Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
How's this NFL 18-game schedule idea?
Assume for the moment that the NFL will have an 18-game season in the next CBA.
- Start with the current 16-game format (2 vs same division, 1 vs all teams in division in same conference, 1 vs all teams in other conference, 1 vs remaining teams in same conference = 16)
-- Example: Chicago Bears' 2011 schedule (2 vs DET, GB, MIN; 1 vs NFC South (ATL, CAR, NO, TB); 1 vs AFC West (DEN, KC, OAK, SD); 1 vs other NFC teams that finished 2nd in their division (SEA, PHI))
- Games 17 and 18 would be against teams from the other conference that finished in the same position. They would not be from the same division as regularly scheduled - rather, one would come from the inter-conference division the team faced last year, and the other from the division the team would face in its entirely next year.
-- Example: Last year, the NFC North played the AFC East in its entirety, and next year (2012) it is scheduled to play the AFC South. Therefore, the 17th and 18th games the Bears would play would be against whoever finished 2nd in those division (NE, IND). (I know 2011 will not go to 18 games, but this is just an example.)
- Further, who the home team is for Games 17 and 18 can be further standardized by declaring which conference would be the home team for each pair. This would then be switched after one cycle (4 years).
-- Example: Say we declare that for the NFC vs AFC-team-from-last-season's-division, the NFC will be the home team. In the Bears' case, they would visit Indianapolis and the Patriots would visit them. I've worked through the logistics, and this will work for all teams. The reverse (vs. IND, @ NE) would also work.
Advantages:
* Minimal disruption to scheduling pattern (not removing any teams currently scheduled, only adding new ones)
* Standardized scheduling system known in advance (i.e, no picking teams just to fill up the slots before season in question starts and potentially screwing over a team for a more arbitrary reason)
* Still guarantees that every team will meet each other at least once every four years, and a potential reduction in waiting times for teams from different conferences to meet each other (admittedly part of this will be chance, but the odds will be greater than 0% for sure).
* Maintains a measure of parity (1st place teams get other 1st place teams, 4th place teams get other 4th place teams)
Thoughts? Suggestions? Alternative proposals?
$0.02 - maybe so, but that is not a realistic expectation at this point.
I meant to say "whoever finished 1st" in the 2nd dash of the proposal.
I wasn't asking for anyone's opinion over whether the league SHOULD expand to 18 games.
Jigokusabre - That might be a better idea, actually.
7 Answers
- jigokusabreLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Wait, why is an 18 game schedule bad? Is there some pressing need to have 4 preseason games instead of 2?
Anyhow, the two new games should be against placing teams from the opposing conference excluding the conference the team played the year before. That means that if the Patriots had the 18 game schedule for 2011, they would play:
6 games from the AFC East teams.
4 Games against AFC West teams
4 Games against the NFC East teams
2 Games against the first place teams in the AFC North and AFC South
2 Games against the first place teams in the NFC South and West (not the NFC North, since they played the NFC North in 2010).
- $0.02 REMAINSLv 71 decade ago
I think there should be fewer games, not more. Maybe even pare it back down to 14.
The more games, the less meaningful and critical each game is (to a limit).
I realize that, just like in baseball. Fewer games means fewer tickets and less merchandise sold, which means less income for team owners (who have more clout to approve/reject a schedule change). And most players won't speak up against playing more games (since they're the ones who could get injured) because they need the owners more than the owners need the players.
I understand perfectly well why it would not happen (at this point) But overall, I am against extending the season any longer than it already is.
- 1 decade ago
If the league goes to 18 games a year, why not just do this?
-6 games in the division
-4 games against one division in the same conference
-4 games against another division in the same conference
-4 games against one division in the other conference
Then each team plays every team in its conference every 2 years, each team plays every team in the other conference every 4 years, teams don't get punished for having success, it's super-easy for fans to follow, and you get a whopping 16 common games to compare teams in the same division. The only downside is we don't get to see Colts/Patriots every year.
- hooklinesinkerLv 61 decade ago
The fact that your proposal assumes an 18-game season automatically makes it not worth discussing. What are you going to do with your nice little 18-game plan when 30% more players end their season with some serious injuries and you will be forced to play second tier players in your league?
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- unrueLv 45 years ago
Make a determination to not grow to be a kind of celebration individuals who drink at all times and get intimate with men. Make a determination to be a constructive and candy character. Be riskless...Love you sis. <three
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Keep at it 16 games, period..end of story.
