Gasper's Modest proposal...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Gasper's Modest proposal...

    http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/gasper/2010/12/a_modest_propos.html

    Gasper wrote this column. In my opinion, the idea that Kraft brought to the table in 2003 is the best compromise scenario between ownership and the NFLPA. It would add one game, and strengthen the meaning of another week, almost adding 1.5 games as it were. Yet, it wouldn't lengthen the season, exposing players to extra injury risk, or skewing the meaning of historical stats from the 16 game season era. Moreover, it would also do away with the sad fact that extremely weak divisions are disproportionately represented. I would love a straight standings style playoff seeding. Plus, as added intrigue, it makes earning a playoff bye much, much more difficult and therefore important.

    What say you folks? I know the 18 game season is generally unpopular here, and I hope "Jets" Goodell doesn't ram it through, but this could be a half-way point in the discussion.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from fourjays30. Show fourjays30's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    I think they get there with something like this along with the 18 game schedule but one less pre season game. Remember for the owners it's all about gate receipts. I also think you will see the start of the regular season happen the first week of Sep.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    It's not all about gate receipts, it is partially about that, but if the NFL has two extra games to bargain with against the television networks they can as for more money when they collectively sell the television rights .... I think offering the networks one more playoff game and a promise of a more competitive week 18 would get them enough surplus to keep everyone happy...
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from LatenightOwl. Show LatenightOwl's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    Z--

    You will never get straight up conferences because it will take away from divisional play.  Just because the NFC west is horrible this year and will take away a playoff spot from a Tampa Bay team (for instance) is not reason enough to completely overhaul a tradition for decades.

    You do know there have been several 8-8 teams make the playoffs in the past? Its not unprecedented. 

    Im not a big fan of the 18 game schedules.  My biggest concern is what is the benefit to the product already?  I do not own a team so, I have no stake in the gate receipts.  To me, the best teams (for the most part...) rise to the top by 16 weeks.  Lets face it, we have 6 playoff teams out of 16 per conference, but in all reality, maybe 3 have a legit chance of going to the Super Bowl. The rest need some luck.  With 2 extra games, what is the NFL proving?! That St. Louis and Seattle are 8-10 or 9-9?  They aren't getting past the wildcard weekend regardless!  ya know?

    secondly, and admittedly minor, the record books will be demolished with 2 more regular season games.  Comparatively speaking, it will BLEEP things up.  I'm for just keeping things as they are. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    Me too. What does it add? Millions to billions. When they sell the rights to air games to Fox, ESPN, and CBS they can charge more because the networks are getting more games to air.

    It is also why Goodell keeps branching out to new Thursday and Saturday match-ups, because when they do that for the networks they get more money.

    The "stat" issue bothers me the most. As an avid sportsfan , I hate the idea of any league changing the amount of games because it further complicates comparisons, which are already complicated enough by playing conditions and opposing talent. 

    The idea of "best record" is kind of a harder sell, and I realize that the 6-10 playoff team, eve the 8-8 playoff team is somewhat anomalous... but it would  force teams to play out through the end more often.


     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from LatenightOwl. Show LatenightOwl's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    To be fair to Goodell, this whole expansioning the schedule into other days have been in the NFL heads for a very long time.  Pete rozelle is the father of that.  It was his idea for Monday Night football (1970), Sunday Night football (1987), a couple Saturday games AND Thursday night football (1-2 games a year since 1977).  Tagliabue expanded Sunday Nights into all year round in the mid 90s..  Goodell is simply adding on to that evolutionary history with his Thursday expansion package.

    18 game schedule will fill more space in September and add one week on into February.   Its disgusting really but, football is #1 so they want to make it last forever.


       
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    Yeah, that is so true. Rozelle and Tags did the same thing as well. They essentially forced Goodell to be so creative. 

    Caveat venditor, though, because each game they add waters down the importance of the games that were already there. True, more games increases the 'live' weeks where teams have meaningful playoff chances, but at the same time it dilutes the significance of the few that were there. The sixteen game format is so special because, compared to other sports, it is almost as if the playoffs start in week one. Every single down is critical. Going to eighteen or more alters that for the worse.... in my opinion.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from LatenightOwl. Show LatenightOwl's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    and if you are ito symetry, 16 games for 32 teams is geometrically perfect in terms of schedule making.

    Too me its like adding chocolate covered chocolate to the chocolate fudge swirl icecream.  Really??  you want Jimmies and hot fudge too??
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    I'd rather see the 14 team playoff scenario than an 18 game season. My big question is who would the extra two games be against? Rather than the two "odd" games scheduled by the previous season's record have them play two conference divisions? Two more games based on ranking with a second division in the opposite conference? Random out of division games? I've not heard a word about this. It looks like this 18 game season will pass, though. It's all about money. I just hope we don't see a lot more injuries because of it.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from LatenightOwl. Show LatenightOwl's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    What it is now:

    6 division games
    4 games of a rotating conf division
    2 conference non division-- same placement (1st place vs. 1st place)
    4 non conference


    What they would add:

    2 more conference non-divisional games
    1s vs 2/4
    2s vs 1/3
    3s vs 2/4
    4s vs 1/3

    So the Patriots in 2011 would conceivably play:

    AFC east 2x
    AFC West
    Jacksonville, Pittsburgh (as #1)
    #2 Baltimore, #4 Houston
    OR
    #2 Indianapolis, #4 Cincinnati**

    **the additional 2 teams would be up to the NFL as to the rotational aspect.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    Ideally, I would like to see the NFL contract the league to 24 teams, with three divisions in each conference and four playoff teams, and go back to a 12-game schedule. This would appease all the fans who are so worried about player injuries, diluting the product and the record book. It addresses the symmetry issue, would also rid the league of scrub players and scrub teams (and entire scrub divisions), and would re-itnroduce the concept that "less is more." The season and the playoffs could be completed in a tight four-month window and everybody would be home for Christmas. There's really no downside . . .

    Except for the minor inconvenience of taking the NFL off "free" TV and sending ticket, parking and merchandise prices even further into the stratosphere (or further than that).

    But that seems a small enough price to pay to save this insatiable monstrosity from itself.

    People get in comfort zones and convince themselves that the way things are is the best they've ever been.

    Sixteen isn't any better than 14, which wasn't any better than 12. Hell . . .  with exhibitions, they've been playing 20 games since the league expanded to the 14-game schedule. Both the owners and the players want more money, and there's only one way to get it. In my experience, cabals of millionaires tend to get what they want . . .  and maybe it's just me, but I haven't been noticing the league seeming to care very much what its fans think.


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    In Response to Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...:
    [QUOTE]What they would add: 2 more conference non-divisional games 1s vs 2/4 2s vs 1/3 3s vs 2/4 4s vs 1/3 [/QUOTE]

    Is that what you think, or did you read this somewhere? Personally, I'd rather see them add a division in conference and get rid of the "placement" games. Thus every team would play 14 conference games, and face 11 of the other 15 each year. It would give a better gauge on how each conference stacked up against themselves. It will be interesting to see what they come up with. I also hope this would mean they'd play on Labor Day weekend. They do not need to extend the season into mid-February, IMO. There's too many things they need that time for.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    If the NFL contracts and the rosters of the remaining teams are expanded than this could happen. I expect the union to ask for more money for its players (nothing new there). Everyone is hating on Goodell and most of his ideas. They need to realise that, regardless of his contract, Goodell's job is in jeopardy if there is a strike or lockout because that means lost revenue for the owners (his bosses) and he basically becomes the guy that killed the goose that lays the golden eggs.


    I expect roster expansion to be an integral part of the new CBA if an 18 game season continues to be put forth. It will be one of the chips at the negotiating table.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw. Show Philskiw's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

     I would love a straight standings style playoff seeding

    No way. Even though the NFC west is weak now its not always going to be like that. Like in 2008 with Cassel even though we won 11 games we ddin't win enough to get in the playoffs. Our bad when you get right down too it. The only thing I disagreed with the 2008 team was the draft pick number they got. Which has been fixed already.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from LatenightOwl. Show LatenightOwl's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    In Response to Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gasper's Modest proposal... : Is that what you think, or did you read this somewhere? Personally, I'd rather see them add a division in conference and get rid of the "placement" games. Thus every team would play 14 conference games, and face 11 of the other 15 each year. It would give a better gauge on how each conference stacked up against themselves. It will be interesting to see what they come up with. I also hope this would mean they'd play on Labor Day weekend. They do not need to extend the season into mid-February, IMO. There's too many things they need that time for.
    Posted by bubthegrub2[/QUOTE]

    Its 90% accurate. I've heard from several places that if the 18 game schedule goes into effect, it will most definitely be conference games.  HOW they stagger the concept of formularization, is up to the NFL.  I did hear this is a likely formula.  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    I think Goodell should expand the rosters to, say, 300 players, then expand the season to 162 games, like baseball. First round bye goes to the team with the fewest players on IR. I know it would add payroll expense, Roger, but just think of the added TV revenue!

    What a dope.


    Seriously, why mess with a sport that is so doggone entertaining and profitable? I agree with the poster who mentioned contracting to 24 teams, to increase the quality of the overall product and eliminate the gimme games against squads like the Panthers or Bengals. More teams and more games simply waters down the product.

    The vast majority of NFL owners made their billions from some other business. If they need more money, go tinker with those companies.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from LatenightOwl. Show LatenightOwl's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    In Response to Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...:
    [QUOTE]I think Goodell should expand the rosters to, say, 300 players, then expand the season to 162 games, like baseball. First round bye goes to the team with the fewest players on IR. I know it would add payroll expense, Roger, but just think of the added TV revenue! What a dope. Seriously, why mess with a sport that is so doggone entertaining and profitable? I agree with the poster who mentioned contracting to 24 teams, to increase the quality of the overall product and eliminate the gimme games against squads like the Panthers or Bengals. More teams and more games simply waters down the product. The vast majority of NFL owners made their billions from some other business. If they need more money, go tinker with those companies.
    Posted by NY-PATS-FAN4[/QUOTE]

    By contracting to 24 teams, do you think the road to the Super Bowl would be easier or harder for the Patriots?

    Would you feel the same if the Patriots were contracted in order to make the NFL a better product?  How about this.. Say we put your plan into effect 10 years from now.  Take 8 worsts teams in 2020.  You willing to gamble the Patriots aren't one of those teams? 

    My point is, you speak with a tone of arrogance in regards to the teams not playing well right now as reason to contract.  Carolina, while clearly the worst team in football in 2010 was in the Super Bowl just 7 years ago.  The 11-2 Atlanta Falcons haven't been to a super Bowl in 12 years.  By that number, Atlanta should go and Carolina should stay.  Detoit and Cleveland, teams OLDER than the Patriots have never been to a Super Bowl, should they go?  How about Dallas, the havent done anything in almost 2 decades and everyone hates them.. clearly they should be contracted.  Only, they are in the top 3 box office draws in opponents every year.  They make other teams money.   

    Whats your magical criteria?   
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    Although it's clear that no such thing is ever realistically going to happen, the criteria for contraction could and should be idiotically simple. The bulk of the revenue comes from television, so you consolidate according to the broadest and most lucrative TV markets. 

    I have no doubt that if it somehow, magically made fiscal sense, deals would be struck and you most certainly would see regional NFL teams.




     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    Expanding the season is greedy and dumb, they'll strangle the golden goose by messing with it.  Moreover the Fins undefeated season is accompanied by the asterisk that they only played 14 games, the PAT's undefeated regular season will shrink as an accomplishment because it won't be 18 games etc...   expanding the rosters will water down the talent.  Find new ways to make revenue, leave the product alone.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...

    In Response to Re: Gasper's Modest proposal...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gasper's Modest proposal... : By contracting to 24 teams, do you think the road to the Super Bowl would be easier or harder for the Patriots? Would you feel the same if the Patriots were contracted in order to make the NFL a better product?  How about this.. Say we put your plan into effect 10 years from now.  Take 8 worsts teams in 2020.  You willing to gamble the Patriots aren't one of those teams?  My point is, you speak with a tone of arrogance in regards to the teams not playing well right now as reason to contract.  Carolina, while clearly the worst team in football in 2010 was in the Super Bowl just 7 years ago.  The 11-2 Atlanta Falcons haven't been to a super Bowl in 12 years.  By that number, Atlanta should go and Carolina should stay.  Detoit and Cleveland, teams OLDER than the Patriots have never been to a Super Bowl, should they go?  How about Dallas, the havent done anything in almost 2 decades and everyone hates them.. clearly they should be contracted.  Only, they are in the top 3 box office draws in opponents every year.  They make other teams money.    Whats your magical criteria?   
    Posted by LatenightOwl[/QUOTE]

    And you reply with a tone of miscomprehension.

    I have followed the Pats since the late 60s, so I have endured my share of bag-over-the-face seasons. I made comments about the quality of the league, not as an indictment of specific teams; the Panthers and Bengals just happen to be the current cellar dwellers, and I was not sugesting they are the teams to be cut.  My point is I think the league is best served by having the most elite athletes playing on Sunday (and a Monday game). I think more teams, more games (more injuries to starters), and more midweek games diminshes overall quality.

    There are a few franchises that always seem to be on the fringe of moving or struggling to get cost-effective stadium arrangements in place. Bottom line is that not every market in the United States is equipped to handle an NFL team. I am sure there are passionate football fans in Des Moines or Albuquerque or Anchorage who would be rabid NFL season ticket holders if their city had a franchise. But such markets, like Jacksonville, cannot support a competitive NFL team through thick and thin. And since in the NFL, the strong markets carry the weak (through shared television revenue), strong market owners need to add teams and games to increase the pie... when the better alternative (from a product quality standpoint) is to leave the pie the same size and reduce the teams.


     

Share