Possible changes to NFL schedule

[The Gipper]

They were talking about this on the radio this morning, so I bring it here for discussion:     As you know, the NFL owners have wanted to go to an 18 game schedule (who? more money, of course)  but "player safety" and all that seems to dictate against such a move.  But, I understand that there is one compromise that is being discussed by the owners and the players association:

A 17 game schedule.....with that extra game being played  one by each team at a "neutral site". 

Right now, as you know, the NFL has scheduled regular season games in London every year, they have tried Mexico City,  I think, Japan even. 

As I understand it here, the league would schedule 16 of these types of games, probably one like each week....except the final week of the season, in locations that they think would help the league "grow the game".   Be it England, Ireland, Japan, Mexico, Germany, Canada even....or even in non NFL cities in this country (if they have a stadium that is amenable: like  San Antonio, Columbus maybe, OK city....Birmingham...that sort of thing.  Maybe using some college stadiums.  Each team would play one game......

This would allow each current NFL team to NOT have to give up a home game, as they do now, if they go to play in London or elsewhere.

I sort of like the idea.  You would never have one of your division games held at one of these neutral sites.

So, as I see it, there are two basic reasons for this extra game:  

A. "Grow the game in other countries.

B. You could have some more "natural rivalries" played more often than they are now only once every 4 years.   Like say, an annual Cowboys/Texans game held in San Antonio.    Or the Redskins/Ravens game...maybe at the University of Maryland...or something.     Or how about a Pittsburgh/Philly game played at Penn State?  Jets/Giants..go to London....or even stay right at their mutual home on an annual basis.  Same with the 2 LA teams.    Maybe the Broncos and the 49ers or Seahawks or the like play in Salt Lake. Or the Raiders/Seahawks in Portland.    How about the Chiefs/Bears play in St. Louis?  Any others

With this schedule expansion, they would cut back on the number of useless preseason games.

[calfoxwc]

I'm fine with the current 16 game schedule. At least until they schedule one on the moon. You could throw passesfor two hundred yards, jump 15' in the air... kicked 200 yard field goals.

that would rock.

[hoorta]

2 hours ago, The Gipper said:

They were talking about this on the radio this morning, so I bring it here for discussion:     As you know, the NFL owners have wanted to go to an 18 game schedule (who? more money, of course)  but "player safety" and all that seems to dictate against such a move.  But, I understand that there is one compromise that is being discussed by the owners and the players association:

With this schedule expansion, they would cut back on the number of useless preseason games.

Just no Gipper. 16 games is fine by me. The only reason preseason games are "useless" anymore is teams have become too paranoid over players getting hurt in games that don't count. 

[flyingfooldoug]

Pissburg is already a neutral site so we’re good

[The Gipper]

21 minutes ago, hoorta said:

Just no Gipper. 16 games is fine by me. The only reason preseason games are "useless" anymore is teams have become too paranoid over players getting hurt in games that don't count. 

Well....apparently 16 games is NOT fine with the NFL owners, otherwise they would not have been pushing for the 18 game schedule....or this "compromise"  17 game thing.  

And I think these preseason game ARE useless....for, yes,  the reasons that you mention about players getting hurt, plus they are a joke of games with scrubs playing half of them.....and correct me if I am right.....you, as a season ticket holder have to pay full price for these  primarily scrub/practice squad games, no?  And I doubt that they discount parking, concessions, etc. etc. for these games, do they?

[The Gipper]

Well, you all can ignore it if you want, but from what I hear, it WILL be a definite topic of negotiation, the scheduling situation.  

So, as I see it, like I said, game 17 would be the game to really develop those cross conference, natural Rivalries.  What do we have where we have to come up with a "natural" rival for each team in the other conference, that could be played every year.   Some are easy

Jets/Giants

Rams/Chargers

Dolphins/Buccaneers

Ravens/Redskins

Steelers/Eagles

Texans/Cowboys

Browns/Lions.......once upon a time...1950s, they were our biggest rivals...plus they are actually closer than Pittsburgh

Raiders/49ers......even after move to Vegas, this still seems like it would be a natural thing.

Colts/Bears.   These 2 cities are not much further apart than  Cleve/Pitt.  .   

Jaguars/Falcons    Jacksonville/Atlanta

Broncos/Cardinals?    Wild West showdown?   Or would Denver/Seattle be better

Titans/Panthers     Tennessee v. N. Carolina, sees a natural rivalry

Chiefs/Vikings  ??  The battle for the hearts of Iowa?    At one time, the Kansas City mob used to run the organized crime in Minn.

That leaves the following with no actual natural rival in the other conference:

Seattle, Green Bay, New Orleans,    and Cincy, Buffalo and New England.

New Orleans would have a rivalry with Houston....but they are taken by their Texas rivalry with Dallas.  Cinci's natural rivals are already in the division here....Cleve. Pitt.   plus Indy.   Same with Green Bay with Minn/Chic being in their division.  New England's natural rivals could be NYG or Philly....but both are taken up with other rival teams.   Seattle is too far out from anyone.....unless you want to give the Broncos to them...then what about AZ? Buffalo...also in same conf. with potential natural rivals:  Cleveland and Pitt. 

 

 

[ballpeen]

I like the 17 game schedule with 1 played at a neutral site.  I would like to see all of those games played the same week if possible.  Jet lag from Cambodia sucks.

[The Gipper]

Another way to do this.....have natural rivals play regularly.......AND to "grow the game" internationally......is to have a "Home away from home" for these Rivalry games.

Example:  Jacksonville plays annually in London.   Have that Jax v. ATL game annually there.  

How about the Browns/Lions  annual rivalry taking place in Toronto each year?

The  Cardinals/Broncos game to be played in Mexico City each year. 

How about the Vikings/Chiefs being played in Scandinavia....Olso or Stockholm

Ravens/Redskins in Berlin.       Dolphins/Bucs in Spain...Madrid or Barcelona

While I know that we have some die hard fans of the Browns in England and elsewhere.....this would be an indication of how a team could actually develop a following in the foreign nations.    Japan may be big Seattle Seahawk territory. 

etc. etc. 

Bears/Colts in Ireland?

[The Gipper]

7 minutes ago, ballpeen said:

I like the 17 game schedule with 1 played at a neutral site.  I would like to see all of those games played the same week if possible.  Jet lag from Cambodia sucks.

So....which teams are you suggesting should play that Cambodian game?  

I think the thing that could be an issue is which games would be played on a very close neutral site......like the Browns ....or Bills, playing in Toronto, or the Steelers/Eagles playing at Penn St.    and which would be played far away.....Europe, Japan etc. 

[hoorta]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

Well....apparently 16 games is NOT fine with the NFL owners, otherwise they would not have been pushing for the 18 game schedule....or this "compromise"  17 game thing.  

And I think these preseason game ARE useless....for, yes,  the reasons that you mention about players getting hurt, plus they are a joke of games with scrubs playing half of them.....and correct me if I am right.....you, as a season ticket holder have to pay full price for these  primarily scrub/practice squad games, no?  And I doubt that they discount parking, concessions, etc. etc. for these games, do they?

Just unbridled greed by the owners, MHO. Players certainly aren't pushing for it. 

RE: The price of preseason games, theoretically the face value is 25% less, but the price of regular season "premium" games (opener & Steelers) is jacked up proportionally, so it's a wash.

And sure isn't a reduction in price on concessions. Can't wait to see how much the rip off will be this year. Though season ticket holders get a card for a few freebies.

[Orion]

What I had heard (end of last week) was they were toying around with the idea of an 18 game schedule (that's EIGHTEEN).

But, players could only play in 16 games.  So, some combinations of backups would have to play two games.

THIS, of course, would be horrid.  I mean, what if you planned a road trip, and then it turns out that many of the starters (Mayfield, etc., etc.) would not be playing.

Football goes from August to February.   That's enough I should think.    

[Ibleedbrown]

40 minutes ago, Orion said:

What I had heard (end of last week) was they were toying around with the idea of an 18 game schedule (that's EIGHTEEN).

But, players could only play in 16 games.  So, some combinations of backups would have to play two games.

THIS, of course, would be horrid.  I mean, what if you planned a road trip, and then it turns out that many of the starters (Mayfield, etc., etc.) would not be playing.

Football goes from August to February.   That's enough I should think.    

That’s the proposal l heard too. Not a fan, for some of the reasons you mentioned. Also, it would create a change in strategizing. Teams would have to make wierd decisions like starting your B Oline against a team with a perceived weak pass rush earlier in the year, or “hope” your starting Oline gets banged up enough throughout the season that it works itself out. And for the poor team that busted their tail to get into the playoffs all year, but then are forced to start their backup QB the last 2 games, which isn’t fair to the rest of the team.

I’m quite content with a 16 game schedule. If the NFL is hellbent on making more money, start a minor league and play games on Wednesdays or something. 

[gumby73]

am one of those draft geeks 🤓 that likes seeing draftees and undrafted rookies play in preseason games..Am not opposed, to dropping pre-season game 4. The full dress rehearsal of starters playing, still allows, mixing in final camp battles that are final after PS game 3 anyhow.. The rest is trash can able 🗑️...1.) No pro game, tells there stars they can't play..2) Gameday rosters can't stay at 46 active..3) Pull a few starting Ol-man(most only keep 8),to get a franchise QB smeared just makes no sense..sure it's the new CBA talk that's out there.. But only greedy millionaires could try to ruin it 🛑  

[ballpeen]

3 hours ago, The Gipper said:

So....which teams are you suggesting should play that Cambodian game?  

I think the thing that could be an issue is which games would be played on a very close neutral site......like the Browns ....or Bills, playing in Toronto, or the Steelers/Eagles playing at Penn St.    and which would be played far away.....Europe, Japan etc. 

I am just making the point, forget the location.  I'd like to see all the teams hit the road, then the entire team on bye the following week.  If the league felt it couldn't shut down the entire league, set 10 teams to go neutral site the following week with their bye after that.  That way 10 teams could fill the entire Thursday through Monday slate.

 

Play these games say week 5,, week 6 is a bye for most of the league, week 7 for the 10 other teams.    Also, offer up another bye after week 12, week 13 for the ones designated to play in week 12.  Seems a more fair way of handling the bye.  Some teams get them way early, others way late.  Basically give everybody the same, evenly spaced breaks.  

 

For the record, I am not a big fan of international play outside North America, but it is what it is.  We could probably find 16 cities in this part of the world that would jump at the chance to see a NFL game played locally.  Kind of like GB played games in Milwaukee for many years.  The Browns could play in Columbus.  Cincy in Lexington.  Obviously when it was their "home" game.  Buffalo in Toronto, Seattle in Vancouver, Dallas in San Antonio, AZ in Albuquerque ...OKC would get a game.  Birmingham and Memphis could host a game.  Mobile,  Montreal,...there are natural places for most of the teams.

[ballpeen]

21 minutes ago, gumby73 said:

am one of those draft geeks 🤓 that likes seeing draftees and undrafted rookies play in preseason games..Am not opposed, to dropping pre-season game 4. The full dress rehearsal of starters playing, still allows, mixing in final camp battles that are final after PS game 3 anyhow.. The rest is trash can able 🗑️...1.) No pro game, tells there stars they can't play..2) Gameday rosters can't stay at 46 active..3) Pull a few starting Ol-man(most only keep 8),to get a franchise QB smeared just makes no sense..sure it's the new CBA talk that's out there.. But only greedy millionaires could try to ruin it 🛑  

I don't buy the greedy part or the trying to ruin it part.

 

Any business is always trying to grow it's market.  Forget the owners are mostly billionaires.  Millions doesn't cut it anymore.  Pretend they are just like Mom and Pop diner owners.  They seek to bring in new customers.  Large scale or small, the goal is the same, increase customer counts and sales.  The business model doesn't change

[gumby73]

1 hour ago, ballpeen said:

Any business is always trying to grow it's market.  Forget the owners are mostly billionaires.  Millions doesn't cut it anymore.  Pretend they are just like Mom and Pop diner owners.  They seek to bring in new customers.  Large scale or small, the goal is the same, increase customer counts and sales.  The business model doesn't change

Sure any business wants to grow it's sales market..but who's coming or paying to come see CFL/Arena League & Practice squad talent, brought in to fill up roster spots? 32 teams with 46, sounds like the sweet spot with any kind of football talent..If they want football in England? bring back the world league..maybe i"m a little old school? but Mom & Pop always keep good customer service people for one real reason..Repeat business brings family & friends..Edit---Surprise Cleveland!!..instead of Russell Wilson waiting on your tables..Tonight & one night only you get Paxton Lynch or Geno Smith (blow me)

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Orion said:

What I had heard (end of last week) was they were toying around with the idea of an 18 game schedule (that's EIGHTEEN).

But, players could only play in 16 games.  So, some combinations of backups would have to play two games.

THIS, of course, would be horrid.  I mean, what if you planned a road trip, and then it turns out that many of the starters (Mayfield, etc., etc.) would not be playing.

Football goes from August to February.   That's enough I should think.    

Yea, it is a pile of horseshit to have  players not play in some games that count.  BS.   With 17 games, the season would not be extended as surely one of the preseason games would be eliminated.

[hoorta]

5 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

Yea, it is a pile of horseshit to have  players not play in some games that count.  BS.   With 17 games, the season would not be extended as surely one of the preseason games would be eliminated.

But- it was pointed out if not here at least several times in the past- the #4 preseason game has been rendered all but meaningless. But isn't that what preseason games were supposed to be? The starters play one series (if that) and then its a glorified scrimmage of your scrubs competing for a roster spot- against theirs. 

[The Gipper]

1 minute ago, hoorta said:

But- it was pointed out if not here at least several times in the past- the #4 preseason game has been rendered all but meaningless. But isn't that what preseason games were supposed to be? The starters play one series (if that) and then its a glorified scrimmage of your scrubs competing for a roster spot- against theirs. 

Yes.   So with a 17 game regular season, you would only have 3 preseason games (except for those playing in the HOF game)

[gumby73]

3 pre-season games- 19 weeks - both teams playing TNF, use the extra bye week *given* on the Sunday before the game...add 2 more wildcard teams in each division..possible? 

[The Gipper]

26 minutes ago, gumby73 said:

3 pre-season games- 19 weeks - both teams playing TNF, use the extra bye week *given* on the Sunday before the game...add 2 more wildcard teams in each division..possible? 

Uhm, we now have a 20 ...21 actually  week season...with 4 preseason games, 16 regular season games, plus a bye for each team.  So...unless you are referring to a 19 week regular season, that is not going to happen.   Besides that,  Well, that completely misses the point of what the league WANTS.    They want that  one extra game to be a neutral site, with at least half of those being non US sites so they can market their games to these other nations.    

I don't know the player's associations position on it.....other than that if the league wants more games, they want a lot more money for the players.  It does, after all, always come down to that, fair to say.

[The Gipper]

Here are the games the NFL is going to play out of country this year...and the future possible sites

October 6	Chicago BearsN		Oakland RaidersA		London	Tottenham Hotspur Stadium	TBA	TBD
October 13	Carolina PanthersN		Tampa Bay BuccaneersN				TBA	TBD
October 27	Cincinnati BengalsA		Los Angeles RamsN			Wembley Stadium	TBA	TBD
November 3	Houston TexansA		Jacksonville JaguarsA				TBA	TBD
November 18	Kansas City ChiefsA		Los Angeles ChargersA		Mexico City	Estadio Azteca	TBA	TBD

 

Future markets[edit]

Within the United Kingdom, aside from London, potential candidates for hosting NFL games include Millennium Stadium in Cardiff, Wales;^[53] and Murrayfield in Edinburgh, Scotland.^[54] Other prime locations to get games would be Croke Park in the Republic of Ireland (Ireland has already hosted the NCAA Emerald Isle Classic, a college football game similar to the International Series, and the late Steelers owner Dan Rooney was once an ambassador to the country), Germany (which hosted the majority of teams in NFL Europe throughout its existence as an all-European league and whose national American football team won both the 2010 and 2014 European Championship), China,^[55] Brazil,^[56][55] Australia^[57] and Canada (Canada hosted the Bills Toronto Series from 2008 to 2013 and is set to host a preseason game in Winnipeg in 2019). In 2007, NFL senior Vice President Mark Waller doubted Asia or Australia would be targeted because of travel concerns, but did not dismiss the possibility.^[5] The league had planned to host a game in China in 2018 with the Los Angeles Rams as the home team against the San Francisco 49ers.^[58] The potential game in China was postponed (the third time the league has postponed playing in China, following failed attempts in 2007 and 2009) to being aimed for the 2019 season to coincide with the league's 100th anniversary; that game ultimately was not scheduled for 2019.^[59][60] The league has indicated that a China game is still not certain because of the lack of a fan base in the country (NFL games are played in the middle of the night in China).^[61]

In regard to future games outside London or Mexico, Mark Waller stated in 2017 that the only holdup with games in Germany was what he dubbed "an inventory management thing. How many games do we actually have?"^[61]

So, that "inventory management issue" is why the league wants a 17th,  neutral site game. 

[Dutch Oven]

I'd be fine if ALL the leagues shortened their seasons, to be honest.

14 games for the NFL, 140-148 games for MLB, 60ish games for NBA and NHL. 

For the love of dog, shorten the NBA and NHL playoff season. I swear it feels longer than the regular season sometimes. 

[Bob806]

The 16 game schedule, and the rotating schedule system in place now is perfect.

I sense the owners may want something else from the union. They throw this idea out in the open, before CBA negotiations begin, as a tactic. Probably just going fishing...they know the union is against it, but maybe this stupid 18 game idea will be leverage for concessions on something else.

The owners better be careful. I think they've over-saturated the market with these Thursday night games as it is. Just leave the game and schedule alone. 

[JPPT1974]

Yeah it is perfect. And if they would just get rid of the Thursday night games. Then it could help the players rest a bit. 

[Orion]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

With 17 games, the season would not be extended as surely one of the preseason games would be eliminated.

I hear ya.

 

3 hours ago, gumby73 said:

Am not opposed, to dropping pre-season game 4. The full dress rehearsal of starters playing,

...but perhaps coaches ARE opposed.  They may WANT their starters to get at least a half of football playing together before the first game.   So, preseason game 3 becomes the dress rehearsal.  (just sayin')  

[The Gipper]

14 minutes ago, Bob806 said:

The 16 game schedule, and the rotating schedule system in place now is perfect.

I sense the owners may want something else from the union. They throw this idea out in the open, before CBA negotiations begin, as a tactic. Probably just going fishing...they know the union is against it, but maybe this stupid 18 game idea will be leverage for concessions on something else.

The owners better be careful. I think they've over-saturated the market with these Thursday night games as it is. Just leave the game and schedule alone. 

Hello, McFly...is anybody home?  Of course the owners want something.   They want fucking money.  And the players want money.  They don't give a shit where it comes from, they just want to explore new avenues.  They don't give a shit if they saturate the market.....they figure that if MLB and NBA and NHL can have games every day of the damned week, then so they have Thursday, Sunday, Monday night games.  You don't hear people complaining if the NBA has  games 7 nights a week.

Leverage?  It may be leverage for something else...sure.  It is something the players want.  Players want an end to testing for marijuana...OK...give us more games, more  of the revenue that comes from them. Players want a change to the disciplinary system....OK, give us more games and more of the revenue that comes from them.  The players want more guaranteed contracts.  OK, give us more games....in Germany, China, Australia, Brazil...and maybe more guaranteed contracts can come.  

You may be right...and wrong at the same time....this may be not really be about what the owners want....but what the players want..... and the owners simply  try to come up with something to get back from them in the way of revenues rather than just give the players willy nilly no drug tests and a different discipline system.   And at the same time....really, actually (or at least hopefully) opening up those foreign markets to exploitation for revenues at the same time.

[The Gipper]

8 minutes ago, Orion said:

I hear ya.

 

...but perhaps coaches ARE opposed.  They may WANT their starters to get at least a half of football playing together before the first game.   So, preseason game 3 becomes the dress rehearsal.  (just sayin')  

Well...why can't preseason games 2 and 3 be that.  They DO NOT need 4 for that.  

Another thing that should be done:   eliminate the fucking "game inactive" thing.  Why put a player on the fucking roster if you have to be disallowed from playing 5-6-7 of them.   You pay them to play, not to sit.

And that is another thing the players may want.....expanded rosters.  Instead of doing something absurd like saying "18 games...but players are only allowed to play in 16 of them"     have a 60 man roster.

[gumby73]

46 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

Uhm, we now have a 20 ...21 actually  week season...with 4 preseason games, 16 regular season games, plus a bye for each team.  So...unless you are referring to a 19 week regular season, that is not going to happen.   Besides that,  Well, that completely misses the point of what the league WANTS.    They want that  one extra game to be a neutral site, with at least half of those being non US sites so they can market their games to these other nations.    

I don't know the player's associations position on it.....other than that if the league wants more games, they want a lot more money for the players.  It does, after all, always come down to that, fair to say.

after the wife, pimped me out to mow the neighbor's grass  am back.. I was listening to Timmy the 12th caller on a radio show today & I had to agree with him that, TNF needs a additional bye week given by the league, in front of all of them. Each team plays in one. So each team would receive 10 days off before playing TNF & 10 days off after playing TNF..Play them where they like..London & China starts drinking by 7am 🍺 ..Thursday football on my tv by 6-7pm..life is good 

[Orion]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

Yea, it is a pile of horseshit to have  players not play in some games that count.  BS.

I hear ya (again).

I don't even know how an idea like having healthy players sit out 2 games even gets to see daylight.  

Can you imagine?  Well, I can't play my Left Tackle for a couple of games...might as well start the backup QB those two weeks.  -  Doesn't all but one or two players play every week?

I know!!!!   For 2 games a year every team will have to play with just special teamers.....

....and now, a man with two buttocks....