OT-18 game schedule

**chicagoravensfan** · 06-16-2010, 06:18 PM

Does anyone like this idea? Seems like the ultimate "if it ain't broke don't fix it." With relatively few games on the schedule it makes every game very important so teams can't sleep on anybody. Other sports have regular seasons that are way too long and fans lose interest midway through. Plus who wants to see more injuries which will lead to more second stringers in playoff games? Just seems like a bad idea to squeeze more revenue out while diluting the quality of the product.

**Mista T** · 06-16-2010, 06:44 PM

I like the idea of reducing the full priced exhibitions down to two (one at home, which hopefully can be reduced to $10 or so). If increasing the regular season to 18 games is the price to pay for doing that: yes, absolutely. However, I preferred the idea of reducing the exhibitions to just two and playing the 17 game schedule, with the 17th game played on neutral turf (London, LA, San Antonio, etc.)

As to Ray Lewis and Tom Brady's whining: grow a pair! You are paid multi-millions to entertain us.

**Losac** · 06-16-2010, 10:02 PM

No, no, no, no and no.

And no to the stupid annual London game.

As you said, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

**Dont Know** · 06-17-2010, 02:55 AM

No. No. No and No.

You are gonna see backups playing somewhere in a season. The choices are either at the very start of the season when you have been deprived of football for 6 months, or at the end of the regular season, just before you are about to watch your team in the playoffs.

Aside from the facts that it's the Colts, anyone finding joy watching backups play regular season games 15, 16 and in the case of an expanded season maybe games 17 and 18 as well?

And if playing backups in meaningless games at the end of the regular season is such a great idea, why did Goodell get so angry at the Jets and Colts?

Watching the backups play meaningless games in the pre season sucks, but watching the backups play meaningsless games when you are getting ready for the playoffs is worse.

**grayplay** · 06-18-2010, 07:50 AM

With an enhanced season comes enhanced injuries. I love football because of the urgency of every game played, as stated prior. I would rather a developmental league spring up for the offseason or during the first half of the regular season with 8 teams. One for the AFCN, AFCS, AFCW, AFCE, NFCN, NFCS, NFCW and NFCE. Each team gets to send a number of players to their divisions team yearly based on their record, lower records giving you the opportunity to groom more players in the system.

Money from that league should make up for the 2 games they are seeking. And so no one get's hurt- flag football.

**Raven Nurse** · 06-18-2010, 01:07 PM

Love 18 games, love expanding to England. This league will be a world wide league in several years. I would love to go to England and watch the Ravens

**Losac** · 06-18-2010, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Raven Nurse

This league will be a world wide league in several years.

No, it won't. The world at large doesn't give a shit about American football, despite Goodell's best efforts. If you're thinking about a franchise in London, the logistics of the amount of travel and jet lag involved would be ridiculous.

**Mista T** · 06-18-2010, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by Losac

No, it won't. The world at large doesn't give a shit about American football, despite Goodell's best efforts. If you're thinking about a franchise in London, the logistics of the amount of travel and jet lag involved would be ridiculous.

Money talks. The NFL is seeking to double its revenues. It's pretty well tapped out the US free TV market and extorting cities with stadium-mania, and won't venture so far into the Canadian market as to destroy the CFL. Looking for revenue growth, I believe that it's going to be some combination of:

18, perhaps grow to 20 game season
London & perhaps beyond, to get into the European TV market
expansion to 34, then perhaps 36 teams, including LA, maybe Toronto and San Antonio, at over $1 billion per team
perhaps some pay-per-view extension of the NFL ticket
Spring scrimmages - not free

of these, the least risky and most assured instant revenue generator would be the increased TV contract revenue from the 18 game season

As to your comment in London: they said the same thing about travel to the West Coast many years ago. Somehow, the NFL players overcame the adversity. London to most US cities is not that big of a deal, anyway. As to jet lag, intelligent scheduling, including bye weeks and scheduling of Monday games following London flights, should mitigate any issues.

**Losac** · 06-18-2010, 02:29 PM

Your thoughts on the London issue are known on these boards, as are mine. The one game a year is one thing, but I don't see a franchise there ever happening. When has such a thing ever even been attempted in any professional sports league (having teams from multiple continents)? Not to mention the support just isn't there. It's much like soccer in the US - there's a small but vocal fan base, but it's just not going to catch on with the general public.

It would be a massive failure, and you'd eventually see the franchise relocate to somewhere in the US (Los Angeles, San Antonio?).

This is one league where things are fine how they are, but Goodell keeps insisting on changing everything just for the sake of change.

**chicagoravensfan** · 06-18-2010, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Mista T

Money talks. The NFL is seeking to double its revenues.

I agree that the NFL is likely to pursue all of those revenue streams but at some point they'll kill the golden goose. The NFL is king now but people can only handle being squeezed so much.

**Jeremiah W** · 06-18-2010, 02:52 PM

I want it. Preseason football stinks. More football is more football.

They can not just add 2 games to the schedule without expanding the rosters and adjusting the IR rules, but they need to do that anyway.

There used to be 12 games and 14 games. There used to be less teams, less fans.

I do not think it will be a problem, in fact it could turn out to be a big part of the soloution to the CBA mess.

**Raven Nurse** · 06-19-2010, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by Losac

No, it won't. The world at large doesn't give a shit about American football, despite Goodell's best efforts. If you're thinking about a franchise in London, the logistics of the amount of travel and jet lag involved would be ridiculous.

Yeah, about the same amount from here to San Diego, LA, Washington State, San Fran etc... It will be world wide IMHO, The English have sold out all events when the NFL has played abroad. So I do think there is a desire and potential marketing area that will eventually be tapped