Why Not Two Bye Weeks?

[dgambill]

Just wondering what would be the opinion of people and what might inhibit the NFL from going from 1 bye week to 2? Start the season 1 week sooner (either eliminate a pre-season game or the HOF game). I understand the it is very hot and playing in extreme warm conditions could be harmful but the teams are already working out during this time anyways. My proposal would allow teams to have an extra bye week during the year to first improve player health conditions and two to improve Thursday Night and London or other foreign planed games. With the extra bye they could move it so that a team making a trip to London could perhaps leave a week early to acclimate better to the environment (we seem to always see poor play from one or both sides in these games) and two which is worse these Thursday night games. There simply isn't enough time for a player to rest, recouperate, and prepare for a game in 4 days and have two teams play at a high level. We often see players like Gronk or other hi profile players forced to sit out because they are too banged up to compete on Thursday night. So...before each teams scheduled Thursday night games simply institute a bye before them...thus giving them a week and half to prepare. If player safety and quality of the game improves I don't see why it would be a bad thing. NFL is losing revenue and I think they have to look at improving the quality on the field...and allowing players another bye week can be the difference in keep the best quality players on the field for all 16 games and improve the entertainment with hopefully more competitive football in these games that have proven to be below standard. What do you think? I think if the league doesn't change it will morph into something nobody wants to watch anymore.

[Finball]

They did have that in 1993. But players and teams didn't like it, so it was dropped. Too disruptive of regular schedule or something like that.

 

And NFL still probably doesn't like the idea (don't know why) because their mouthpiece, Peter King, has been against the idea.

 

I'd personally like it. Helps reduce injuries, improve quality of football and even make more revenue for NFL if they are smart about it.

[dgambill]

6 minutes ago, Finball said:

They did have that in 1993. But players and teams didn't like it, so it was dropped. Too disruptive of regular schedule or something like that.

 

And NFL still probably doesn't like the idea (don't know why) because their mouthpiece, Peter King, has been against the idea.

 

I'd personally like it. Helps reduce injuries, improve quality of football and even make more revenue for NFL if they are smart about it.

Well did they have London games and Thursday Night games in 1993? I don't remember them if they did. Isn't that the point...those games are so disruptive to the schedule we are getting poor quality? Thus putting in an extra bye before these games actually can get them back to some symbolance of normalcy....or at least its so abnormal already it can't hurt. Mostly I think this helps players rest and get bodies right so they play more games. But yeah...like you said...improve the quality on the field should be the goal for everyone.

[Finball]

22 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Well did they have London games and Thursday Night games in 1993? I don't remember them if they did. Isn't that the point...those games are so disruptive to the schedule we are getting poor quality? Thus putting in an extra bye before these games actually can get them back to some symbolance of normalcy....or at least its so abnormal already it can't hurt. Mostly I think this helps players rest and get bodies right so they play more games. But yeah...like you said...improve the quality on the field should be the goal for everyone.

 

Nope, didn't have either.

[SaturdayAllDay]

I think the extra bye week is something they were thinking of adding if/when they expand the schedule to 18 games. I think they are holding off until they make a final decision on that first. 

[JaguarsWoman]

When the NFL proposed restructuring the season to be 2/18 instead of 4/16 the NFLPA insisted on having two byes if they do it. As it is, I don't hear anyone complaining about having only one bye in 17 weeks.

 

In the case of London games, the NFL should not have scheduled the first one in Week 3. Both teams wanted a more middle-of-the-season bye week and I have never seen a team benefit from being idle in Week 4. Jet lag cannot be the lone excuse for losing, but the Jaguars and Ravens probably could have won their Week 4 games in Week 5.

[mikey287]

CFL added an extra after they took away wearing pads in practice...ya know, to help account for the surge in injuries that that will lead to...

[oldunclemark]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 3:04 PM, SaturdayAllDay said:

I think the extra bye week is something they were thinking of adding if/when they expand the schedule to 18 games. I think they are holding off until they make a final decision on that first. 

I think you are right.   To have two bye weeks, you need to eliminate some exhibit games..

[JaguarsWoman]

On 11/4/2017 at 8:54 AM, mikey287 said:

CFL added an extra after they took away wearing pads in practice...ya know, to help account for the surge in injuries that that will lead to...

 

That would not have helped Deshaun Watson or Teddy Bridgewater.

[dgambill]

3 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

I think you are right.   To have two bye weeks, you need to eliminate some exhibit games..

I don't think you need 18 games but we need to eliminate the 4 days prep for a Thursday night game...that's just dumb. Just start practice a week early don't even need to shorten preseason if that's an owner issue. It isn't going to prevent injuries necessarily but it should allow players body to heal up some and those that are missing games could use that bye instead of sitting out live action.

[mikey287]

3 hours ago, JaguarsWoman said:

 

That would not have helped Deshaun Watson or Teddy Bridgewater.

 

Was sardonic...

[Myles]

I like the idea.    I like a longer NFL season.  This would allow them to get to 18 weeks without adding a game.  Perfect.  

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 11/3/2017 at 1:10 PM, Finball said:

They did have that in 1993. But players and teams didn't like it, so it was dropped. Too disruptive of regular schedule or something like that.

 

And NFL still probably doesn't like the idea (don't know why) because their mouthpiece, Peter King, has been against the idea.

 

I'd personally like it. Helps reduce injuries, improve quality of football and even make more revenue for NFL if they are smart about it.

 

I think the league has expanded since then, and the wildly popular DFS leagues keep peoples interest all season, unlike the early 1990's.  Give up pre-season game 4, IMHO. But coaches would bark about that.  Tough noogies.

 

6 hours ago, Myles said:

I like the idea.    I like a longer NFL season.  This would allow them to get to 18 weeks without adding a game.  Perfect.  

 

They lose ticket and concessions revenue... but player contracts aren't boogered up, and longer season means more ad time for sponsors/networks.  Thus increased contact cost to make up / surpass earlier losses?

 

Hmmmm... might be viable.