I think Peter King is basically right. They need to cut the pre-season, and end this madness about extending the regular season. Unless they want to shorten the average player's career, of course.
It would be interesting to see the players' reaction if the owners proposed a longer season. Would any players support the move? Possibly backups, who'd figure that they'd get more chances to play (due to rest of or injury to starters). Maybe the players would propose expanding the rosters and increasing the players' share of the (presumably larger) revenue pie in exchange.
The National
Football
League!
has never cared about average players (it's why contracts aren't guaranteed). There's plenty more from the free farm system.
Yeah, I was thinking of roster expansion too. If you think of it, the second stringers who play in the pre-season would be first in line to occupy new roster spaces. The difference is that the league would have to pay them decently for their games.
The players would clearly expect another game check. There is a zero percent chance the schedule would be extended without the players getting more money.
Stacy, obviously they'd get more money, and the owners would offer it to them. I'm wondering if the Players' Association would bargain for a larger percentage of total revenue. So if the owners offer 55% of the (larger, 17-game) pie, the players say, "No, we want 58% of the larger pie. And bigger rosters." It's sorta comparable to having a time-and-a-half rate for overtime.
It's all about the $$$. The average NFL player has a 4 year career before injuries or below average skills take them off the field.
Today's players are bigger, stronger, faster and the collisions between bodies are more violent, and more stressful on the biological machine.
Making the season longer will have the effect of diminishing the product due to fatigue and injury. The NFL and the NFLPA should take a good hard look at what they've got and try hard to preserve it. The greedy impulse to squeeze a few more bucks will inevitably lead to unanticipated costs they will not be happy about paying down the road.
Agreed. The pre-season is nothing but second stringers half the time anyway. I don't get it.
That's the point of the pre-season. NFL football requires that teams have depth to have a chance at the Superbowl. Either that or you have to get extremely lucky with injuries. One of the reasons why the Patriots and Colts have been dominant is their ability to throw second string players in for the starters when they inevitably get hurt. One of they ways they train the new guys is by getting them a lot of playing time in the pre-season.
I think cutting the preseason down is a good idea as well. They also need to up their total roster spots and practice squad if they intend to expand their seasons.
Seems like a three game preseason is a no-brainer. One home one away one in some crazy far away place that doesn't have American football like Beijing, Berlin or LA.
Bigger rosters would be good too (or like a 8 game minor league system for the fall that you could pull up players from during the season). But no more regular season please.
The problem with King's argument is that it's a purely kneejerk reactionary one. An "injury-filled week" does not prove that the NFL shouldn't add games to the season. This was week 1. It seems to me that regardless of whether there were 8 games or 80 in an NFL season, there's no avoiding freak injuries. That's the nature of the game; it's a violent sport full of people trying to harm other people. It is what it is. But because Peter King's favorite player was among the wounded on day 1, it's crisis mode time.
King is acting like he's never heard of guys like Kurt Warner or Frank Reich...or Tom Brady. Injuries happen, and they happen all the time. You didn't see anyone put an end to the season when Vick when down in a meaningless preseason game, did you? And players a lot less financially secure than Brady get carted off the field all the time, and they have for years. However it simply doesn't logically follow that freakish injuries involving a large man colliding with another man on the first week of a new season proves anything at all about the whether the season goes on too long. I understand the argument against lengthening the regular season, but this past week did not make the case.
If anything, it's another argument in favor of shortening the preseason.
I heard Mike Ditka discussing this issue on the radio (on Sunday morning, before the Brady injury), and he mentioned that the only reason that the NFL played exhibition games in his day was to cover the cost of training camp. Unfortunately, the current purpose of those games is to soak season ticket holders for a few more bucks. Using conservative estimates of a $100 average ticket price and 65,000 seats, dropping a home preseason game without adding a home regular season game would cost each franchise $6.5 million dollars (and not to mention the less-lucrative but still existent revenue from TV and radio advertising, concessions, merchandise, and the like that are associated with these games). Lopping two games off of the preseason without adding to the regular season would cost the league something in the neighborhood of $200 million, conservatively. It's not going to happen.
Mike Pereira, the NFL's VP of officiating was just on NFL Total Access and he said that players are not going to be allowed to take drop to their knees during a touchdown celebration "unless it's to praise the Lord." Is it just me or does that seem a little questionable- that a rule outlaws secular but not religious celebrations. What do you think? I plan to blog about it on Spottie soon. I think it's worth highlighting, I would love to see Roger Goodell explain that on television.
Here's a piece no one cared about. Meh, whatever, probably the most enjoyable article I did during my stint at TIME. Premiered a month before I got laid-off. The nail in the coffin? Ya think?
Here's me going after Al. I didn't so much have a problem with him, as I had a problem with media acting like this dude was the go-to guy for everything black.
This was my first real story at time. I was writing for the Business section, a real change of direction for me. At any rate, it's about Wal-Mart's attempts to colonize the inner-city. As much as I enjoyed this piece, I mostly enjoyed going out to Chicago, which is a beautiful, beautiful city.
This a piece I did about the cops just outside our nation capitol, in Prince George's County, a few years back. I wanted to offer a counter to the dumb, conventional wisdom that if you paint your police force black, you could eradicate police brutality. In fact, Prince George's--one of the richest, blackest counties in the country--also had one of the most brutal police force's in the country.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Ta-Nehisi:
I know this is OT, but what happened to Sully? He hasn't posted all day. He usually has 10 posts up by now.
It would be interesting to see the players' reaction if the owners proposed a longer season. Would any players support the move? Possibly backups, who'd figure that they'd get more chances to play (due to rest of or injury to starters). Maybe the players would propose expanding the rosters and increasing the players' share of the (presumably larger) revenue pie in exchange.
Agreed. The pre-season is nothing but second stringers half the time anyway. I don't get it.
The National
Football
League!
has never cared about average players (it's why contracts aren't guaranteed). There's plenty more from the free farm system.
Yeah, I was thinking of roster expansion too. If you think of it, the second stringers who play in the pre-season would be first in line to occupy new roster spaces. The difference is that the league would have to pay them decently for their games.
I know this is OT, but what happened to Sully? He hasn't posted all day. He usually has 10 posts up by now.
He's at the hospital having his ego surgically reduced.
The players would clearly expect another game check. There is a zero percent chance the schedule would be extended without the players getting more money.
Send him an e-mail, Joe. We're in different cities.
Stacy, obviously they'd get more money, and the owners would offer it to them. I'm wondering if the Players' Association would bargain for a larger percentage of total revenue. So if the owners offer 55% of the (larger, 17-game) pie, the players say, "No, we want 58% of the larger pie. And bigger rosters." It's sorta comparable to having a time-and-a-half rate for overtime.
It's all about the $$$. The average NFL player has a 4 year career before injuries or below average skills take them off the field.
Today's players are bigger, stronger, faster and the collisions between bodies are more violent, and more stressful on the biological machine.
Making the season longer will have the effect of diminishing the product due to fatigue and injury. The NFL and the NFLPA should take a good hard look at what they've got and try hard to preserve it. The greedy impulse to squeeze a few more bucks will inevitably lead to unanticipated costs they will not be happy about paying down the road.
Agreed. The pre-season is nothing but second stringers half the time anyway. I don't get it.
That's the point of the pre-season. NFL football requires that teams have depth to have a chance at the Superbowl. Either that or you have to get extremely lucky with injuries. One of the reasons why the Patriots and Colts have been dominant is their ability to throw second string players in for the starters when they inevitably get hurt. One of they ways they train the new guys is by getting them a lot of playing time in the pre-season.
What, no coffeenerdness? Nothing about what happened to you on your connecting flight to Newark? What about your kid's sports exploits?
Don't be a tease.
As long as the owners get to charge regular season prices and pay the players training camp wages, the pre-season will never die.
I think cutting the preseason down is a good idea as well. They also need to up their total roster spots and practice squad if they intend to expand their seasons.
Seems like a three game preseason is a no-brainer. One home one away one in some crazy far away place that doesn't have American football like Beijing, Berlin or LA.
Bigger rosters would be good too (or like a 8 game minor league system for the fall that you could pull up players from during the season). But no more regular season please.
The problem with King's argument is that it's a purely kneejerk reactionary one. An "injury-filled week" does not prove that the NFL shouldn't add games to the season. This was week 1. It seems to me that regardless of whether there were 8 games or 80 in an NFL season, there's no avoiding freak injuries. That's the nature of the game; it's a violent sport full of people trying to harm other people. It is what it is. But because Peter King's favorite player was among the wounded on day 1, it's crisis mode time.
King is acting like he's never heard of guys like Kurt Warner or Frank Reich...or Tom Brady. Injuries happen, and they happen all the time. You didn't see anyone put an end to the season when Vick when down in a meaningless preseason game, did you? And players a lot less financially secure than Brady get carted off the field all the time, and they have for years. However it simply doesn't logically follow that freakish injuries involving a large man colliding with another man on the first week of a new season proves anything at all about the whether the season goes on too long. I understand the argument against lengthening the regular season, but this past week did not make the case.
If anything, it's another argument in favor of shortening the preseason.
I heard Mike Ditka discussing this issue on the radio (on Sunday morning, before the Brady injury), and he mentioned that the only reason that the NFL played exhibition games in his day was to cover the cost of training camp. Unfortunately, the current purpose of those games is to soak season ticket holders for a few more bucks. Using conservative estimates of a $100 average ticket price and 65,000 seats, dropping a home preseason game without adding a home regular season game would cost each franchise $6.5 million dollars (and not to mention the less-lucrative but still existent revenue from TV and radio advertising, concessions, merchandise, and the like that are associated with these games). Lopping two games off of the preseason without adding to the regular season would cost the league something in the neighborhood of $200 million, conservatively. It's not going to happen.
Mike Pereira, the NFL's VP of officiating was just on NFL Total Access and he said that players are not going to be allowed to take drop to their knees during a touchdown celebration "unless it's to praise the Lord." Is it just me or does that seem a little questionable- that a rule outlaws secular but not religious celebrations. What do you think? I plan to blog about it on Spottie soon. I think it's worth highlighting, I would love to see Roger Goodell explain that on television.