|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343 Likes: 11
2nd String
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343 Likes: 11 |
Seven more key injuries in watching the Steelers/Redskins game. And there is still 2 weeks of preseason left. Seems like a lot of teams are getting hit with the bug this year more so than what i usually see. (Man the Steelers luck with running backs is astounding). Should there be more time for OTA/Training camps with less preseason for evaluation? Maybe Scrimmages with lighter tackling against other teams. Or should they consider a longer season with reduced games in the preseason? It just seems 4 weeks of preseason is WAAAY too much chance for injury when it doesn't even count for anything.
Who let the Dawgs out???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
2 games seems to fit very well...
Adding more regular season games invites the same amount of injuries that we're seeing now though I'd assume. Injuries only increase during the regular season
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
3 games...1 home, 1 away, 1 neutral site, would be pretty cool I think. Neutral sites would be tougher for some of the midwest and west coast teams that are spread farther apart but I'm sure an equitable solution could be reached. Season ticket holders only have to buy one preseason game, the teams get three games to prepare for the season, and people who don't otherwise get the opportunity can go to an NFL game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Two is probably more than enough, but realistically, what owner is going to turn down getting full value for shoddy temp work?
Sixty-plus per ticket for performances by guys who won't be employed in two weeks is hard to pass up.
For how hard they're trying to pimp the game in Western Europe/Southern Canada, they should just send the preseason games over there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814 |
Quote:
2 games seems to fit very well...
Adding more regular season games invites the same amount of injuries that we're seeing now though I'd assume. Injuries only increase during the regular season
I don't know King, I think they go down.To me there are two factors.
First, in many practices you work in semi controlled conditions. Players are instructed to pull up a bit. Remember Hortons quote about being gentle? If one guy is trying a bit harder to impress his coach then another, someone gets hurt. It's hard to regulate pulling up v just saying play at 100%.
Second, during the season, they play the game, then for the most part there isn't much hitting in practice. Players are given a chance to recover where in training camp players are exerting their bodies much more between games, thus there is little recovery time.
I think this whole training camp process is much overrated in this era of being a year round football player. I think there are ways to add 2 games to the schedule and still allow teams enough time to evaluate players.
You could add more to rookie camp to help get them up to snuff. These could be made optional for veterans. I see that as mostly for guys new to the system who want to get accustomed to the terminology. You couyld also expand rosters by maybe 8 players for the first 2 games of the season. Then you could make final cuts and establish practice rosters.
Obviously some details would need to be ironed out, such as accrued NFL time for the players kept for the 2 game roster expansion, but it could all be done.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,118 Likes: 134
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,118 Likes: 134 |
One of the biggest ongoing debates in the game today. Do we cut down on camp, do we cut a couple of preseason games?
I suspect that if they cut 2 games from preseason, they'll just add them to the regular season.
Money talks....
I don't know the answer.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,640 Likes: 510
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,640 Likes: 510 |
If it were as simple as eliminating 2 preseason games and adding 2 regular season games the NFL would have done it years ago ... but there is one glitch:
The NFL doesn't have to pay its players for the preseason. The players are paid based on the 17 week regular season schedule ... and the NFL owners know that if they extended the regular season to 19 games the players' contracts would have to be raised as well ... thus, the preseason remains. The owners receive the same amount of revenue without having to pay the players.
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Is the salary based on number of games? I thought it was X dollars a year, regardless of the number of games the player plays. Also owners would make more from TV and tickets and such.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
I think the rookies and other low level guys that are on the bubble, trying to make a team, wants all the preseason games they can get in to demonstrate their talents and worth. Especially those coming outta college and not familiar with the speed and tempo of the big boy league.
Yes all the injuries suck, maybe coaches should even limit more their starters playing time and etc? I don't know if eliminating preseason games is the answer, or if it isn't really. Tough call to make given all the various circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,976 Likes: 356
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,976 Likes: 356 |
Quote:
If it were as simple as eliminating 2 preseason games and adding 2 regular season games the NFL would have done it years ago ... but there is one glitch:
The NFL doesn't have to pay its players for the preseason. The players are paid based on the 17 week regular season schedule ... and the NFL owners know that if they extended the regular season to 19 games the players' contracts would have to be raised as well ... thus, the preseason remains. The owners receive the same amount of revenue without having to pay the players.
That's true ..... yet not true.
Players are paid according for a season's worth of work. Their contract includes pay for all aspects of the season, including the off-season. They aren't working for free in the pre-season. They just don't get their "game checks" during this time. Star players, of course, have already received signing and reporting bonuses .... workout and attendance bonuses, and so on. In addition, they receive off-season pay for training camp. (a per-diem) Players are also paid for their bye week. It is part of the CBA agreement that they get a regular "game check" even when they are off.
The NFL players are paid according to a percentage of revenue generated by the league. Right now the pre-season games are excluded from national TV contracts, and the games themselves are more lightly attended than regular season games. If 2 pre-season games were turned into regular season games, then more revenue would be generated for everyone, and everyone would benefit under the terms of the CBA.
This would mean more playing time for veteran players who have already signed contracts, and their deals would not necessarily be individually adjusted for the additional regular season games, and thus the holdup. The NFLPA wants, essentially, 2 extra game checks for its membership in order for them to agree to such a change. The owners don't want to give every player, including backups, a bump in pay just for the sake of doing so.
I do think that it will eventually happen, and the NFL will have an 18 game season ...... but it will take some serious negotiations between the 2 sides.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,640 Likes: 510
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,640 Likes: 510 |
So in other words, in order to change to an 18 game schedule, players and owners would need to rework deals in order to escalate player salaries accordingly ... because from everything I've read, the players are definitely against any form of season expansion.
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
I would assume that to be the case. Their contracts were negotiated with the expectation of a 17-week, 16-game regular season. I don't know easy it would be to implement a sweeping 12.1% increase (the average of 2/16, the salary increase the players would likely want, and 2/17, the salary increase more favorable to the owners) to all future contract regular-season dollar figures (base salary, prorated portions of the signing bonus, earned performance incentives, etc).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 Likes: 98
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 Likes: 98 |
I vote, 2 pre-season games and 18 Regular season games wit 2 bye weeks .... JMHO 
John 3:16 Jesus said "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,774 Likes: 1341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,774 Likes: 1341 |
It is true that the players would receive more money and here's why. Revenue sharing. The players are supposed to receive a certain percentage of the total revenue. So it's pretty cut and dry that the salary cap would increase accordingly with the additional revenue from TV rights and such. And going from 4 pre-season games to 2 pre-season games and extending the regular season to 18 games is not a new idea. Here is a link to an article (and there are several more) discussing this very topic from 2010 during the off-season......... http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/footba...rticle-1.185493
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814 |
They would, but only in the next signed contract. It's not like teams pay out more in to a profit sharing account.
It just raises the cap and teams are required to spend X percentage of the cap.
To me it is like the players see it as being actors. Each game is a stage or movie performance. As it is they are contracted for 16 performances a year. If asked to give 18, they feel like they should make more.
I am kind of 50/50 on how I feel about that.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 28
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 28 |
I feel that getting rid of preseason games takes away opportunities for the backup players to prove themselves for an NFL job. Honestly the teams should self police themselves and just play their starters less, early on in the preseason. Maybe make the 4th preseason game strictly for backups trying to make the team. But adding games will add injuries and probably shorten careers in the long run. Running backs will start to quiver even earlier than 30. And all the records will lose their luster.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
What I'm trying to understand is why some people believe that these injuries wouldn't have happened if it was the regular season. Injuries happen in football. They can't be prevented in the PS or the RS.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,184 Likes: 18
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,184 Likes: 18 |
Quote:
What I'm trying to understand is why some people believe that these injuries wouldn't have happened if it was the regular season. Injuries happen in football. They can't be prevented in the PS or the RS.
This has also always boggled my mind. A lot of these injuries are because the guys aren't in shape yet. If you tried to throw them into full action for the regular season right now without being physically ready to play a full 60 minutes, imagine how many additional injuries we'd see.
Why not keep pre-season at 4 games, but limit playing time for starters even more? Let the guys who need to prove something play more while the starters continue to get ready through more intense practices and scrimmages.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,774 Likes: 1341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 67,774 Likes: 1341 |
Quote:
They would, but only in the next signed contract. It's not like teams pay out more in to a profit sharing account.
I would hope the NFLPA would have enough sense to have their player contract deals predicated on a 16 game season. I believe that was the major reason it was brought up before the new bargaining agreement was rectified.
I would highly doubt players would accept adding 2 more games without compensation.
Quote:
It just raises the cap and teams are required to spend X percentage of the cap.
Which I believe would be a factor in how salaries would be raised.
Quote:
To me it is like the players see it as being actors. Each game is a stage or movie performance. As it is they are contracted for 16 performances a year. If asked to give 18, they feel like they should make more.
While I do agree with you to a point, I'd say that's not far from an accurate statement. With the glitz, glamour, TV viewing and entertainment value of the NFL, they do perform in every game.
I do however see a reasoning I feel is more concerning to the players. If you look at the average career of an NFL player, overall, their window is pretty small. A career ending injury is much greater during the regular season games because the starters are playing all four quarters. The intensity of the game is much greater and they actually count on the record. Considering those and other factors, if I were asked to play 2 more games a year in regular season, I would expect to be paid accordingly.
Quote:
I am kind of 50/50 on how I feel about that.
I see it as slightly more cut and dry than that. The entire premise of the contract between the players and owners is a division of the profit from the game.
The NFL has made the game a television extravaganza. I simply wouldn't be comfortable with them expecting the players to take a higher risk of injury, line their own pockets while doing so and not compensating the players.
After all, who would pay to watch the owners go out there and play for four quarters?
More work equals more pay IMO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,567 Likes: 147
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,567 Likes: 147 |
I've often thought about the league coming up with an 18 game sched w/2 preseason games with a few stipulations.
1. Each player gets the bye week off(obviously).
2. Each player gets an additional 2 "game weeks" off, say, between weeks 4 & 13.
2a. Weeks off determined "by seniority".
2b. No more than "X" amount of positions off the same week(1 WR, 1 DL, etc per week).
3c. Etc, etc.
4. Practice/Taxi squad players eligible for "vacation coverage", etc.
Whew.........Imagine the "Slide Rule" needed to figure that out.
Imagine the strategies in them scenarios.
Let this sink in..... On 12-31-23 it be will 123123.
On the flip side, you can tune a piano but you can't tune-a-fish.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,941 Likes: 69
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,941 Likes: 69 |
Quote:
After all, who would pay to watch the owners go out there and play for four quarters?
Banner's arms are too short to play LT, so move him inside as an OG....ya listening Lombardi? ....j/k of course.
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,118 Likes: 134
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,118 Likes: 134 |
Quote:
I've often thought about the league coming up with an 18 game sched w/2 preseason games with a few stipulations.
1. Each player gets the bye week off(obviously).
2. Each player gets an additional 2 "game weeks" off, say, between weeks 4 & 13.
2a. Weeks off determined "by seniority".
2b. No more than "X" amount of positions off the same week(1 WR, 1 DL, etc per week).
3c. Etc, etc.
4. Practice/Taxi squad players eligible for "vacation coverage", etc.
Whew.........Imagine the "Slide Rule" needed to figure that out.
Imagine the strategies in them scenarios.
I doubt even the players would like that.. But it's inventive.. That I'll give you...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,606 Likes: 239
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,606 Likes: 239 |
I always hoped the NFL came up with a plan that was an 18 game schedule and 2 preseason games to judge the bottom 1/2 of the roster. 0 starters would play in the preseason games as a result the starters would play about a 1/2 a game more a year while getting paid more.
Here's how the starters would only play 1/2 a game more:
Currently, they play the first quarter in preseason in the first game. they play the first half in the second game and 3 quarters in the 3rd game. Almost no starters play the 4th game. The non starters would have more time to impress the coaches and get more game time experience in the NFL.
This structure would also help coaches and the staff to better see the quality of depth they have in the first two preseason games because they would see them full time without have to dress their starters. Players that are non starters would benefit because they would have a better chance to play more in the regular season. (injuries, teams locking up the division earlier etc)
Ticket sales would go up because the 2 regular season games added to the schedule would be likely sold out or at least have more fans showing up. Especially with how empty the 2 games they would lose in preseason. Those added fans would boost food beverage and memorabilia sales. They already stick the season ticket holders with buying the 4 preseason tickets so... it's not like they wouldn't stick them with the 2.
The players and owners would also get paid more because of the revenue share agreement in food sales, beverage, memorabilia, tv contracts, and ticket sales.
What's the problem?
Blocking those who argue to argue, eliminates the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
What's the problem?
Communism... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,500 Likes: 1022
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,500 Likes: 1022 |
What astounds me is that they get full price for pre-season games. In addition, with all that is attached to player safety four pre-season games just does not make sense.
More than likely this formula will change.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The question is Preseason...
|
|
![[Linked Image from s2.excoboard.com]](http://s2.excoboard.com/forums/25521/user/302752/484538.gif)
