Roger Goodell: Fans have made it clear, they don't like preseason - Page 5

brat316 · 08-26-2010, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency

Who cares. The revenue from the TV broadcasts will easily dwarf stadium costs.

yeah but thats where owners are hung up, how do they share this revenue, should the Bills be getting paid the same as the Cowboys?

Shiver · 08-26-2010, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

Yep.

The owners are the ones pushing and the players aren't really fighting it because they know it means more money and jobs. They could all care less what the fans want.

It is a win-win-win as far as I am concerned.

(more fantasy football! woot!)

yourfavestoner · 08-26-2010, 12:51 PM

Literally, the only problem I have with it is the quality of games at the end of the season. Goodell has bitched every year about teams tanking it for the last couple of games. I can't wait to see what he says when teams winning bad divisions are packing their **** in for an entire month at the end of the season.

The record book will be completely re-written, but that was to be expected in coming years anyways since football has essentially turned to basketball on grass. Anybody with half a brain should be able to put records in context.

Shiver · 08-26-2010, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

Literally, the only problem I have with it is the quality of games at the end of the season. Goodell has bitched every year about teams tanking it for the last couple of games. I can't wait to see what he says when teams winning bad divisions are packing their **** in for an entire month to end the year.

The record book will be completely re-written, but that was to be expected in coming years anyways since football has essentially turned to basketball on grass. Anybody with half a brain should be able to put records in context.

Drew Brees, first to 5,500 yards? Andre Johnson first to 2,000 yards?

yourfavestoner · 08-26-2010, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

Drew Brees, first to 5,500 yards? Andre Johnson first to 2,000 yards?

Hahahaha, the possibilities for offensive production are absolutely endless. The new benchmarks set that will be set are going to be absolutely ridiculous.

For the most part, though, I think you'll see a lot of the rushing records stay intact for awhile. A longer season means more platooning for backs. And if they shoulder the majority of the load, you'll likely see their careers end way before they start approaching 12,000 yards or so.

Shiver · 08-26-2010, 01:02 PM

Yeah, the RBBC is not going away anytime soon. Really, with exception to the 1990s-2003, that has been the standard practice in the NFL. Go back to the 70s and try and find a team that didn't use a 1-2, sometimes 3 punch at RB. With an 18-game schedule having just one back would be far too risky.

WinslowBodden · 08-26-2010, 01:23 PM

They don't even need to make the season 18 games, they could do 2 preseason games and just start the season when the third game of the preseason normally is... 4 Preseason games is completely pointless.

Splat · 08-26-2010, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinslowBodden

They don't even need to make the season 18 games, they could do 2 preseason games and just start the season when the third game of the preseason normally is... 4 Preseason games is completely pointless.

Sounds good on paper but they don't want to lose the money from those two games.

yourfavestoner · 08-26-2010, 01:37 PM

If/when the season does go to 18 games, I think they should make it a 20 week season with two bye weeks for each team.

FlyingElvis · 08-26-2010, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinslowBodden

They don't even need to make the season 18 games, they could do 2 preseason games and just start the season when the third game of the preseason normally is... 4 Preseason games is completely pointless.

But they would leave the potential revenue from two additional regular season games on the table, and that's not happening.

My biggest concern with all of this is the fact that the owners will want 18 games and still ask the players to take less money. That has ugly negotiations & lockout written all over it.

yourfavestoner · 08-26-2010, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis

But they would leave the potential revenue from two additional regular season games on the table, and that's not happening.

My biggest concern with all of this is the fact that the owners will want 18 games and still ask the players to take less money. That has ugly negotiations & lockout written all over it.

Ultimately, that's where the compromise is going to have to come in these negotiations.

CC.SD · 08-26-2010, 02:13 PM

I'll be sad.

31 is still a lot over 18 games though.

Jvig43 · 08-26-2010, 02:15 PM

What are schedules going to look like, do they just add two more games against teams from the other conference?

Ness · 08-26-2010, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

Drew Brees, first to 5,500 yards? Andre Johnson first to 2,000 yards?

Ugggh....should I even watch the NFL anymore?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splat

Sounds good on paper but they don't want to lose the money from those two games.

Can't they just condense the money into 18 games instead of 20?

njx9 · 08-26-2010, 03:12 PM

anyone know when the tv deal expires? i glanced through the thread, but didn't see anything. it seems unlikely to me that the nfl would really change the season until/unless they can renegotiate the tv deals. i don't see them giving fox/cbs/nbc/whoever has the contracts this year a free deal on the extra two real games.

FlyingElvis · 08-26-2010, 03:44 PM

quick search (ie wiki) so don't take it as law . . .

"Currently, three American terrestrial television networks CBS ($3.73B), NBC ($3.6B) and Fox ($4.27B), as well as cable television's ESPN ($8.8B) are paying a combined total of $20.4 billion[1] to broadcast NFL games through the 2011 season for CBS, Fox, and NBC and through 2013 for ESPN."

source

Addict · 08-26-2010, 03:45 PM

I'm in favor of an 18-game season, if only because it gives the Lions a chance to not be the worst team ever anymore.

njx9 · 08-26-2010, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis

quick search (ie wiki) so don't take it as law . . .

"Currently, three American terrestrial television networks CBS ($3.73B), NBC ($3.6B) and Fox ($4.27B), as well as cable television's ESPN ($8.8B) are paying a combined total of $20.4 billion[1] to broadcast NFL games through the 2011 season for CBS, Fox, and NBC and through 2013 for ESPN."

source

hmm... for some reason, i thought they'd gotten some ungodly sum in the last year or two for a longer term set of rights... in that case, 2012 will see the 18 game schedule, i'd guess. that sucks.

thenewfeature06 · 08-26-2010, 03:51 PM

I am sure the Lions won't be forgotten though, and me as a fan yeah I would like it... If I played I guarantee it would be the opposite.

scpanther22 · 08-26-2010, 11:15 PM

Could you imagine if you were a Fullback and had to play 18 games?

they wont last long.

brat316 · 08-26-2010, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addict

I'm in favor of an 18-game season, if only because it gives the Lions a chance to not be the worst team ever anymore.

0-18 would have something different to say about that.

GB12 · 08-26-2010, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scpanther22

Could you imagine if you were a Fullback and had to play 18 games?

they wont last long.

That's why you carry two fullbacks.

Or three.

Shiver · 08-26-2010, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

If/when the season does go to 18 games, I think they should make it a 20 week season with two bye weeks for each team.

That would be the most fair thing to do. I don't like how some teams get theirs so early (like Atlanta last year) and other teams get to rest their people late into the regular season and get healed up for the stretch run.

elway=goat · 08-27-2010, 03:18 AM

I am fine how it is now.. If its not broke dont fix it. 18 games is too many for the players and it has a potential to really effect the product in a negative way. Players=you're product Goodell.. Think about how this is going to effect the future insteado of living in the moment.

Players are going to break down faster, play less years overall because of this, and has the potential to water down the product. I am not in support of this move if it goes through.

steelersfan43 · 08-29-2010, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

Hahahaha, the possibilities for offensive production are absolutely endless. The new benchmarks set that will be set are going to be absolutely ridiculous.

For the most part, though, I think you'll see a lot of the rushing records stay intact for awhile. A longer season means more platooning for backs. And if they shoulder the majority of the load, you'll likely see their careers end way before they start approaching 12,000 yards or so.

Its only 2 more gamess...