DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Roger Goodell wants to expand regular season

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/341/index.html?eref=fromSI

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell is ready to move forward on expanding the regular season for 2010. And he wants to contract the preseason. Goodell says he understands that fans aren't happy about paying full price for preseason games. With the current offseason workout schedule teams use, there's no need for four preseason games.

Some interesting questions come out of this. If the NFL expands to 17 games, who gets the extra home game? Or does it go overseas?

The 1972 Dolphins and Emmitt Smith are ecstatic. Now, no one will be able to go undefeated. And Smith can say he's the rushing king for backs who played 16 games.

I'm a huge NFL fan and am excited about this. I guess you could say this will water down the product, like the long MLB and NBA season does. But when the NFL season is over, I'm usually pretty depressed.

Quote:

---

Now, no one will be able to go undefeated.

---

They can't? Why not?

Personally, I'd like to see them go to 18 regular season games.

I would guess that they will rotate divisions as far as the extra home game goes. 4 divisions get it this year, and the other 4 next year. Not really a perfect solution, but probably about the best possible given the odd number of games. I really doubt that owners are going to give up a (potential) home game, with all of the concessions and other revenues that most receive ...... and I doubt that the owners are going to make season ticket holders pay for a "home" game to be played in Mexico. (for example)

One thing that I would look for is expansion of the rosters as a result of compromise between the owners and the players union. I would expect rosters to increase to the 56-60 player level. The players aren't going to agree to another "full" game without something in it for them. I would guess that most contracts will be adjusted to compensate for an additional "real" game as well.

It'll be interesting to see how the give and take plays out.

Quote:

---

I guess you could say this will water down the product, like the long MLB and NBA season does.

---

So, uh, how does an extra game water down the product?

If they are going to expand the season...they should also expand the roster to allow for the greater chances of injuries.....

I am not exactly in favor of either....but you know the NFL isn't going to cut the price on pre season games with out making that money back somehow....

Being the FANatic that I am, this is the best news I could get. The best weeks of the year are the 16 weeks of football season. There's more anticipation of the weekend those weeks than any other. Would love to experience that once or twice more a year.

I think they would have to rotate it by conference.

Tie breakers are a important factor that impact the better teams. It could play a big difference in who has the extra home game and who doesn't.

I would favor a system where as an example the NFC gets the extra home game in odd years, always playing a AFC team, then flip it in even years.

Playing at home is an advantage. It needs to be by conference to keep it as fair as possible.

I have also thought the "contracting" of pre-season games would be a good idea to spread the NFL to areas and people who don't normally get to see a NFL game live.

Many years ago for the Worlds Fair in Knoxville, the Steelers played I think the Patriots...they had 50,000 show up at Neyland for that game.

I think you could get good crowds for games in towns all over the country. You could fill 30-40,000 seat stadiums if ticket prices were fair.

It just isn't realistic for hometown fans to pay full price for a exhibition game when a few weeks later you can see the real deal.

I think the NFL and it's owners are finally budging on this matter.

Right now exhibitions are 20% of the ticket cost, and fans aren't happy. I don't think many would complain much if you had to buy 1 game as a part of the package.

Play 3 exhibition games....1 at home, 1 at another teams field, and the other at some college stadium....say Browns/Lions in Toledo.

Awesome! I agree the best weeks are during football season and I too get a lil depressed when it's over. Why not 2 preseason games and 2 reg season games; one home and one away? 20 weeks and give an extra bye for the players? just a thought.

I spent $90 on preseason games this year that I didn't attend. As long as they keep scheduling them on Thursdays I can't get off work to go

I bought a 3pack this year- In order to buy the three pack I had to take the preseason Chicago game. I was cool with it because I knew it was the best chance for me to get tickets to the Giants game.

That's what they do with the 3 packs...include a exhibition game??

That sucks when 33% of your tickets are crap.

Well, it follows the model of pick on game from group A, B, C.

By the time I bought the tickets, the only game left in group C was the preseason.

Yeah... it's bad enough when 20% of your tickets aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

I think all 17th games should be played at a neutral site. It would solve several problems at once. You could then play your "overseas" games without having to remove a home game from anyone's schedules (so it basically stays the same as now). Plus get the extra exposure that comes with playing games in other venues.

Also, that 17th game doesn't HAVE to be played overseas. You can play it at some neutral site here in the states. It would be a great chance for cities that don't have a pro football team to actually see some real football. It might also reduce the number of teams that move to a new city. Rather than LA taking a team away from another city ... they could just host "neutral site" football games all year.

Maybe I'm goofy,.... but I'm going out of the box here.

Get back to 14 games and 60 on the roster. The injuries to key people are really hurting some teams, most especially the Browns.

Money is not the issue, except to the continuing greed of TV network and league ownership. They already have plenty of cash. So do the players, but they are the ones who will have to carry any extra load.

I mean, who wouldn't watch, even if they went back to 12 ??