Should the NFL move to an 18 game season?

Over the weekend NFL Network reported the League's commisioner has propposed dropping two pre-season games (there are currently 4) in favor of two more regular season games.

Naturally this will be the subject of much debate in the sports pages for a while. I'm not sure what to think yet. As a fan I'd love a longer season. Buit aslo as a fan I would hate to see more injuries, teams too tired in the playoffs, and who knows what other effects a longer season might have.

I remember when the season was 14 games long, and only 4 teams made the playoffs in each conference (three division leaders and one wild card). I like the 16 game season better, and the longer post-season with more teams, too (now it's four division winners plus two wild cards).

But with more games there are consequences:

1) More chances for injury. Sure an injury can happen any time (Martin "Automatica" Gramatica injured himself celebrating a field goal all alone), but they're more likely in games where the players are going all-out or nearly so, meanign regular season and playoff games. In the pre-season the rhythm of play and the play time for each player is different (rookies and backups play more, for one thing)

2) Records. Some records are more easily broken; yards per season, TDs per season, sacks per season, etc. Others are harder to break, notably achieving an undefeated season. I've no doubt if the NFL still played only 14 regular season games, some team otehr than Miami would ahve had an undefeated season by now, maybe more than one. At 16 games it's not quite impossible, but it is much harder. At 18 games, I'd call it impossible for the foreseeable future.

3) Fatigue. Both the players and the fans may get tired of a longer season. You'll see more teams reasting their starters late in the season. To this end, it may help to add a second bye-week to all teams. of course, this means lengthening the season even more (to at least 20 or 21 weeks). Fan fatigue could be more of a problem.

4) Higher season ticket prices. They ahve to. After all, more games, more money, right?

Any thoughts?

I'd be totlly against this. The season is already going long with the byew, which they would surely keep. In 1993 they had a double-bye season and it was not well received. As it is plenty of teams are out of it by week 10. They still will be but teams like the Browns will have another 2 games for the fans to suffer thru. But in the end it is about dillution. The NFL is special in that with so few games each game means a lot. Games used to be Sunday afternoon only. Then they added MNF and it was a hit. Then sunday night football. Then more and more thursday games. Now it will start earlier or go longer yet. Why can't sports leagues undrestand what Jerry Seinfeld said about "leave them wanting more?"

Actually, as much as I have liked football all my life, the last thing I want is more NFL. Holding up a city for $30MM to put a roof on "in case it rains" during a Superbowl; letting doig-killers play after just a 4 game suspension; promoting fantasy-football but being adamantly against "betting" on games. Other than the Steelers the whole NFL is only lines and bets to me.

I'm a huge NFL fan as well. I live in Seattle and have missed only one Seahawk home game in a decade (seriously). I work at the games, originally in the stat booth (My dad and two uncles basically run it) and I now issue out vests for the media. When watching your next game, look for the ugly red/black vests that people wear. I issue those each game and collect them afterwards. During the game, I walk around on the field and make sure they're following all of the stupid little rules the NFL sets for them. It's a BS job, but somebody has to do it and I'm happy to :). I'm not trying to say "I have inside knowledge" or "I'm smarter than you" - most people who like football enjoy hearing something about my job.

I believe that you missed the most important point: Money. How about the majority of players who have contracts signed for 16 + postseason games? They will be "asked" to play two more grueling games... therefore their salaries will have to be changed and the salary cap (if they make one) will also have to be increased. You can't just go with a linear increase in their salary because I would argue that #1 and #3 would mean that they get paid more than just a 12.5% increase... unless guaranteed contracts become the norm.

As a straight fan: I would LOVE two extra games. When I start to think about it: Injuries would just become way too prevalent and the NFL already has a looming crisis when it comes to brain damage. I haven't followed it as much as I should but hasn't it been decided that the NFL is legally liable for the severe problems players have later in life? I just don't think it's the best thing right now, but if they have to do it I agree about adding another bye week.

Lastly: After working every home Seahawk and Husky football game, I'm tired as shit at the end of football season.

I'm the only vote for lengthening the regular season.

I don't know why everyone cares so much about injuries. They even out. If you care that much about injuries, then we should be calling to shorten the regular season. The NFL should just add roster spots or get rid of "injured reserve"

I figure if they add two games, the season gets lengthened one week on both sides. Week 1 is Labor Day weekend and the Superbowl is President's Day Weekend.

Season ticket holders pay for all 10 games now anyway, so the prices might go up, but at least they only have to suffer through one pre-season game.

I understand about the concussion fears, but that needs to be addressed through the game, not through the length of the regular season.

Finally, football season is 5 months long, baseball is 7, hockey and basketball are 8 1/2. Making football two weeks longer doesn't seem that crazy.

I'm gonna say no for the reasons stated above. Why the constant need to mess with a good thing??...kind of like the NCAA expanding the men's BB tourney. Fortunately they didn't destroy that by going to 96 teams. Lets not screw up NFL either. Its perfect the way it is.

Yes, they should convert the last two pre-season games to regular season games. Even the coaches say 4 pre-season games is a waste of time.

The season ticket holders totally get ripped off in this - we pay full price for 10 games, but out of the 4 pre-season games, the starters play maybe a game and a half. Pre-season game 3 is the only one where starters play most of the game. I mean, think about the 4th pre-season game, it's like a game on the last day of the baseball season and both teams are 30 games out.

The owners are against it because they keep all the revenue, the players would be for it because presumably they think their salaries would go up.

TV revenues should be higher for the two extra regular season games, which would help the owners.

To think there were 6 preseason games not that long ago...

There are some positives to a longer season:

1) Backup QBs wuold play more in real games. A team that's out of it by week 10 or 12 could do worse than provide its backups with experience. Considering how many first-rate QBs got to play only because the starter was injured (Favre, Warner, Brady), it might be netter to let them play in real games more often, if only to see what they can do.

2) More games outside the division. As it is every team plays about 40% of the season against divisioanl rivals. Add two more games and the percentage drops to 1/3 of the season.

In any case it's something that should be carefully considered. More games would be nice, but if the quality of play comes down, then more games wouldn't be much good.

I wonder if the NFL wouldn't do better to set up a spring football league. Summer's just too hot for football, but a minor league playing from late February to June might do well. Of coruse, teh last NFL attempt at a parallel/minor league in the US was a misserable failure.

Quote: Chuck

Yes, they should convert the last two pre-season games to regular season games. Even the coaches say 4 pre-season games is a waste of time.

The season ticket holders totally get ripped off in this - we pay full price for 10 games, but out of the 4 pre-season games, the starters play maybe a game and a half. Pre-season game 3 is the only one where starters play most of the game. I mean, think about the 4th pre-season game, it's like a game on the last day of the baseball season and both teams are 30 games out.

The owners are against it because they keep all the revenue, the players would be for it because presumably they think their salaries would go up.

TV revenues should be higher for the two extra regular season games, which would help the owners.

Totally agree. Your not really lengthening the overall season at all. Just changing the status of two games. Playing time will increase for some and decrease for others. People who pay for preseason games get totally ripped off and with the prices today it is one hell of a rip off. Plus you ever try betting on a pre season game. It's like kissing your cousin.

Also in the yes camp. 2 more games reduces the odds that idiotic playoff tiebreakers are needed. There's nothing like going 9-7 and missing the playoffs because someone beat someone who beat someone who beat you by 2 in week 1.

Quote: thlf

People who pay for preseason games get totally ripped off and with the prices today it is one hell of a rip off. Plus you ever try betting on a pre season game. It's like kissing your cousin.

Why would you buy tickets for preseason, or bet on preseason games? You wouldn't pay for warm lemonade, would you? or bet on three card monte. If you do, you deserve what you get.