also includes expansion teams in at least 4 locations most of which will be outside the continental US. Canada, Mexico, London, LA... All of which will have the capacity to become large market football consumers.

 

[Ian]

Roger's background is in marketing. His lipservice to the integrity of the game is really only geared towards it's increased broad based marketability. He could care less what the product on the field turns out to be, from a quality (football purists) standpoint, just that it sells better.

The Players and even most coaches seem to be less than luke warm to this idea, and even fans seem to be split for purely logical reasons. Any ownership backing he's getting is likely coming from the small market teams who don't make much money on their preseason as is. The big market clubs do, and since they get to pocket that they will have an issue with adding more to the revenue pool from which teams will only get 40% (or less for the top money makers who have to contribute even more of their profit to the low revenue teams as part of the bailout they agreed to in that last CBA). Unless we're talking so much more money it's not worth arguing about...

Ergo this may basically ultimately be a means to selling more overseas games which currently adversely impact big market home teams revenues and season ticket holders good will. And I really think that is what this is all about. Because even Goodell couldn't be as dense as he sounds when he talks on this proposal about how the players are already playing in and being paid for those weeks... What he really wants is more (new) overseas capacity with which to market/leverage his product to the networks, satelite and cable companies. It's not so much more games as a broader audience for them to broadcast to to drive increased advertising revenue for the league and it's various broadcast partners.

If the product on the field suffers, so be it as long as the bottom line expands. That is Goodell's legacy in a nutshell. His ultimate goal probably also includes expansion teams in at least 4 locations most of which will be outside the continental US. Canada, Mexico, London, LA... All of which will have the capacity to become large market football consumers.

Exactly. By getting into the overseas markets, it obviously generates more money in terms of television revenue and merchandise. They'll share TV revenue from over there (along with all the money they'll receive when those fans buy Jerseys, Hats, T-Shirts, etc), and by adding two more regular season games they'll gain more $$ from TV revenue over here because preseason games are televised on local affiliates, not on CBS & Fox like they are during the regular season (obviously excluding the nationally televised games). Granted the home teams lose money from ticket sales for the overseas games, but I'm sure there has to be compensation involved to that team to make it worth their while.

I think Mo hit it right on the head with the long-term plans of expansion, and I'm sure we'll probably hear more and more about this as time goes on.

 

[Tunescribe]

Any ownership backing he's getting is likely coming from the small market teams who don't make much money on their preseason as is. The big market clubs do, and since they get to pocket that they will have an issue with adding more to the revenue pool from which teams will only get 40% (or less for the top money makers who have to contribute even more of their profit to the low revenue teams as part of the bailout they agreed to in that last CBA). Unless we're talking so much more money it's not worth arguing about...

Ergo this may basically ultimately be a means to selling more overseas games which currently adversely impact big market home teams revenues and season ticket holders good will. And I really think that is what this is all about. Because even Goodell couldn't be as dense as he sounds when he talks on this proposal about how the players are already playing in and being paid for those weeks... What he really wants is more (new) overseas capacity with which to market/leverage his product to the networks, satelite and cable companies. It's not so much more games as a broader audience for them to broadcast to to drive increased advertising revenue for the league and it's various broadcast partners.

If the product on the field suffers, so be it as long as the bottom line expands. That is Goodell's legacy in a nutshell. His ultimate goal probably also includes expansion teams in at least 4 locations most of which will be outside the continental US. Canada, Mexico, London, LA... All of which will have the capacity to become large market football consumers.

Thanks for the perspective, Mo. The key question seems to be how complicit the owners generally are in Goodell's grand schemes. His Achilles heel might well be how the next CBA pans out. I hope he fails miserably and is ousted.

 

[Pats726]

Exactly. By getting into the overseas markets, it obviously generates more money in terms of television revenue and merchandise. They'll share TV revenue from over there (along with all the money they'll receive when those fans buy Jerseys, Hats, T-Shirts, etc), and by adding two more regular season games they'll gain more $$ from TV revenue over here because preseason games are televised on local affiliates, not on CBS & Fox like they are during the regular season (obviously excluding the nationally televised games). Granted the home teams lose money from ticket sales for the overseas games, but I'm sure there has to be compensation involved to that team to make it worth their while.

I think Mo hit it right on the head with the long-term plans of expansion, and I'm sure we'll probably hear more and more about this as time goes on.

I agree...but there are OTHER ways to sell the game internationally...like Pat Kirwin's idea of a few barnstorming teams to play all over the world. I think having players at a location for a few days promoting the game will help a lot more than a game here and there...impacting the season here.
I also agree it's all about PR and money as opposed to teh good of the game. The season now 16-4 and such works..and they have a few games to evaluate talent and develop players..that would be gone with a longer season...It's all about MONEY overseas.

 

[Gwedd]

I would offer that the only way the 18 game season will work is by breaking it into three 6-game sections, with a bye for every team at those points. That would give each team a bit of a breather, before taking on the next 6-games stretch, and possibly reduce injuries or allow players to heal up from minor dings, etc.

If the league were smart, they would schedule bye week activities for family and fan NFL-oriented events, like hometown rallies with player appearances, punt, pass and kick competitions, "NFL Experience" events at every stadium, meet & greets with owners and coaches, whatever. Think of the opportunities for NFL-sized Pep Rallies to fire up the fan base.

That sort of a combination could work, because it would combine a number of fan-related events to cover the gaps in the trimesters, and let the teams catch their collective breaths, make changes, etc.

Otherwise, it might well be asking too much from the tams, unless you allow them to increase roster sizes.

respects,

 

[AzPatsFan]

The simple act of allowing all 53 players to be active all the time, would substantially help the players. With only 47, an injured player is occasionally required to try and "gut it out" when he is hurting. Now the reserve player is active and can come in in his stead.

There is no sacred thing from the 47 active 53 max. It was just an accident when they opened the roster up partially, one year.

In addition, raising the active number to 53, also would remove the load of playing ST from many regular players. It would also give young developing players more of an opportunity to play a few snaps as a way tot speed up their adaptation to the NFL. Today if they can't be among the active 47, they have no change to get any playing experience, even in garbage time.

Raising the roster size to 55-57 would also alleviate the problem.

I think it is great to be doing away with some of those dreary exhibition games.

 

[Ian]

For anyone interested:

Goodell’s Press Conference Airing at 12:30pm ET : New England Patriots Blog - By: Ian Logue

Turn to NFL Network now (I'm at work...so let me know if anything interesting comes out of it)

 

[JoeSixPat]

For anyone interested:

Goodell’s Press Conference Airing at 12:30pm ET : New England Patriots Blog - By: Ian Logue

Turn to NFL Network now (I'm at work...so let me know if anything interesting comes out of it)

It will be interesting to see if Goodell can keep a straight face when asked if the only reason he's doing this is to create an extra bargaining chip for the labor negotiations.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I could see 17 games with the "17th" at a foreign/nutral site.

This would need an roster expansion and cap expansion.

Let's face it, revenue generation in the US will be tougher. largeer marginal generation will occur outside the US.

There would have to be some consideration for regional rivalry like round robbin AFC/ NFC West in Mexico or Japan.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't think he cares about evidence. I think he knows we'll watch all 18 regardless, and obviously there's more television revenue involved since the PreSeason games aren't on CBS or Fox, they're usually on the local affiliates. Plus I think they want to move the games "world wide" (London, etc) and adding two games allows the owners to make back revenue that would be lost if the team loses a home game for it.

Right now, with 16 games, there are about 2 weeks each season that a person can easily afford to miss, and that's being low with the number. Adding 2 more games is going to further water down the impact of each game.

On the bright side, this will probably free up a couple of weekends for me, since I won't have to worry about any particular NFL games impacting my team. Instead of needing to watch 13-16 games a season, I'll only have to watch 10-12. Missed games really won't mean all that much in the end.

Thanks Rog!

 

[moosekill]

We have already had all this discussion before.

#1 Anyone here who pretends they won't watch the extra 2 games is a liar. You will watch it and enjoy that 18th game much more than that 4th preseason game.

#2 Anyone who claims that 16 games is perfect is blowing smoke out of their arse. You are just plain making things up, is 12 perfect, 14, 17, 19, who knows, you sure don't.

#3 Anyone who thinks professional football is about anything other than money doesn't understand the world in general.

#4 Anyone who thinks this isn't about the labor issues, and that the owners aren't behind this shouldn't bother posting on this board.

All that being said, if they do go to 18 games, which I would love, they had better expand the rosters and give players some more money. Of course right now Goodell will say no more players no more money, but see that is what we call bargaining. When all is said and done the league will "cave in" and allow the rosters to expand and the players to get a bit more money. Then we have a "win win" everyone goes home happy and we get two more weeks of professional, non preseason football.

Yay!

 

[Sicilian]

I like 16 games myself, don't see a need for more. Only way I would like this (in hindsight), would be if the Patriots go 19-0 this year, then go 21-0 in the first year of the new schedule

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Easy to see our disgust at this possibility of a longer season but its easy right now to do so because this team usually is on top near the end of the 16 game season.

What happens when this team starts a slow decline and is hanging onto a 500record in week 14 and is 2 games back of the division leader? - those 2 games could be very helpful and could make the difference.

Of course it could work against the team if we have a 1 game lead and are looking tired down the stretch as a division leader.

 

[moosekill]

The other thing for people to remember is Goodell works for the owners. He is paid very well to be the A-hole in front of the cameras while he does what the owners, including Kraft, tell him to do. If you think somehow he is proposing all this without the blessings of the owners you are incorrect.

 

[Deus Irae]

We have already had all this discussion before.

#1 Anyone here who pretends they won't watch the extra 2 games is a liar. You will watch it and enjoy that 18th game much more than that 4th preseason game.

#2 Anyone who claims that 16 games is perfect is blowing smoke out of their arse. You are just plain making things up, is 12 perfect, 14, 17, 19, who knows, you sure don't.

#3 Anyone who thinks professional football is about anything other than money doesn't understand the world in general.

#4 Anyone who thinks this isn't about the labor issues, and that the owners aren't behind this shouldn't bother posting on this board.

All that being said, if they do go to 18 games, which I would love, they had better expand the rosters and give players some more money. Of course right now Goodell will say no more players no more money, but see that is what we call bargaining. When all is said and done the league will "cave in" and allow the rosters to expand and the players to get a bit more money. Then we have a "win win" everyone goes home happy and we get two more weeks of professional, non preseason football.

Yay!

Sorry.... I'm not a sheep who just runs with the herd. In most seasons, good teams clinch playoff berths with a couple of weeks left in the season even with a 16 game season. Bad teams are done little more than halfway through the year. Now, the good teams will be able to blow a game or two and still clinch by week 15 or 16, so there'll be less need to follow each week. There will also be a lot less reason to pay attention to non-"favorite team" games. I don't need to really focus on watching that Cardinals-Saints game in week 2 "just in case" anymore.

I quit watching baseball when they took the World Series away from us. I reckon I can resist wasting more weekends watching football if it comes to it.