Enhanced Season / Developmental League

[Malkavian Raven]

If you haven't heard by now, there's a lot of discussion surrounding the NFL taking two preseason games and adding them to the regular season (two preseason games, eighteen regular season games). It's not an "extended" season (as they're saying), it's an "enhanced season". Just your thoughts.

Also, they're talking of a developmental league. Much like NFL Europe, but in the US during the spring. Again, your thoughts?


-----

I think the preseason should be left alone, it gives players who are fighting for 1st team roster spots a better chance of showing their talents. I think cutting it in half would not only hurt the preseason roster adjustments, but the "enhanced" regular season would mean players would want to be compensated with more money & the risk of being injured goes up.

As for the developmental league; with college ball and the NFL, along with other interstate leagues, walk-ons -- I think a developmental league would just muddy the waters even more. In no way, shape or form would I'd like to see the NFL turn into the MLB.

So, I'm against both.

[BuckWilds]

I'm for a developmental league. There are a lot of guys that have the ability to play at a high level and could contribute to an organization... I doubt there would be a 1-to-1 ratio from pro teams to development teams, but it would be neat to see the Wilmington Ravens or something like that.

As far as extended seasons are concerned, I worry about player durability. If the season was 18 games long, we might not be talking about 1 or 2 more years for Ray right now. We could be talking about 1 or 2 more years until he's eligible for the Hall of Fame.

Development League: Yes
Extended Season: No

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='Zhamtao' date='16 June 2010 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1276739343' post='422518']
I'm for a developmental league. There are a lot of guys that have the ability to play at a high level and could contribute to an organization... I doubt there would be a 1-to-1 ratio from pro teams to development teams, but it would be neat to see the Wilmington Ravens or something like that.

As far as extended seasons are concerned, I worry about player durability. If the season was 18 games long, we might not be talking about 1 or 2 more years for Ray right now. We could be talking about 1 or 2 more years until he's eligible for the Hall of Fame.

Development League: Yes
Extended Season: No
[/quote]

Couldn't agree more.

I feel bad for some college guys I watched who had successful careers but don't get drafted for whatever reason. A developmental league would allow them to show off their skills.

[JO_75]

[quote name='Zhamtao' date='16 June 2010 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1276739343' post='422518']
Development League: Yes
Extended Season: No
[/quote]


[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='16 June 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1276742187' post='422563']
Couldn't agree more.

I feel bad for some college guys I watched who had successful careers but don't get drafted for whatever reason. A developmental league would allow them to show off their skills.
[/quote]

I agree with both of you. Developmental league... all for it but isn't that what the UFL is suppose to be?

On the extended season.. before hand when this idea was thought about I was all for it because I would have enjoyed more meaningful games if it meant less pre-season games. Now... no. Sure it would be nice for me and others who love football and would want more regular season games but we have to take in players health and conditioning. Plus the NFL would have to open up from the 53 man roster to a 60 man roster to account for injuries that happen throughout the season. With only a 53 man roster, teams would run out of bodies if injuries did get that bad.

Please Roger Goodell, you are watering down the NFL with bogus penalties and taking the game of football away, we don't need it to be watered down even more by adding games to the regular season. By all means if you want to do anything about the pre-season stop teams charging regular season price tickets for pre-season games and just maybe we would be ok with 4 pre-season games if they didn't cost the same price as a regular season game!

[Alexir]

I can watch football in the spring and not have to watch the Orioles? I'm all in.

[MKdave]

[quote name='JO_75' date='17 June 2010 - 04:23 AM' timestamp='1276745034' post='422600']
I agree with both of you. Developmental league... all for it but isn't that what the UFL is suppose to be?

[/quote]

Actually the UFL is supposed to be a rival league. And it's serving more as a last chance saloon than a developmental league.
NFL Europe was a developmental league, where teams have an affiliate in that league and can assign players to that team.

As for the question, I'm for both, with an asterisk. I would prefer them to add 5 or 6 roster spots than add a development league, but if they won't expand the rosters then a development league is quite necessary. The practice squad just doesn't do the job more full roster spots or a development league does.
I also think that, as I have said in other threads, the season should be extended to 17 games instead of 18 and getting rid of 2 preseason contests.

[George70]

Put my vote down as being in favor of the developmental league, and against the extended season. It is my belief that the season is long enough as it is, and we wouldn't want to extend the season, including the super Bowl, into the month of March.

The developmental league would make good sense, at least to me, because there are most likely some younger players who may not be ready for the NFL just yet. This is where a developmental league could - and would - come in handy.

[JO_75]

Question, we have all this talk about expanding the regular season and cutting down the pre-season, I have a better idea. Why don't we just cut the pre-season to 2 games and just keep the regular season at 16 games? That is much easier and a very simple solution rather expanding the regular season by adding 2 games to make up for subtracting 2 pre-season games. I don't get why we need to add to make up for subtracting pre-season games.

I say just go to 2 pre-season games, add a "bye" week a week before the first regular season game for all the players(meaning when the 4th pre-season game is suppose to happen it's a bye week) so players can be healthier for the season and most likely be more healthier down the stretch.

[BuckWilds]

[quote name='JO_75' date='18 June 2010 - 01:15 PM' timestamp='1276881321' post='423401']
Question, we have all this talk about expanding the regular season and cutting down the pre-season, I have a better idea. Why don't we just cut the pre-season to 2 games and just keep the regular season at 16 games? That is much easier and a very simple solution rather expanding the regular season by adding 2 games to make up for subtracting 2 pre-season games. I don't get why we need to add to make up for subtracting pre-season games.

I say just go to 2 pre-season games, add a "bye" week a week before the first regular season game for all the players(meaning when the 4th pre-season game is suppose to happen it's a bye week) so players can be healthier for the season and most likely be more healthier down the stretch.
[/quote]

Well, that's similar to one of the ideas being kicked around by the owners. The owners want more money, but they're not necessarily going to offer to the players what the players consider a fair share.

The reason the owners don't want 2+16 is that the 4+18 equal more money for them. 2+18 would still be more money since they'd be replacing 2 lower revenue preseason games with 2 regular season games.

What I've seen is that if a player currently makes $1.6 million, or $100,000/game, they wouldn't necessarily make $1.8 million, or that same $100,000 per game in an 18-game schedule. They'd get a percentage of revenue. So theoretically, the players would have to play more, but for less money per game.

[MKdave]

[quote name='MKdave' timestamp='1276810432' post='423018']
I also think that, as I have said in other threads, the season should be extended to 17 games instead of 18 and getting rid of 2 preseason contests.
[/quote]

Mo' fo' stole my idea:

[url="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/27/a-case-for-17-games-not-18/#more"]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/27/a-case-for-17-games-not-18/#more[/url]

[Rav'n Maniac]

Although you guys all make valid points, I had to vote yes to both. On the enhanced season, there are some issues that need to addressed for it to be successful. I don't agree that there is truly any greater injury risk to players with a 18 game season. The injury risk begins when they walk out on the practice field during OTAs. They play this game for the love of it, the love of money or both, so the rewards vs risks are much greater.

(1) The players need to be equally compensated for the additional games. Whatever their average salary is per game during 16 games, should be added equally for the additional 2 games. (100K per game @16 = 1.6M / 100K @18 = 1.8M)

(2) The rosters need to be expanded to 65 players.

(3) There should be an additional bye week added.

I feel that when this happens, the owners, the players & the fans will all be happy.

On the developmental league, great idea! Keeps unsigned players following college from going to other leagues in or out of the country. Gives these players an opportunity to hone their skills under NFL supervision and quality coaching. Also gives the teams an additional place to draw a replacement from should a player go out on IR during the season.