The NFL Wants to Play More Games
Because of course they do
While Olympics fever is well underway, and the network that’s airing it, NBC, officially signs a massive deal to reclaim the NBA, today we’ll be taking a look at the one sport that still indisputably rules America’s airwaves.
That’d be football, as the NFL is looking to add some more dominance to its schedule. An 18-game season is back on the table, mainly because it never truly left the conversation.
The head of the NFL Players Association, Lloyd Howell, told the Washington Post a few weeks ago that his organization had begun talking with the league about making 18 happen, at what he called “a very high level.” In this case, that translates to heavy on ambition, light on details.
We don’t know much of anything about what this would look like, but I’m pretty sure we’ll find out real soon. This is going to happen. It won’t be next year, or the one after that, or probably even the one after that. But the one after that? Now we’re talking. Oh yeah. We’re in range.
No ifs here, only hows. How does this brutal, injury-riddled sport stretch out for yet another game?
Would they steal one from the preseason schedule and effectively start a week early? Would they tack one on in the middle or end so the Super Bowl could take over President’s Day Weekend, as Goodell has openly called for?
Hold up, though. Didn’t we just do this? Yeah, actually. The NFL added a 17th game starting with the 2021 season. It’s not like it’s been very long. Raising the prospect of 18 games already makes it all the more clear that 17 was never meant to be a destination. It was always just a stop on the way to the real destination.
Roger Goodell has had this in mind for some time. I can remember this coming up in the CBA talks in 2019, and I’m sure it was raised before then too. All due respect, to the limited extent that Roger Goodell can be said to have a masterplan on anything, this would be it.
As recently as May, Goodell downplayed pursuing the idea right now, but the cynic in me sees comments like these as goodwill groundwork:
"The key thing for us is looking at making sure we continue to do the things that make our game safer," Goodell said. "Seventeen games is a long season, so we want to make sure we look at that and make sure that we continue the safety efforts."
Goodell added: "Working with our players association is No. 2. We would reach an agreement with them if we're going to proceed on that. But also, third, and this is not necessarily in order, is the quality of our game. We would do it in the context of reducing the number of preseason games. We think that's a good trade: less preseason games and more regular-season games. I think most anybody would think that was beneficial. But again those other two factors are important."
My Goodell critiques aside, I think that’s all fair. It’s been suggested many times over, and I’ll join in: a second bye week for every team is probably the answer if it’s player health you’re concerned about. I’m not generally of the opinion that the NFL is all that concerned about player health, and it’s hard to argue that adding another game per year is a positive on that front.
That all said, I’d like to think I’m pretty clear-eyed on the incentives that will inevitably Tush Push this over the line. Not that that’s impressive. This one’s pretty easy.
More games = more money. Replacing a preseason game with a regular season game is a meaningful difference. That’s more broadcast money, more ticket revenue. On a less quantifiable level, it’s another week’s worth of real estate in the American media diet, which is probably a good thing from where they’re standing. They see the NBA’s success in becoming a nearly year-round topic of sports discussion and think to themselves: yeah, this wouldn’t hurt. Every week helps, right?
The primary intrigue here, then, is what they’ll trade the players to make it happen. My guess would also be money. Novel, I know. But they’ll say something to the effect of: an extra game adds to the pot, so your piece gets bigger as the whole does.
They might have to give something else up to get the Players Union to negotiate in the middle of a deal. The last CBA — the one that gave us the 17-game season — was signed in March 2020, and they’re not due to renegotiate until 2030.
Will we wait that long for 18? Possibly, but my guess is no. I think they’ll beat it by a few years, and while I base that on very little beyond the league’s clear ambition to make it there, I think that’s plenty. Don’t you? Sure you do.
An extra two games from the league we grew up with may not sound like a lot, but it is for the players suiting up. Most starters aren’t playing real, heavy minutes in those preseason games anyways. It’s not a trade. It’s an addition.
They understand that. So some guys say: alright, cool. If you’re gonna pay us for our troubles, then sure. Let’s work out the details, but you got a deal.
Other guys are less open. The survey numbers might surprise you. They surprised me. It’s pretty close to an even split, per ESPN: “46% were in favor of an 18-game schedule with stipulations and 8% voted yes without stipulations.”
If those numbers hold up, they’re already enough. A simple majority is all they need, so it really comes down to defining those stipulations.
It’s not a trivial sacrifice for the players, whose bodies — and literal brains — are the ones impacted by the added attrition.
But I did say I was clear-eyed about the incentives, and there’s only one way this is heading.
The question will, and should, be asked: if we’re going to 18 in the name of maxing out the money, what’s to stop us from going to 20? 25? How about a game every damn week?
I think the league knows enough to know that there’s a line they shouldn’t cross. Diminishing returns is not an unfamiliar concept to the bunch of Scrooge McDucks that own NFL teams.
I don’t know where that line is, and I’m not sure they do either. They’ll feel it out, and probably run the numbers, once we have a few years of 18 games behind us.
But then, to answer that obligatory question, I’m sure it will come up: what if we got rid of the whole preseason, which no one likes anyways? That’ll bring us to 19 or 20. Add a third bye week and call it a season? Whaddya say?
I say: get used to this conversation. We’ll be having it again before you know it.
Also, This
🏀 I can’t even gather all of my Olympics observations here. There’s just too much. What I can say is: I’ve thoroughly enjoyed turning it on every morning to see what I can throw on in the background, and I’ve actually enjoyed the reminder that I, ersatz sportswriter, know very little about a lot of sports.
As I Notes’d about, the rugby was fantastic. Absolutely massive ending for the USA Women, who won as time expired on an 80-meter breakaway: a dead sprint after two broken tackles to take out a really good team in Australia. To medal in this tournament is a big deal for the U.S., which has yet to welcome rugby into its heart at scale. Maybe this helps change that? Love to see it.
One of my latest discoveries is 3x3 basketball, a sport which I feel the U.S. should probably be better at but is softened by another reminder, which is that Canyon Barry shoots free throws in the same style as his pops. HYB.
📺 That ESPN-Fox-WBD sports bundle has a name and a price tag. For the low low price of $42.99/month, signing up for Venu will get you all the sports on offer from those three networks. WBD’s contributions will no longer include the NBA after this season though, so I wonder if that’s baked into their projections. I’ll be pretty curious to see how those numbers shake out. Internal forecasts are reportedly aiming for 5 million subs in its first five years, so I guess that’s the pass/fail line. I’m a little skeptical, so long as all three continue to sell their own separate streaming packages, but why speculate, right? Let’s check back in in five. Years, that is.
🏐 Word on the street is that the North Brooklyn Baddies may need an extra player next week, which could mean a call-up for yours truly. Truly, desperate times. Earlier, Laura said something to the effect of: “Look, if you suck, then we’ll just bench you.” Harsh, but fair! I’ll report back.