Nesta Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 To me, the notion of 17 games is just ridiculous. Everyone should have the same number of home and away games, period. So 17 is out for me. As for 18, I love the idea of 2 more games and an earlier start to the season, but I feel like a lot of guys will be fucked out of their chance to make an impression and earn a roster spot. You have to wonder if this change would result in more injuries as well. I say keep the 16 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 To me, the notion of 17 games is just ridiculous. Everyone should have the same number of home and away games, period. So 17 is out for me. As for 18, I love the idea of 2 more games and an earlier start to the season, but I feel like a lot of guys will be fucked out of their chance to make an impression and earn a roster spot. You have to wonder if this change would result in more injuries as well. I say keep the 16 games. If they go to 17 each team would play on a neutral site. Not necessarily outside the nation either. It would be a way to get games played in LA and other areas that don't get a chance to go to a game. I'd go with 17 myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 If they go to 17 each team would play on a neutral site. Not necessarily outside the nation either. It would be a way to get games played in LA and other areas that don't get a chance to go to a game. I'd go with 17 myself. Me too, sounds pretty cool. Since I hate exhibition season anything that has to do with eliminating meaningless games is ok by me. I do think they need to have 2 or three, though, so guys have a chance to play and win a spot. Personally, I think the best possible world is just eliminate one of the exhibition games and keep the 16 schedule. But because of money, that will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treehugger Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 If they go to 17 each team would play on a neutral site. Not necessarily outside the nation either. It would be a way to get games played in LA and other areas that don't get a chance to go to a game. I'd go with 17 myself. I like this idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gman329 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I have read that the Giants will be one of the few dissenting votes when this comes up. They are concerned with player safety - adding games means greater risk of injury. Other teams are concerned that to compensate for that, the Player's Association will probably want a higher roster number, which would cost the owners more $$. One way or the other, the Players Association will need to get something back before signing off on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeMesiS Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I hate the idea adding more game. Records won't mean the same and you can bet more injuries will accord. Bad Idea if you ask me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 But....they are not ADDING games they are simply removing one preseason and adding a regular season. "But Lubes the starters would play the whole extra regular game!!!" 30 extra minutes of playing is not THAT big of a difference guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 17 games = 10 years of hearing this in the postseason: "Well, you've gotta wonder if that extra game didn't wear so-and-so out and add to him getting this career threatening injury." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 I hate the idea adding more game. Records won't mean the same and you can bet more injuries will accord. Bad Idea if you ask me... Agreed. Keep it at 16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boohyah Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 16 is a perfect number, and while they are at it, 2 preseason games tops, with your starters playing a half each only. Preseason games are a joke. I've said it before, there are 32 teams in the league. Why can't the Giants team up with someone like the Bills and run practice games in Albany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted March 28, 2009 Author Share Posted March 28, 2009 But....they are not ADDING games they are simply removing one preseason and adding a regular season. "But Lubes the starters would play the whole extra regular game!!!" 30 extra minutes of playing is not THAT big of a difference guys. The last preseason game does not get 30 mins of play from most starters. And, there is already a high number of season ending injuries during the preseason, likely a product of poor offseason conditioning, so yeah I do think an extra 30 mins of play in what would've been the 4th preseason game is going to make a big difference. Either the players are going to start training harder, sooner, or they're going to start falling with injuries. The neutral site idea is kind of neat, but it makes it imperfect. There is a measured weight to a home and away game. A 'neutral' site isn't black or white. If the cowboys, for instance, play the Vikings in Mexico City, you might as well chalk that up as a Dallas home game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 The last preseason game does not get 30 mins of play from most starters. And, there is already a high number of season ending injuries during the preseason, likely a product of poor offseason conditioning, so yeah I do think an extra 30 mins of play in what would've been the 4th preseason game is going to make a big difference. Either the players are going to start training harder, sooner, or they're going to start falling with injuries. The neutral site idea is kind of neat, but it makes it imperfect. There is a measured weight to a home and away game. A 'neutral' site isn't black or white. If the cowboys, for instance, play the Vikings in Mexico City, you might as well chalk that up as a Dallas home game. Yeah, we dont need any extra Dallas shit. In any form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 What they should look to do is go back to 2 bye weeks like they did in the early 90's where the season can now stretch 18 weeks. I would like more games, but I realize that more games could impact the level of late season play in terms of injuries and overall team stamina, especially for instance if a team played a schedule like the 2008 Giants did. Adding another bye week would add another week of TV money for the networks and really allow teams to plan how they get their in season rest. It also might add to fewer of these late season meaningful games whereby one team just rests players because they have everything wrapped up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted March 29, 2009 Author Share Posted March 29, 2009 What they should look to do is go back to 2 bye weeks like they did in the early 90's where the season can now stretch 18 weeks. I would like more games, but I realize that more games could impact the level of late season play in terms of injuries and overall team stamina, especially for instance if a team played a schedule like the 2008 Giants did. Adding another bye week would add another week of TV money for the networks and really allow teams to plan how they get their in season rest. It also might add to fewer of these late season meaningful games whereby one team just rests players because they have everything wrapped up. not a bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hlb37 Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 I don't like having to buy the pre-season games but even with that I do not think they should shorten pre-season. Pre-season is VERY important both for player development and player evaluations. It might not be exciting to watch, provide compeling drama or any of that but pre-season is still very important to the players and the teams. Especially with NFL Europe being history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 What they should look to do is go back to 2 bye weeks like they did in the early 90's where the season can now stretch 18 weeks. I would like more games, but I realize that more games could impact the level of late season play in terms of injuries and overall team stamina, especially for instance if a team played a schedule like the 2008 Giants did. Adding another bye week would add another week of TV money for the networks and really allow teams to plan how they get their in season rest. It also might add to fewer of these late season meaningful games whereby one team just rests players because they have everything wrapped up. If you tie that in with a 17 game regular season schedule you also get what the NFL is really trying to accomplish, the Super Bowl during sweeps week. I would only be in favor of a 17 game regular if it came with two byes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 What they should look to do is go back to 2 bye weeks like they did in the early 90's where the season can now stretch 18 weeks. I would like more games, but I realize that more games could impact the level of late season play in terms of injuries and overall team stamina, especially for instance if a team played a schedule like the 2008 Giants did. Adding another bye week would add another week of TV money for the networks and really allow teams to plan how they get their in season rest. It also might add to fewer of these late season meaningful games whereby one team just rests players because they have everything wrapped up. Excellent idea...I say 18 games...2 pre season warm ups and 2 bye weeks. Increase roster size by 2-3 players and allow one injured reserve player per season to come back if his injury turns out not to be season ending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorillaNJ Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Whatever they do, they should bump the Superbowl up a week, so we get the Monday after it off for Presidents day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treehugger Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 They should really do something about the current set up for bye weeks. It's an advantage to get one late in the season while it's useless early on. All the byes should be clustered within a 4 week period, say weeks 8-12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStroud Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I'd like to see the NFL Champs play the College All stars in the 1st pre-season game at Canton Ohio before the regular pre-season slate starts Then go 18 regular games, and 3 pre season games ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorillaNJ Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I'd like to see the NFL Champs play the College All stars in the 1st pre-season game at Canton Ohio before the regular pre-season slate starts Then go 18 regular games, and 3 pre season games ...... I'd rather see the College champs play the Detroit Lions....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMFP Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Eliminate the entire preseason, and use controlled scrimmages instead. Go with an 18 game schedule, and add two more bye weeks. 4 games / bye / 4 games / bye / 4 games / bye / 4 games / postseason. Adding 2 games, adding 2 bye, and removing 4 meaningless preaseason games lengthens the regular season without increasing the wear and tear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gman329 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Eliminate the entire preseason, and use controlled scrimmages instead. Go with an 18 game schedule, and add two more bye weeks. 4 games / bye / 4 games / bye / 4 games / bye / 4 games / postseason. Adding 2 games, adding 2 bye, and removing 4 meaningless preaseason games lengthens the regular season without increasing the wear and tear. That brings us to a 24 week season, meaning they'd start August 29 and the Super Bowl, assuming the week off after conference championships, would be played Feb 13. Great for us, TV execs and the owners....but Players Association might not agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue25 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Keep it at 16, we wore down last year at 16 games. I do not want to see the 13-4 Giants lose Eli Manning,Justin Tuck,Osi Umenyiora and Brandon Jacobs in a week 18 game against the 4-13 Rams. 16 is even its good no need to fix something thats not broken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now