What if an NFL Coach Refused to Play a Preseason Game

[ARMAGEDDON EAGLE]

What would the NFL Commissioner and NFLPA do if a coach felt that His team was just not conditioned enough, wasn't in football-shape, or any other reasonably legitimate reason to keep his team from taking on possibly season/career ending injuries?

If they fined the team, would it be worth the dollars and cents of ot all to give those players more time to get healthy/in football shape. What is the cost attrtibuted to a player's medical expenses, franchise worth, and ineffectiveness to the team once the regular season starts.

I've said it before that preseason is dangerously important/unimportant, but dangerous nevertheless! Stronger/healthier teams have the advantage of inflicting serious damager to weaker opponents -- taking out key players that they will not meet again during regular season -- thereby reducing another threat to their chances of advancing to the playoffs (I'm Not saying that this a strategy that any team management/coaching staff with ethics would apply; but what about individual players?).

Stay with me on this ... I'd like to see a short scrimmage between one or team teams, perhaps the half the time of a regular game. Or, perhaps a contest against opposing team's QB/Receivers (one receiver against one corner/safety), offensive vs defensive strategies against a run/pass play. Defensive teams sprint contests, QB accuracy/distance contests, kicker/foeld goal ranges, etc.

Short of being eliminated from the upcoming season, if I were a coach, I'd consider sitting out a preseason game or two in the name of health.
Once regular season starts, it's survival of the fittest!

There will still be injuries, but Not as many under the current preseason rules of conflict/contact (perhaps the rules of contact should be explored
during preseason).

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Not sure about the cases in which you bring up....however I was thinking either last year or a couple of seasons ago a team refused to play at the eagles old stadium because the turf was really bad and they did not wish to get any players injured.

So I guess in a way it has happened.

 

[SoTex]

Not sure about the cases in which you bring up....however I was thinking either last year or a couple of seasons ago a team refused to play at the eagles old stadium because the turf was really bad and they did not wish to get any players injured.

So I guess in a way it has happened.

It was the Ravens. The cameras caught the whole ordeal on Hard Knocks when it was still on HBO.

 

[ARMAGEDDON EAGLE]

Not sure about the cases in which you bring up....however I was thinking either last year or a couple of seasons ago a team refused to play at the eagles old stadium because the turf was really bad and they did not wish to get any players injured.

So I guess in a way it has happened.

Are you referring to a preseason or regular season game? See, my emphasis is directed toward preseason games. There's so much existing "hubbub" about preseason game improtance, safety (not turf/field preference, but against other players and freak injuries), that many fans accross the NFL are starting to challenge the idea of preseason relevance.

One argument is that a coach/coaching staff should be able to determine starters, who makes the team, and other valuable information without preseason games and unnecessary injuries from teams who are in better football shape than other teams.

Here's a theory: One or two more weeks of extended training camp could reduce or make the difference in getting a season ending injury.

 

[ARMAGEDDON EAGLE]

Someone said...I could see a coach totally writting off a pre-season game if they felt very strongly about getting some much needed rest for impact players. No matter how strongly a coach felt about not playing a pre-season game, I think the most drastic thing you'd see would be a team totally fielded by 3rd stringers and undrafted FA's."

 

[SoTex]

Are you referring to a preseason or regular season game?

It was a preseason game. Andy Reid agreed with Billick on the crappy condition of the field. He didn't want the Eagles out there either.


Preseason games are definitely high risk. I hold my breath on every play fearing injury. I just don't know of a better way to evaluate talent and young prospects. Players must be put in real game situations under the lights. IMO scrimmages and simulated practice situations don't provide this. I look at it like this. For a team to have a successful season they must have some luck and avoid injury. This starts in training camp and extends throughout the season. Every team must deal with it, so it is a level playing field.

.........and I think every team should play their scheduled preseason games. If not the penalty should be substantial.

 

[ARMAGEDDON EAGLE]

.........and I think every team should play their scheduled preseason games. If not the penalty should be substantial.

Good response. You may be right.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

One must also remember that the Owners would not want the teams to just say they do not want to play the pre-season games (except in rare cases like the philly one we brought out earlier).

The OWNERS are the ones that really should be fined IMO over the whole pre-season thing.

To charge the fans full price to see the starters play just a little bit (except normally the 3rd pre-season game) and most watch teams just evaluating players is a sham to me.

 

[SoTex]

One must also remember that the Owners would not want the teams to just say they do not want to play the pre-season games (except in rare cases like the philly one we brought out earlier).

The OWNERS are the ones that really should be fined IMO over the whole pre-season thing.

To charge the fans full price to see the starters play just a little bit (except normally the 3rd pre-season game) and most watch teams just evaluating players is a sham to me.

Good point. I will not pay full price for a preseason game. The view from the TV is just fine with me.