NFL to have 17 games?

[Seadragon76]

Personally, if the NFL expands the schedule to 18 games, why not add two more games in the conference?

What I mean is this: Already, a team that finishes first in their division would play the first place team of the other two divisions. Well, now you throw in the second place team.

A good example would be Seattle: The Seahawks already play Chicago (North division winner) and Philadelphia (East Division Winner). Now, with this plan, the 'Hawks would add Minnesota and Dallas to the schedule because those were the second place teams in those divisions.

Another example is Cleveland, who finished last in the North and will play the East division teams this season. So, under this format, they would play Houston and Oakland, the fellow basement dwellers in the other two divisions. Under this new idea, they would add Denver and Jacksonville, the third place teams.

[Jimmy!]

How about expand the regular season to 18 games, chop off two of these exhibitions, and have two games at neutral sites? They could be international games, or just areas where the NFL doesn't have a franchise (LA?)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but players don't get paid for presesaon games, right? If the league chops off two preseason games and adds two regular season games, wouldn't owners have to pay players for two extra games?

[mjrbaseball]

I like the idea of a designated interconference game at a neutral site, but the rivalries don't exist for everyone as has been stated, and neither do the facilities at a reasonable location.

There are match-ups and sites that do work, of course. Sure you can have Eagles vs. Steelers at Penn State or Dolphins vs Buccaneers at Orlando. But are we going to get Cardinals vs. Broncos at Salt Lake City, or possibly Falcons vs. Titans in Jackson, Mississippi?

[ninersdd]

Personally, if the NFL expands the schedule to 18 games, why not add two more games in the conference?

What I mean is this: Already, a team that finishes first in their division would play the first place team of the other two divisions. Well, now you throw in the second place team.

A good example would be Seattle: The Seahawks already play Chicago (North division winner) and Philadelphia (East Division Winner). Now, with this plan, the 'Hawks would add Minnesota and Dallas to the schedule because those were the second place teams in those divisions.

Another example is Cleveland, who finished last in the North and will play the East division teams this season. So, under this format, they would play Houston and Oakland, the fellow basement dwellers in the other two divisions. Under this new idea, they would add Denver and Jacksonville, the third place teams.

Except that would be harsh to those 2nd place teams since its adding 2 more first place teams

[Joshawaggie]

I think this should just be used for preseason games, there are far too few home games to be going away from home to play.

Also, the Pro Bowl should rotate to internation areas if they really want to promote that way.

[VitaminD]

I think this should just be used for preseason games, there are far too few home games to be going away from home to play.

Also, the Pro Bowl should rotate to internation areas if they really want to promote that way.

I could actually support these ideas. However, the arguments against this cockamamie plan far outweigh the arguments for it.

If the NFL is dead-set on trying to internationalize their game, they'd be better served really supporting NFL Europe (or NFL Deutschland for all intents and purposes). The game has fizzled in most of Europe, and if they want to capture Europe's (or Asia's) fancy, work needs to be done at the youth level in communities. An exhibition once a year won't accomplish much. For those who want to draw parallels to soccer, don't. Soccer is understood and played by far more Americans than American football is understood and played by Euros/Asians. Moreover, our demographics are such that, between our many ethnic groups as well as our ongoing influx of immigrants, we have more soccer fans coming into the country than they have football fans immigrating. We have youth soccer leagues, semi-pro and lower-tier professional leagues, as well as a top-level pro league that has put down pretty good roots. While it's not on par with the EPL or La Liga or Serie A, MLS is growing into its own fairly nicely and will continue to get stronger. As such, flying a top-flight Euro soccer team (Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, Inter, Real Madrid, OL) would draw huge crowds that appreciate the game and its best players.

There are no such correlates abroad for American football. Flying a couple hundred Americans halfway around the globe to a country where they likely don't speak English primarily and having them play a game few people in that country appreciate on a basic level (nevermind the sophisticated levels the NFL hope for) makes the game a tough sell, and nothing like flying an international team of well-known superstars to a city in the US with large enclaves of expatriates who grew up with the game imbued into their culture.

The logistics of this are also staggering. The NFL has mushroomed from a 14-game season and a 3-week playoff into a 12-month affair, what with the Draft and mini-camps and mini-mini "volunteer" passing camps, and training camp. The season alone now occupies our attention from Labor Day through early February. It's reaching a saturation point. When are teams going to be expected to make these trips? Teams gripe enough as it is about trans-continental flights; what about crossing the Pacific the week before a key divisional showdown? And you just know that there'll be a team left out of the playoffs that will carp about the injustice of their schedule including flying to Moscow or Shanghai while their hated rivals only had to fly to Toronto or Vancouver, and that's why we're not in the playoffs.

Noble idea, but there are more practical ways to spread the game.

[mania]

4 in Latin America (2 in Mexico City, 2 somewhere else, maybe Guadalajara?)

Buenos Aires?

I'd be there, although it would probably be the biggest failure ever here.

[ivan26278]

if an NFL game is held in Buenos Aires it will be a real big failure

[Mac the Knife]

How about expand the regular season to 18 games, chop off two of these exhibitions, and have two games at neutral sites? They could be international games, or just areas where the NFL doesn't have a franchise (LA?)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but players don't get paid for presesaon games, right? If the league chops off two preseason games and adds two regular season games, wouldn't owners have to pay players for two extra games?

Technically speaking, no. Players are paid on a "contract year" basis, rather than per game. Salaries can be paid out in any way the NFL team and the Player might work out, though traditionally its been on an every-other-week basis during the season.

Unfortunately, the fans pay for NFL preseason games, the same ticket price as they would for regular season games... and season ticket holders get screwed because they must buy the preseason games as part of the package. Granted this doesn't piss off the masses, but its one of many reasons why I think a shorter preseason schedule would benefit the league and its fans.

[Lee.]

I think the NFL would love to have a meaningful rivalry game between such teams as Giants-Jets,

I support this. Why, they could hold the game on a neutral site, say, a stadium in Jersey!

[PeytonManningRocks]

I think the NFL would love to have a meaningful rivalry game between such teams as Giants-Jets,

I support this. Why, they could hold the game on a neutral site, say, a stadium in Jersey!

I don't know....Jersey seems kinda small!

But yea, I agree with most that this plan is quite stupid, but I also love your idea of preseason games held around the country. What I think they should do is hold the games at smaller college stadiums in football-crazy states that don't have a team, like Alabama or Oklahoma. Then play a few in Canada as well, and you've got yourself a decent preseason schedule. But no more of this London or Germany stuff. Keep that in NFL Europa.

[whitedawg22]

If the NFL is dead-set on trying to internationalize their game, they'd be better served really supporting NFL Europe (or NFL Deutschland for all intents and purposes). The game has fizzled in most of Europe, and if they want to capture Europe's (or Asia's) fancy, work needs to be done at the youth level in communities. An exhibition once a year won't accomplish much. For those who want to draw parallels to soccer, don't. Soccer is understood and played by far more Americans than American football is understood and played by Euros/Asians. Moreover, our demographics are such that, between our many ethnic groups as well as our ongoing influx of immigrants, we have more soccer fans coming into the country than they have football fans immigrating. We have youth soccer leagues, semi-pro and lower-tier professional leagues, as well as a top-level pro league that has put down pretty good roots. While it's not on par with the EPL or La Liga or Serie A, MLS is growing into its own fairly nicely and will continue to get stronger. As such, flying a top-flight Euro soccer team (Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, Inter, Real Madrid, OL) would draw huge crowds that appreciate the game and its best players.

The reason NFLE has "fizzled" is simply that the quality of play is really poor, worse than even major college football. We're sending European fans teams with no history full of players that even most hardcore American football fans haven't heard of. If NFLE were a true minor league, like baseball, there might even be some hope. But 99% of the players on a given NFLE roster will never make a significant contribution to a NFL team, so following their careers doesn't give much satisfaction, either.

There are NFL fans in other countries. But they don't want to see NFL-branded football that bears little to no resemblence, whether in teams, players, or ability levels, to the real thing. I'm not someone who necessarily thinks a 17th regular-season game overseas is a great thing, but it would certainly be a far better way to market the league than sinking more money into NFLE.

[MC Buffalo]

Also, how would a 17th game work... does every team then play all intraconference teams that finished the same as them the previous year? Or maybe each team designated an annual inerconference rival?

This would make the most sense. I think the NFL would love to have a meaningful rivalry game between such teams as Giants-Jets, Eagles-Steelers, 49ers-Raiders, and other cross-city/state/region games each season.

The big problem with setting up a year after year rivalry game is that it brings up some unfair competition issues that have fallen upon MLB since they went to the same setup. And with football it would be one of only 17 games instead of 4 of 162.

How fair would it be if the Wildcard in the American League comes down to the Orioles and the Red Sox and every year the Red Sox have to deal with the Braves while the Orioles get to beat up on the Nationals. I know in theory it should be cyclical as teams get good for a few years than dip again, but look how long the Braves have been good and the Expos/Nationals have been bad.

The MLB interleague schedule should be like the current NFL one where they play one division from the other league each year (or at least change the teams you play each season). Don't you think the fans in Denver or San Diego wouldn't like to have the Yankees come to town.

I'd have no problem with the International games, but if you think teams have a tough time playing after a West Coast trip, imagine you have to play the Patriots on Sunday Night Football after a trip to Dusseldorf!

[jhans203]

I think the league should look into Season games inside the US as well. Like L.A., Orlando, Honolulu, and other sizeable markets without a team.

[VitaminD]

I think the league should look into Season games inside the US as well. Like L.A., Orlando, Honolulu, and other sizeable markets without a team.

Yeah, that sounds good.

Now go tell that to the guy who forked over thousands of dollars for a PSL for the privilege of forking over even more money for his season tickets that you want to take away one of his home games so people in 2nd and 3rd tier cities can be gouged for a week. Let us know how that works out for you; in the meantime, those people can watch games on that box in the den with the moving pictures and sounds if they don't feel like going to any of the 31 sites where NFL football is already being played.

[Sec19Row53]

I think the league should look into Season games inside the US as well. Like L.A., Orlando, Honolulu, and other sizeable markets without a team.

Yeah, that sounds good.

Now go tell that to the guy who forked over thousands of dollars for a PSL for the privilege of forking over even more money for his season tickets that you want to take away one of his home games so people in 2nd and 3rd tier cities can be gouged for a week. Let us know how that works out for you; in the meantime, those people can watch games on that box in the den with the moving pictures and sounds if they don't feel like going to any of the 31 sites where NFL football is already being played.

[insert "Post of the Day" ribbon here]

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

I thought a little bit on the 17th game being an Interconference Rival. It's great for some teams, less so for others. I found that the NFC North was the hardest to create rivals for, since the whole division is steeped in their own rivalries, and geographically speaking, there's few teams THAT close to them. So, here's my best shot at the NFL Interconference Rivalry Weekend. Some are obvious connections. Some less obvious, some downright stretches.

Tampa Bay v. Miami --3 FL teams, but...

Carolina v. Jacksonville --Jax has the natural expansion counterpart thing going w/ Carolina

Atlanta v. Tennessee --Distance. Also, UGA/UT angle.

New Orleans v. Indianapolis --Distance. Kind of an awkward fit.

San Francisco v. Oakland --Natural. Battle of the Bay

St. Louis v. Kansas City --Natural. Battle for Missouri

Seattle v. San Diego --Awkward fit. It's the MLB rivalry.

Arizona v. Denver --Distance

Dallas v. Houston --Texas, obviously.

Washington v. Baltimore --Natural.

New York Giants v. New York Jets --Natural

Philadelphia v. Pittsburgh --Natural.

Detroit v. Cincinnati --A bit awkward. Battle of the Big Cats? A little Michigan/Ohio St. action, too.

Minnesota v. Buffalo --Awkward. Cold climate teams. Basically, leftovers.

Green Bay v. Cleveland --Arguably the two most tradition steeped teams in the game. Hard nosed fans.

Chicago v. New England --Battle for Irish pride.

So, there it is. Seems to be the best case scenario for all teams. Any suggestions, changes, backlash, hatred?

"New Orleans v. Indianapolis --Distance. Kind of an awkward fit."

the battle of the mannings? Archie's old team versus Peyton's current team.

"Green Bay v. Cleveland --Arguably the two most tradition steeped teams in the game. Hard nosed fans."

This one i would watch out of all of them provided I could ISOT to the present the historical teams of the Packers and Browns.

On Madden 07, i like setting up historical team matchups and one of them are between Packers/Browns/Colts. i usually use the 66 Packers, 68 Colts, or 60 Browns. Usually its between Packers/Colts or Packers/Browns.

[BBTV]

Green Bay v. Cleveland --Arguably the two most tradition steeped teams in the game. Hard nosed fans.

Cleveland? Maybe if "tradition steeped" means seven seasons.

[DDR]

Well, the current Browns absorbed the name, colors, history and records of the old Browns. You can argue that that legacy died when Modell went to Baltimore, but according to the settlement and the NFL, the two are linked.

[BBTV]

I just struck a deal to purchase my neighbor's history. I now qualify for social security, get discount ice-cream on Wednesdays, and was the 1955 Pennsylvania state champion in the shot put.