Idea for the 17 game proposed schedule

So, as I understand it from another thread, I believe the NFL wants to have a 17 game schedule. Among other problems, I think there's an issue that would result from this. Some teams will have more home games than away games while others will have it the other way. This could give teams a slightly unfair advantage when it comes to making a push for the playoffs. Imagine that Seattle, being excellent at home for example, has an extra home game, and we have an extra away game. Does this not seem like it could cause a problem for us? Sure, we should win the games on our schedule, but I think you can see the issue with this.

On the other hand, the NFL seems quite keen on playing internationally. This would be a neutral venue. Therefore, I had an idea. If they are to play 17 games, have every team play an international game. Have some play in London. Have some play in Munich during Oktoberfest (beer and American Football in Germany would be really fun). Have some in Tokyo and Melbourne. And then have some play in Toronto and Mexico.

By doing this, the NFL continues to expand their international markets, and every team maintains an equal number of home and away games. What do you all think of this?

Have 17 games (overseas or not) & do away w/preseason.

I am pretty sure that is the idea, each team would play one game on a neutral field in order to expose fans in other markets / countries to the NFL.

Doomsday said:

I am pretty sure that is the idea, each team would play one game on a neutral field in order to expose fans in other markets / countries to the NFL.

Click to expand...

I would certainly hope so because that's the most fair way to have an extra game without creating an unfair home and away count. And, it'll expand the sport to other countries thus creating either a boost to the interest in already existing leagues like the Japanese X League, British American Football Association [where Efe Odaba came from], and the German Football League/American Football Bundesliga or creating new interest in countries that had no previous interest. If developed, this could turn into a World Cup if it develops.

17 games is such an ugly number. We have great symmetry right now as it is. I hate to see greed win the day (though it likely will).

And the problem with each team having a neutral site game is the players will view it as a road game because it will have all the usual stuff like having to travel, be away from home, etc.

Ghost12 said:

17 games is such an ugly number. We have great symmetry right now as it is. I hate to see greed win the day (though it likely will).

And the problem with each team having a neutral site game is the players will view it as a road game because it will have all the usual stuff like having to travel, be away from home, etc.

Click to expand...

True, but at least nobody would actually be home. And I hate the idea of 17 for that reason. Do, this was my idea of a logical solution to one obvious problem it creates lol.

NFL is already looking at several overseas venues.

Furboy said:

True, but at least nobody would actually be home. And I hate the idea of 17 for that reason. Do, this was my idea of a logical solution to one obvious problem it creates lol.

Click to expand...

If they go 17, I think the best solution would be to add one additional inter-conference game. One year all the AFC teams host an NFC, then next year the opposite. That way, in any given season, all your divisional and conference rivals have the same number of home/away splits (excepting the occasional neutral site game in London or Mexico like we already have).

Would be interesting if they could design it in theory for the top 16 teams to have one extra home game, as a benefit for being "good".

Not a fan of the overseas idea, although I see why fans over there would want it.
I feel it's good in small doses over there but don't think it would be popular full time. But that's just my opinion and the failure of NFL europe on my mind.

Ghost12 said:

If they go 17, I think the best solution would be to add one additional inter-conference game. One year all the AFC teams host an NFC, then next year the opposite. That way, in any given season, all your divisional and conference rivals have the same number of home/away splits (excepting the occasional neutral site game in London or Mexico like we already have).

Click to expand...

Yes, but where do you play the game? I still think you have to have it as a neutral site to keep it from being uneven.

John813 said:

Would be interesting if they could design it in theory for the top 16 teams to have one extra home game, as a benefit for being "good".

Not a fan of the overseas idea, although I see why fans over there would want it.
I feel it's good in small doses over there but don't think it would be popular full time. But that's just my opinion and the failure of NFL europe on my mind.

Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of giving the top 16 teams an extra home game. I think the overseas bit at least gives the idea of a neutral ground. Or, at least have it in neutral venues such as Honolulu where teams do not presently play. Or, just play 18 games to keep it as 9 home and 9 away (and maybe expand a team or two).

Furboy said:

Yes, but where do you play the game? I still think you have to have it as a neutral site to keep it from being uneven.

Click to expand...

Sorry if I was unclear. What I meant was 1 year all AFC teams have 9 home and 8 away and all NFC teams have 8 home and 9 away. That way all AFC teams have the same advantage and all NFC teams have the same advantage so that makes it fair when determining playoff seeding. So all* games would be played in a team's home stadium.

* Well, there will still be teams required to forfeit a home game in order to play in London, Mexico, etc. But that's no different from today.

Ghost12 said:

Sorry if I was unclear. What I meant was 1 year all AFC teams have 9 home and 8 away and all NFC teams have 8 home and 9 away. That way all AFC teams have the same advantage and all NFC teams have the same advantage so that makes it fair when determining playoff seeding. So all* games would be played in a team's home stadium.

* Well, there will still be teams required to forfeit a home game in order to play in London, Mexico, etc. But that's no different from today.

Click to expand...

I figured that would be the case, but I think that's still leaving an advantage. And by sliding in an international/neutral ground week for each team, you're not running the risk of giving teams an extra home game in their home stadium. Sure, they might be a "designated" home team for an international game for purposes of determining the coin toss, but at least they're not playing at a home venue. And there are loads of places where the NFL could fill venues before it becomes tedious. By that point, the NFL will probably come up with an 18 game schedule.

Ghost12 said:

If they go 17, I think the best solution would be to add one additional inter-conference game. One year all the AFC teams host an NFC, then next year the opposite. That way, in any given season, all your divisional and conference rivals have the same number of home/away splits (excepting the occasional neutral site game in London or Mexico like we already have).

Click to expand...

I hate to pay myself of the back... awww, who am I kidding? I love to pat myself on the back!

Ahem, anyway... there’s a report on PFT that the above suggestion is what the NFL is indeed strongly considering...

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.