I knew someone had been throwing that suggestion out there over and over and over again but I wasn't sure who 😉 They want to add more games because it will bring in more money it's as simple as that. It won't make anything better as far as the game is concerned and the added potential for injury could make it worse. The neutral site would theoretically ad interest and even more money. Making more money isn't necessarily a bad thing but I think if they are going to get the players on board they are going to have to give up a quite a bit as well.
Originally Posted by: sschind
Hey, it was over and over with years apart from each other 😉 ...
Yeah I think more games could make it worse product as a whole, both from injuries standpoint, and because by the end of the year a number of teams have nothing to play for other than pride and individual players contracts already. More games just means more teams will have either locked up a spot or be already out of the chase by the season ended.
But this idea sorta split the difference of adding one single game, while not forcing anyone to give up a home game. As you point out, the players would still have to get on board, but I think a number of the players like playing somewhere different on a neutral site, but you're right that's not gonna move the needle at all for the Union.
Good idea,
To build on it, the players are going to want something.
Everyone, of course will get a 1 game raise, I would like to get rid of the 7 players who are inactive every week.
Make it a 53 man roster.
Also a relaxed IR.
Something similar to baseball.
Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan
I think most would prefer that in some shape or form.
Does this also come with an extra bye week?
Originally Posted by: gbguy20
I think they're two separate ideas, which could be combined if one wants to.
The non-NFL-city game is more about spreading NFL into new locations that it's normally not played in... depending on how to do it, it doesn't necessary have to be neutral locations (one idea I had was to set it up, for AFC gets it one year and the NFC gets it for another, letting the teams plan and decide where the games are played), but another could be the NFL and trying to get some international games (though those might be nice to have a bye week before or after).
The other extra bye weeks idea, was simply to expand the season in terms of number of weeks it's covered via TV, without necessary expanding the number of games, which the players might be more open to it (if you cut preseason shorter to counter the extra week time for players).
The first Packer game I saw live was at Milwaukee County Stadium in 1970. It was a preseason game against the Bears and ended in a 6-6 tie.
They could barely fit a football field in there, and both teams were on the same sideline.
Miller Park purposely was built as a baseball only stadium, and they can’t fit a football field in it no matter which way.
I myself think that was very short sighted. But that’s what they wanted.
Originally Posted by: Cheesey
I wasn't aware of Milwaukee's stadium, I just knew they used to play there some, I guess that's over with.