Are you in favor of an 18 game season?

[Skew]

Can we CLOSE/LOCK this thread...

SEE: Poll Thread w. same title

Merged.

[panthers55]

There are arguments either way. But I am in favor of it. If a player is going to get hurt I would rather it is be in a real game that counts than a meaningless contest. Plus lets be real, how much more would a starter play if we had 2 preseason games and 16 regular season games, maybe 3/4s of a game.

If I have to pay for 10 games, I would be rsther have 9 meaningful games and 1 throw away instead of 8 meaningful games and 2 scrimmages. Plus I really do think given how we always seem to play our best ball late, we might be able to parlay a 16 game season into a few more playoff runs.

And finally if it keeps us from a lockout, then I am all for it.

[Jangler]

But then home/away games are uneven ...could be a huge advantage

Yeah, but as Lady Panther pointed out, 2 more games doesn't add anything to the season (other than money for the owners). But if you have an odd season then the game is important.

[beckersteen]

Two more games will not bring meaningful football.

[Brooklyn Bully]

Yes, if they turn two preseason games into regular games. As a PSL owner, I'd much rather get to see one more "real" game.

[Mother Grabber]

But then home/away games are uneven ...could be a huge advantage

Everyone plays one game in London.

[Mr. Scot]

Not in favor of it, nor in favor of the international game.

Two preseason games is not enough to evaluate the new guys.

Sixteen games is quite enough.

[weyco2000]

2 Preseason games (you could add 1 or 2 more for draft picks and rookie FA only.) 2 bye weeks: week 3-7 for and week 11-15. and do away wth the week before the Superbowl. Or 17 game schedule with 3 preseason games: 1 away and 1 home, week 3 would be held in England... no I'm not serious, but the third could be held at a college or city where they don't have a team. And for God sake stop charging full price for a preseason game.

[Razzy]

No. I like the fact that, unlike other professional leagues, in the NFL you can't afford to lose games because there are so few.

[weyco2000]

So it has taken 3 years to evaluate that Dwayne Jarrett is not an NFL talent?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/8299 He will be playing in his 15th preseason game on Sat.

33 catches in 3 years as a second round pick, thats pitiful! Oh and don't forget his 1 career TD against the second team Saints D.Teams have rookie camp, OTA and TC. if you can't figure out who to keep, you should find a new line of work.

[Dropey]

Teams have rookie camp, OTA and TC. if you can't figure out who to keep, you should find a new line of work.

The only problem with that is some players shine in camp and disappear in games and vice versa. I think we need those preseason games to evaluate the new guys. It also gives them time to shake their nerves and make adjustments.

[weyco2000]

The preseason is longer than the playoffs, If a guy gets a normal job and he's not catching on after 2 weeks, does he get 2 more weeks to prove himself? I think everyone here on this forum, can pick a 53 man roster after 2 weeks. The Colts are 4-20 in the preseason, since 2005. However, they have the best record since 1999 and have won 6 of 7 AFC South titles. They have won 12 or more games for 7 years, an NFL record. Playing in 3 conference championship games and 2 Super bowls. Looking at our roster, I see at least 42 players who are locks and I could pick 11 more to complete the roster. Now comes the third week... which is almost a regular season game, most of the starters will play into the third QTR. Then comes the last preseason game, a waste of time.

[Urrymonster]

In my mind more games does not lessen the importance of each one. I do not really understand how when countless teams are always battling for the division titles or wild card spots right until the end. At least this way teams will not be divided by 'strength of schedule' as a couple more games should stretch the teams out a bit.

The only issue in my mind is for the teams at the bottom of the ladder. In most other professional sports there is relegation to fear and that gives the teams battling at the bottom something to play for throughout the season. I can guarantee the fans of the teams that narrowly avoid relegation feel like they just won the title themselves.

Everyone harping on about extra injuries is missing the point. Injuries happen al the time, in game and in practice, so changing two games from practice to real will not make a huge difference. Sure there will be some marque player going down in game 17/18 and every fan of that team will revolt, but players get injured in pre-season just as much.

The only thing people should be concerned with is the impact on the competition. All teams will face the issues of more injuries, so that is a mute point. Playoff competing teams have two extra games to clinch or lose it. Only problem is for bottom dwellers. I am sure they will include an extra bye week as they need to protect their commodities.

Those that said 'No! Every game counts!', do you not think it is better to give the teams that matter (ie the teams tied on record for playoffs) a chance to clinch their spot legit rather than having to allow SoS decide it?

[panthers55]

Why is it that the pros needs 4 meaningless games to be ready to play and in college they don't need even one?

And again, most playoff teams play a 16 game schedule already. Do they usually have a ton more injuries at key positions. Sure we had a bunch at runningback in 2005 but did we in 2003 for example.

What about New Orleans last year or Indy. I don't recall that many, but wasn't paying attention to that.