Each NFL Team To Play One Game Overseas In 18-Game Schedule?

By floating the idea of an 18-game schedule, the NFL has added another negotiating point to the stalled labor talks. Chicago GM Jerry Angelo says one of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell's main objectives in expanding the regular-season format is to ensure all 32 teams play one game overseas each season. As usual, following the money seems like a good way to analyze the proposal. More regular-season games mean more TV revenues in the pockets of NFL owners who claim their profits aren't what they used to be. Many players will balk - until they become convinced those enhanced revenue streams will trickle their way. "I like what we've got right now, but going to 18 games wouldn't hurt, either," Titans defensive tackle Jovan Haye said to the Nashville Tennessean. "The preseason is necessary, but after those first two games, you're like, 'Wow, let's get the regular season going.' I'd prefer 18, not just because of the money but because it lets you get to football quicker."

Source: Tampa Tribune

 

I'll get this for whoever wants it.

 

God help us all.

 

this is a terrible idea?

 

Yes.

I'm beginning to think this whole thing is an obsession to Roger. Seriously. Roger's going to force a lock out, not the owners or the players. :icon_confused:

 

Godell said it 2 or 3 SB ago in an interview during the game. He can imagne games at London and locating a team in London in the fututre too.
Easy to predict an SB played at England in..... 2015

 

Lets be honest, there are a hell of a lot more problems that are higher up the agenda of the NFL than this.

Personally, I can't see 16 games being held overseas because there is simply not that level of interest globally. As you guys will probably remember last year they were attempting to bring two games to London this year, and that was met with a large amount of critisizm from not only Americans, but the British fans as well. Quite a chunk of the attendance at the London are fans from continental Europe, and having games say in Amsterdam, Berlin, Paris etc would split attendance for all the games.

I'm open-minded about global expansion because of the benefits for the league. But they need to do it slowly. Going from 1 to 16 games is a steep increase that will bite them on the butt.

 

There won't be any splits Andy.Goddell want a team at London and I fear he will get his wish.

Although I see the same problems as you do. I can't see continental Europe fans traveling to London every second week in the season. Especially not with the current economic situation. It will fail and this should be the end for the Godell aera

 

Most fans wouldn't go every second week, even the Brits. As much as Goddell does want a London team, there's no way the owners will pass it through, especially with the cracks within the NFL over other larger issues.

Even if it did happen and fail, I don't think it would end him, after all, Tagliabue oversaw the expansion into Jacksonville & Charlotte, the disintegration of the LA/NFL market and screwed up the CBA and still managed to retire on his own terms.

 

Let's just take their soccer players and convert them to kickers.

Goodell has got to go. I never thought I'd say this, but I miss Tagliabue.

 

Brutal...just brutal...

 

It's already a "worldwide" phenomenon...what's Goddell proving with 16 games overseas? A team in London? Epic FAIL!

 

I don't understand why people are so opposed to this. It makes more sense to me then a team in Jacksonville

 

Because generally, Americans don't like foreigners to intrude on "their" sport.

 

Who would get international games? I think you'd see games in the following:

• Great Britain
• Mexico
• Germany
• Japan
• Canada
• China (they have had a hard-on for years to play there)
• Spain

I think these are the ones the NFL would target. I don't have a problem with the NFL bringing it's game to international markets. I just have an issue with trying to expand to a 18 game schedule. That to me is just asinine....

 

i agree. i think the article is inaccurate in saying all the games would be played 'overseas' becuase they want games in Mexico and Canada, where there is some interest in the league and Goddell wants to grow the presence in those countries also.

I also feel that the article is inaccurate by saying this would be the arrangement with an 18-game schedule. This would only make sense with a 17-game schedule.

If every team played 1 game at a neutral site (internationally) each year, they would have 17 games remaining in an 18-game schedule. How would it be competitively fair for some teams to get 9 home games while other teams only get 8? HFA is huge in the regular season in this league. This structure would not work with 18 games.

I have a feeling the league is predicting that the most they will be able to get from the players is 1 more game a year and each team playing once in another country at a neutral site would keep 8 home games for each team intact and not disturb the competitive balance of the scheduling.

 

Agreed. If they expand to 18, the priority should be to bring the fans more high quality entertainment and not an excuse to make more money overseas.

 

Yep, should read 18 week schedule, what will be an 17 games season for each team. 8 homegames, 8 away plus one international

 

i don't buy the 'injury' claim in an 18-game schedule and I don't really care about the 'records' being skewed. the only logical argument against an 18-game schedule I've heard thus far is that with these small, 4-team divisions, a major problem every season is that there are always several meaningless games late in the season because teams are out of playoff contention so early or other teams already have the divisions wrapped up by week 14 or week 15. Will an 18-game schedule just add more meaningless games to the end of the season?

If the league wants to add games, should it actually add more playoff teams/games to decrease the amount of meaningless games in december?

They could add 2 more teams in each conference, therefore making the top 8 teams in each conference playoff-worthy and just eliminate the first round 'byes' for the top 2 seeds that we currently have. There have been many teams through the years that miss the playoffs with 9, 10, and even 11 wins because the conference is so stacked. Obviously, the downfall would be a lot more 8-8 and maybe even some 7-9 teams would make the playoffs when a conference has a bad year. Of course, those teams would almost certainly be #7 and #8 seeds and would be facing the top teams on the road but at least they would have played more meaningful games late in the regular season to at least qualify for the playoffs.