NFL proposes 18 game schedule

Melonfeud · Jul 12, 2019

mrmojo said:
IDK, what if your fighting for a playoff spot in the last 2 weeks of the season and your key players have already played the allotted games, you would go into key match ups at less than full strength.

*it's a shuck&jive Bull -**** boosted revenue schemed ploy of "league" orchestrated proportions,just more unregulated free lance fleecing of the cash cow fan base( yet, the shield will make a bee-line like a striped-a** ape to file in federal court jurisdictions viewed to be deemed more advantageous to their desired decreed outcomes),,,for an entertainment "product" that the ZEBRA CORP funnels the dictates of outcomes when given a mere fraction of an opportunity,,, ( pre-snap movement on the field goal attempt, by the "hiker" hisself in that skins game, should reside in an unsavoury fashion in any fans book.)

** this oozes with pre-planned slime, fellers

erod · Jul 12, 2019

DFWJC said:
Would certainly add a premium to backup QBs and the kicking would be real weird. Roster size and practice squads would have to get bigger...which puts more players in the league

I think coached would juggle players at least some and not sit entire units at the same time. So position flex comes into play

Chances are, the owners are just throwing something extreme out there to start negotiations.

So we need to sit Tyron. You want Dak to play now?

You basically have 10 games to deal with in the offensive line. How games games can you have all 5 starters together?

This would destroy the quality of football.

HungryLion · Jul 12, 2019

This is actually one of the worse ideas I have heard in a long time, when it comes to ways to change the game.

Flamma · Jul 12, 2019

John813 said:
Terrible. Who wants to watch a regular season game where Zeke, Amari or a guys like LVE or Smith are held out ?
It's like a preseason game .

How would you manage the offensive line which relies on chemistry?

This is just a bad compromise for two unnecessary games. Tell me, what's a good game to not let my starting QB play? What about kicker? This is besides what you brought up. Are they going to expand the roster? Because now along with injuries we'll have players not eligible to play. It's dangerously close to a gimmick.

Besides money, what is the purpose of the extra two games? Do we not see everything we need to see about the teams after 16 games? It's bad enough having a crap season, but do we need to see 4-14 teams? Or a 9-9 Cowboys team?

Reverend Conehead · Jul 12, 2019

Blackspider214 said:
So ****** stupid. Being forced to mix match rosters for certain games when never in the history of this sport have you had to do that. The last thing the NFL does is increase their season. In fact, I'd love to see a 12 game schedule with 2 bye weeks. No out of conference games. 18 is waaaay too long. 16 is already an extreme grind of attrition.

I agree. 12 games would be perfect. I could live with going back to 14. 18 is ridiculous.

Melonfeud · Jul 12, 2019

DakPresgoat said:
This is actually one of the worse ideas I have heard in a long time, when it comes to ways to change the game.

,,,er,,,more like "Dictate" the currently schemed game,,,ya-know?,,,more control over 'who' ends up where,,,

BrassCowboy · Jul 12, 2019

bigdnlaca said:
I think a minutes cap of 120 minutes would be better.

What I am saying is that a player playing in a game shouldn't count if a player got injured during the opening kickoff and unable to return. Also, there have been some games where the game is over after the 3rd quarter. If a team sits out their qb 4 times in the 4th quarter, that is a full game right there.

Actually like this idea the most. Good one

Jake · Jul 12, 2019

This is one of the dumbest ideas the NFL has had in a long time. I can't wait to buy tickets for a game before the season only to learn my favorite players are sitting out for "load management" purposes.

I guess CFL players are tougher, since they play 18 regular season games and no one dies from it.

Praxit · Jul 12, 2019

...this sounds like an incentive for $$$$$ ...White shirts will say longer season, fans want it, owners want it.....etc. Why now? Does someone want to compete with Amazon??

...

Insomniac · Jul 12, 2019

Rockport said:
With a 16 game limit per player.

If they don't think the players can play an 18 game season then they shouldn't have one.

DFWJC · Jul 12, 2019

erod said:
So we need to sit Tyron. You want Dak to play now?

You basically have 10 games to deal with in the offensive line. How games games can you have all 5 starters together?

This would destroy the quality of football.

You're posting to me as if this is my idea.
Nowhere did I say this was good idea

To answer your question, if I was HC in this make believe situation, I'm sitting Dak and Tyron in the same 2 games.

JayFord · Jul 12, 2019

Why not stick to 16 games?

I’d hate to lose a game with playoff implications because we had to play backups

windward · Jul 12, 2019

JoeKing said:
It's limited to 16 games, the games they play. They don't get a revenue share if they don't play.

That’s... not how it works

Cowboysheelsreds053 · Jul 12, 2019

slick325 said:
The requirement of 16 game limit per player is to attempt to prevent "load management" NBA style. The NFLPA shouldn't agree to minimum 16 game per player, if any sport requires "load management" it is the NFL. These guys take a BEATING!

This, having seen it with my brother playing with the niners, leave it as be.

JoeKing · Jul 12, 2019

windward said:
That’s... not how it works

Yes it is. They are allocated to receive a predetermined amount of money but it is divided by 16 and that is what they get for playing each game. For each game they do not play, they lose 1/16th of that predetermined amount.

windward · Jul 12, 2019

JoeKing said:
Yes it is. They are allocated to receive a predetermined amount of money but it is divided by 16 and that is what they get for playing each game. For each game they do not play, they lose 1/16th of that predetermined amount.

Oh lord. 18 games means more TV revenue. Revenue that is shared with the players. Ergo, players (as a whole) get more money than they would otherwise.

JoeKing · Jul 12, 2019

windward said:
Oh lord. 18 games means more TV revenue. Revenue that is shared with the players. Ergo, players (as a whole) get more money than they would otherwise.

Good grief, that's not how it works. I'm tired of explain to you because you don't listen.

erod · Jul 12, 2019

DFWJC said:
You're posting to me as if this is my idea.
Nowhere did I say this was good idea

To answer your question, if I was HC in this make believe situation, I'm sitting Dak and Tyron in the same 2 games.

No, I'm just thinking out loud. Bad idea by the league.

Night, night. Late here.

Rockport · Jul 12, 2019

JoeKing said:
The proposal is for all players to only play a max of 16 games. Nowhere was more pay for players proposed.

It’s the owners proposal. Don’t you think the NFLPA will come back with a counter proposal? Come on man.

windward · Jul 12, 2019

JoeKing said:
Good grief, that's not how it works. I'm tired of explain to you because you don't listen.

That’s exactly how it works. How do you think the salary cap is calculated? FROM THE PLAYERS SHARE OF LEAGUE REVENUES.

If league revenues are increased, so is the salary cap.

It really is that simple.

NFL proposes 18 game schedule

I Copy!,,, er,,,I guess,,,ah,,,maybe.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I Copy!,,, er,,,I guess,,,ah,,,maybe.

Well-Known Member

Beyond tired of Jerry

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

NFL Historian

Well-Known Member

Diehard

NFL Historian

Diehard

Well-Known Member

AmberBeer

NFL Historian