18 Game Schedule, Who Wants It?

Discussion in 'NFL General Discussion' started by SoDev, Aug 27, 2010.


Are you in favor of an 18 game season?

  1. I like what an 18 game season would do for the league.

  2. I do NOT like what an 18 game season would mean for the league.

  1. SoDev

    SoDev Don't tase me, bro!

    Do you want it? We know Goodell and the owners want it for 1 reason, cha-freaking-ching $$$!

    I don't like it, but I believe it's going to be force fed to us at some point withing the next 5 years anyway.

    We are all fans here, so I want to see if the majority of fans really don't want it. I see a lot of people saying "more football = better", well no, not really, not if the overall quality of the product suffers (which is already a current issue), and it will suffer. If you think there should be less preseason (somehow this makes for a good argument in favor of 18?) then drop 1 or 2 of those practice games, doesn't mean they need to be turned into regular season games.

    Please discuss.
  2. K Train

    K Train Do You Honeycutt?

    um i love it.....for my own selfishness, the players make alot more money than all of us they can entertain us for 2 additional weeks out of the year.

    i love football so much i couldnt see myself arguing over an additional 2 weeks of my sunday ticket. preseason takes about 15 minutes to piss me off anyway so do away with 1 or 2 of them

    ideealy this would extend the season to make the superbowl the sunday before presidents day....giving everyone the day off on monday. jackpot for the NFL and its advertisers and us the consumer win as well
  3. SoDev

    SoDev Don't tase me, bro!

    Respect your opinion, but why does everyone always say this as if it's going to be free.

    Maybe you didn't mean it as being free (doubt it), but everyone acts like Sunday ticket and season ticket prices won't go up. Like you will just be getting extra for your money. You people really think they will not find a way to charge you more now or in the future for it? Maybe you don't care to pay more, but stop using it as a selling point like it's all bonus free crap.
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2010
  4. phiglesphan

    phiglesphan BANNED

    I'm for it. Even if I pay more. Sure there may be some more meaningless games for elite teams but for the most part it just turns 2 meaningless games into meaningful games. It's also great for FF : )
  5. Ridin Burgundy

    Ridin Burgundy on the Magic Bandwagon

    I think its a bad idea. All it will mean is players are going to break down quicker and have shorter careers. Most players already struggle to get through a 16 game season and as SoDev mentioned it will likely result in the standard slipping with the talent pool already being spread pretty thin.
  6. Sorry brother....I'm all for an expanded regular season.

    Sure...this could mean more injuries but that is certainly why they'll expand the rosters.

    You could also see more expansion teams in the near future with an 18 game schedule.
  7. SoDev

    SoDev Don't tase me, bro!

    Oh lawd... it's all good, I'm not for it, but I'm not so opposed to the idea that I don't think I couldn't like it once it happened. It will be good for a lot of players on the bubble, we will find more gems in the rough.
  8. phiglesphan

    phiglesphan BANNED

    The reasons I don't buy the injury nonsense is that players are more then well compensated for the risks to their bodies and the slight uptick in player break down won't in my opinion change the quality of the game at all. Hell most of the time players on the practice squad could ne plugged in a game or two here and there without the game suffering. Injuries are now and always will be a part of the game. Using it as a reason against an 18 week schedule is cat IMO
  9. Chipper10

    Chipper10 Back 2 Back! Roll Tide Roll!

    I don't like the idea. I believe that it will cause players to be more lazy than a lot of them already are. You give them a couple extra games to give lackluster performances in, and then you will start seeing sloppy play throughout. Also, I think it will take away from the playoffs. By the time you play 18 games in a regular season, when before it was 19 games ..20 at the most for regular season and playoffs, just..gonna make them more lazy, and more at risk for a bigger injury when their bodies wear out. Sure, they get paid lots of money, but they also take a lot of punishment to their bodies. You say we shouldn't use risk of inury as a cat reason to go against an 18 week schedule because of the players pay rates, but in the same token, let's not use their PAY for a reason why they SHOULD have an 18 game regular season. No matter how you look at it, there's gonna be people for it..and people against it, despite the many facts supporting both.
  10. brakos82

    brakos82 30% more cats than last year!

    I have nothing against an expanded season, but I think that more expansion teams is a really bad idea. The divisions work perfectly (8 divisions, 4 teams each), and I don't see the NFL screwing up the symmetry anytime soon... not to mention the field product would end up getting so depleted with 40 teams. It's hard enough finding 32 quality players at every position on the field, much less 40.
  11. Crowned

    Crowned Doesn't give a shit.

  12. SoDev

    SoDev Don't tase me, bro!

    Here is a nice break down on what a 17 game season would mean. Feel free to discuss that too. Personally if you are going to do 17, might as will do 18. Although I do like the idea of teams not being able to 'tie' themselves. It would be better seeing 9-8 or 8-9 than 9-9.

    A case for 17 games, not 18 | ProFootballTalk.com
  13. 86WARD

    86WARD -

    I like it.

    The only reason I don't like it is that it doesn't give those late round guys and free agents that extra game action / evaluation period that they normally get.
  14. Flacco2MasonTD

    Flacco2MasonTD ಠ_ಠ

    Originally it was 14, now it's 16 but they want 18 - other than mangling the record books I think it's greedy - 16 has worked fine thus far, other than increased revenue for the owners I don't really see how it would help anything. Shortly after they'll be clamoring for 20 games too - it's not broken, no need to fix.
  15. ravenfan52

    ravenfan52 Perennial All Pro

    No FRICKIN way. Goodell and the owners are a bunch of frickin morons. Injuries, rookie wall, records being broken, this SUCKS. no way do i want this. and the reasons are obvious and i don't have time to get into it all now. here's an idea: make sure there's football in 2011. then we'll talk. or not.
  16. cpgobrowns

    cpgobrowns < Deer/Headlights

    I think 3 preseason and 17 regular season games would be great. The 4th week of the pre-season is the most painful thing to sit through as it is.
  17. DontKnowMe

    DontKnowMe Anti-Social Networker

    I'm against it because in a sixteen game season you already have a hard enough time getting playoff bound teams to play their starters through all of the games. And then you have teams that only win 6 games or less in the season so adding two more games wouldn't help them either if they lost so many games already. The only ones that would really gain something from this would be the owners.
  18. Sportsguy

    Sportsguy AKA-Sportsguy9695

    I would think it would be a great idea. Less pre season games and more regular season games. that would just be great
  19. phiglesphan

    phiglesphan BANNED

    "We fear change"
  20. warcrychief

    warcrychief Ur just da assistant Pimp

    if its not broken...then dont fix it.