2020 Pats: DT Byron Cowart Tests Positive

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
12,529
A longer season is far different than the NFL adding 2 more games to the schedule for each team. If it's still 16 games per team, spread out over 19 weeks instead of 17, doesn't everyone make more money despite the fact that each team still plays the same number of games they always have?

But you might be right that it's the NFLPA not lovin' this for some reason that I cannot think of.
Yeah I probably should have rephrased it to playing regular season games well into January with more bye weeks or “flex weeks” built in.

I agree it seems like a mild concession for more flexibility (and player safety) but who knows. That’s why I was wondering out loud whether maybe it was the union pushing back on the idea of regular season football well into January and playoff football well into February because it doesn’t make sense for TV and the NFL to be rigid about it. Most of us agree it likely makes them more money.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,371
The NFL likely makes more money spreading a season out over 18 or 19 weeks, but it would make even more money adding a 17th game to the inventory. Going with an 18-week schedule for 2020 was going to blunt the NFL's push for getting the NFLPA to agree to the 17th game.

Also, the networks pay the big money for NFL games to sell ads, yes, but also to promote their other programming. If the NFL won't wrap up its season and clear the airwaves for other programs (e.g., by adding Tuesday games), that runs counter to what the networks want to a certain extent.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,305
The NFL likely makes more money spreading a season out over 18 or 19 weeks, but it would make even more money adding a 17th game to the inventory. Going with an 18-week schedule for 2020 was going to blunt the NFL's push for getting the NFLPA to agree to the 17th game.

Also, the networks pay the big money for NFL games to sell ads, yes, but also to promote their other programming. If the NFL won't wrap up its season and clear the airwaves for other programs (e.g., by adding Tuesday games), that runs counter to what the networks want to a certain extent.
Wouldn't a tuesday night nfl game blow away the ratings for whatever the network normally shows on a tuesday night? Somehow I don't think a network would complain about getting an exclusive night of football essentially for free
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,371
Players had the chance to opt out and make $350,000 for doing nothing. I've never come CLOSE to making $350,000 in a year. That's years' worth of work for me (and probably most of us here), and they could have taken that for *opting out*.
Not sure that's fair given that "The average NFL career lasts 3.3 years, according to the NFL Players' Association". Assuming that a non-contact year may count the same as a half of a contact year (speculation) and they will be taxed at the highest tax bracket a $350,000 isn't much. True they can go on to other careers but still
 

jercra

No longer respects DeChambeau
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
3,147
Arvada, Co
Wouldn't a tuesday night nfl game blow away the ratings for whatever the network normally shows on a tuesday night? Somehow I don't think a network would complain about getting an exclusive night of football essentially for free
Yes, and that's part of the problem. CBS doesn't carry JUST the NFL. They negotiate with other leagues and content providers as well. Choosing good ratings for an extra 2 nights a year over the remaining 8 months of the year is bad for business. Same is true for Disney and NBC obviously. I'm pretty sure the PGA Tour would be none too happy to find the Super bowl show up on the same Sunday as the final round of the Players, for instance.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
Yes, and that's part of the problem. CBS doesn't carry JUST the NFL. They negotiate with other leagues and content providers as well. Choosing good ratings for an extra 2 nights a year over the remaining 8 months of the year is bad for business. Same is true for Disney and NBC obviously. I'm pretty sure the PGA Tour would be none too happy to find the Super bowl show up on the same Sunday as the final round of the Players, for instance.
Why would the PGA tour care? They usually schedule the TPC Stadium Course(Waste Management Open) the weekend of the Super Bowl. And the round is over before the game gets going.
 

jercra

No longer respects DeChambeau
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
3,147
Arvada, Co
Why would the PGA tour care? They usually schedule the TPC Stadium Course(Waste Management Open) the weekend of the Super Bowl. And the round is over before the game gets going.
It was just meant as an example of things the networks have to consider. It's not just about what the NFL wants or what's best for one or two days of ratings. Maybe a better example is the NCAA. Why doesn't the nfl just schedule games for Saturdays and Sundays? They'd dominate ratings and own weekends. It would also make rescheduling these covid games easier.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Goodell strategy of "just plow ahead making random ad hoc changes without an overall plan because we're the NFL" sounds vaguely familiar.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
But you might be right that it's the NFLPA not lovin' this for some reason that I cannot think of.
I think it's pretty obvious the NFLPA wouldn't love it; it's more time in season and a shorter offseason. We've heard comments from some players who are isolating themselves apart from their families during the season; obviously, the less time they have to do that, the better.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
I think it's pretty obvious the NFLPA wouldn't love it; it's more time in season and a shorter offseason. We've heard comments from some players who are isolating themselves apart from their families during the season; obviously, the less time they have to do that, the better.
The players don't need to isolate from their families. That isn't required, they are not in a bubble. They are living at home.

So I am not sure I understand this or how it has any material impact on extending the season by 2 weeks.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
The players don't need to isolate from their families. That isn't required, they are not in a bubble. They are living at home.
They are not required to, but some of them are doing so. Some of them barely see their families during normal seasons, because they play in a different city than they live in in the offseason, or have kids from prior relationships that live in other cities, etc.

So I am not sure I understand this or how it has any material impact on extending the season by 2 weeks.
I'm not saying it should be the paramount concern, but the question was posed why the NFLPA would oppose extending the season, and it's because having more season and less offseason is less desirable for the players as human beings.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
What is the chance that there was some back room negotiations where the White House told the NFL they would back them in having a season as long as the NFL treated the schedule the same as always? The NFL gets their full $ea$on and Trump gets the appearance of normalcy in the face of COVID.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
They are not required to, but some of them are doing so. Some of them barely see their families during normal seasons, because they play in a different city than they live in in the offseason, or have kids from prior relationships that live in other cities, etc.
Some. How many? 2?

And how many players live in a different place than they play? That also seems like an incredibly small sample size.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,204
What is the chance that there was some back room negotiations where the White House told the NFL they would back them in having a season as long as the NFL treated the schedule the same as always? The NFL gets their full $ea$on and Trump gets the appearance of normalcy in the face of COVID.
What backing was needed from Trump or the White House? What are they gaining out of this exchange?