IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The Other 31 Teams
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-17-2015, 06:02 PM
Warren Warren is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
The NFL makes the huge majority of their money on their national TV deal. I really don't get why they don't just go to an 18 or 19 week season with 2-3 byes per team. You still sell an extra 2 weeks of TV games, but without having to kill the product. Going over 16 games just means the playoffs become even more random since you will have %10-%20 more injuries.
In 1993, every team had two bye weeks so the 16-game regular season was spread over 18 weeks. Ratings dipped so they went back to one bye the next year. I wouldn't be surprised to see them try it again. I would think that revenue from the extra week of games would more than offset a drop in ratings in the various TV markets in weeks when the local teams were off. Plus they could spin it as a player safety move.

I'm just relieved that Sean Gilbert lost his bid to be the NFLPA executive director. That was a work stoppage waiting to happen.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-17-2015, 08:12 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren View Post
In 1993, every team had two bye weeks so the 16-game regular season was spread over 18 weeks. Ratings dipped so they went back to one bye the next year. I wouldn't be surprised to see them try it again. I would think that revenue from the extra week of games would more than offset a drop in ratings in the various TV markets in weeks when the local teams were off. Plus they could spin it as a player safety move.

I'm just relieved that Sean Gilbert lost his bid to be the NFLPA executive director. That was a work stoppage waiting to happen.
But in 1993 Fantasy Football was in its infancy. Today, football fans watch every game almost as much as they watch their home team. I watched a Tennessee-Jacksonville game last year on a Thursday night because it was the only game on. I think the ratings impact would be next to nothing and the extra 1-2 weeks of programming to sell would be huge. Plus it has a player safety appeal like you said. To me an extra bye week elevates the level of play and lets guys get healthy. While increasing games lowers the level of play and increases injuries.

I'd also be in favor of eliminating 1 or 2 preseason games.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-17-2015, 09:02 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

Fantasy Footballers would bitch the most about two bye weeks. "You mean I have to sit Brady twice???"

16 weeks if perfect to me. 18 screws up a lot of things that are perfect right now, like scheduling.

Say it with me folks: "Super Bowl LX - London 2026"
Damn, wouldn't that be the year Houston would finally go?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-17-2015, 11:08 PM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
Damn, wouldn't that be the year Houston would finally go?
You'd have to get a passport. Man, that would suck.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.