NFLPA executive director Maurice Smith has gone on record as saying categorically that the prospect of an 18-game NFL regular season has been taken off the table in the negotiations with the owners.

"It's something that our players don't want," he said. "Eighteen games is not in the best interest of our players' safety, so we're not doing it."

At a period in time in which we're learning more on a regular basis about the long-term consequences of multiple injuries on a player's playing career and post-game life (especially concussions), and during a period where so many of the games in Weeks 15-17 are utterly meaningless anyway (you think the Redskins, for example, wanted to suffer through two more pointless games?), this can only be good for the NFL and its fans that they stay at 16 games.

The NFL is among the most perfectly organized sports associations in the United States (and probably the world), so I say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and let's have the talks move on to other important topics of debate.

---

"You are boring me to death, and I'm already dead. You're boring me back to death."
--Zombie in a Starburst commercial

Fan of the Indianapolis Colts (Super Bowl XLI Champions), Indiana Pacers and Washington Nationals

Certified RFMC Member-- Ask To See My Credentials!

Co-Winner of Time's Person of the Year Award, 2006

Originally posted by Sec19Row53

---

Originally posted by Peter The Hegemon

---

I have to agree with ekedolphin. Whatever the merits (or demerits) of the extra game in terms of value for fans and competitiveness, I just can't see asking people to take even more blows to the head.

---


I don't understand this line of thinking. Where was the increase in injuries when the schedule went from 14 to 16 games? OK, I'll buy that the game is different now. So, where is the increase in injuries among playoff teams who appear in the Conference Championship game, or the Wild Card round teams that win. In those cases, they're already playing those two extra games.

---

The increase in injuries may not be immediately apparent in the short-term. I figure their reasoning is that, in the long-term, adding two games would have a deleterious effect.

And yes, I know they'd be removing a couple of preseason games as well and thus wouldn't "really" be lengthening the schedule. But naturally the starters don't play a whole lot in the preseason; it's used to to get them a little warmed up and into a rhythm for the regular season before letting the reserves play, and see what kind of future they have.

I also agree that preseason NFL football is major boring shit, though.

(edited by ekedolphin on 10.3.11 2009)

---

"You are boring me to death, and I'm already dead. You're boring me back to death."
--Zombie in a Starburst commercial

Fan of the Indianapolis Colts (Super Bowl XLI Champions), Indiana Pacers and Washington Nationals

Certified RFMC Member-- Ask To See My Credentials!

Co-Winner of Time's Person of the Year Award, 2006