As NFL owners and players near the 11th hour of negotiations for a new CBA, they will vehemently argue about revenue sharing, TV contracts, retired player benefits and a rookie wage scale. And yet, Roger Goodell’s side believes they have a simple solution that will make everyone happier and, more importantly, richer: an 18 game schedule.
As the owners depict it, two more regular season games will inject $500 million of new revenue into the league, with little added cost. What they fail to mention is that it’s of little added cost to them. While they simply have to print more tickets, the negative effects of an extra two games would fall on everyone around them, from the players to the fans who attend the games.
1) Long Term Player Health This season, more than any before it, showed us the long-term risks of a career in football. Two weeks ago, a former Super Bowl champion texted his family to request that his brain be donated to science, loaded a gun, and shot himself in the chest. We understand the unforgiving trauma inflicted from a high-speed blow to the head, but scientists are only now discovering that repetitive contact to the helmet over the course of a season can be just as damaging. A recent Sports Illustrated feature investigated how continual close-range helmet collisions, the kind that happen between linemen on every play of a game, can gradually lower the brain efficiency of a player as the season progresses. Adding another two games at the end of a season could exponentially damage a player’s brain, pushing some further towards the same fate as Dave Duerson.
Long-term player health risks aren’t only limited to head trauma. Fans hear all about injuries during their team’s quest for a playoff berth, but little noise is made of the multiple surgeries players undergo after the season ends. A Tom Brady foot operation would be front-page news in October, but in March it is barely a blurb, even though the pain and recovery process for the player is the same. Gary Brackett, in an interview on Sirius NFL Radio last week, said that he is held together with duct tape in the final weeks of the season. Adding more games for players to “gut out” with heavily damaged bodies can leave many in crutches when they finally hang up their cleats.
2) The Law of Diminishing Returns As long-term injury damage threatens the futures of players, short-term injuries from an 18 game schedule would hurt the immediate quality of the game. In recent years, we’ve seen Wes Welker, Phillip Rivers, Ladanian Tomlinson, Jay Cutler, Charles Woodson, and many more Pro Bowl players have to miss part of the playoffs due to late-season injuries. For many of the same reasons stated above, players are more prone to hurt themselves late in the season after weeks of wear and tear to their bodies. This year’s Packers aside, we’ve seen many a team’s championship hopes derailed not by poor performance or coaching, but because it was simply worn down by injuries. The more games that the league tacks onto the end of a season, the more likely we are to see Caleb Hanie and Billy Volek determining who goes to the Super Bowl. The law of diminishing returns spares no product, not even one as popular as the NFL.
3) Winter Weather For the fans, an extended schedule would bring extreme weather conditions at games that extend into mid-February. As we saw in Philadelphia and Detroit this year, winter contests could bring logistical nightmares or major catastrophes. For the record, I love cold-weather games. I tailgated for 8 hours in negative-23 weather at the 2007 NFC Championship between the Giants and Packers and it was the greatest day of my life. But most fans would rather flip from game to game on DirectTV with their fantasy football stats in front of them than sit in sub-zero temperatures at a stadium on a Sunday. The NFL already doesn’t sell out a significant portion of its games and it should expect even worse attendance numbers if it stretches its regular season into mid-January.
3) Winter Weather For the fans, an extended schedule would bring extreme weather conditions at games that extend into mid-February. As we saw in Philadelphia and Detroit this year, winter contests could bring logistical nightmares or major catastrophes. For the record, I love cold-weather games. I tailgated for 8 hours in negative-23 weather at the 2007 NFC Championship between the Giants and Packers and it was the greatest day of my life. But most fans would rather flip from game to game on DirectTV with their fantasy football stats in front of them than sit in sub-zero temperatures at a stadium on a Sunday. The NFL already doesn’t sell out a significant portion of its games and it should expect even worse attendance numbers if it stretches its regular season into mid-January.
4) Fallen Records This might only be a concern to history buffs like myself, but it pains me to think of the damage that an extended schedule could do to the record books. Dan Marino’s 5,084 passing yards and Erik Dickerson’s 2,105 rushing yards in a season are marks that have stood for 16 years. But an extra two games each season would be the death knell for those records. After witnessing Brady’s unforgettable 2007 season, it would be a shame to see Sam Bradford pass for his 51st touchdown in Week 19.
There are numerous reasons to oppose an 18 game season, but simplest one might be the fact that no one wants it. Here is Peter King’s take on fan sentiment for the proposal:
"I've thought all along that the majority of fans don't really support the idea of an 18-game schedule. In an injury-free world, they would; who wouldn't? But Commissioner Roger Goodell keeps saying fans favor the 18-game schedule. They only favor it, in my opinion, in order to NOT have four preseason games they have to pay regular-season prices for. But that's a different story than actually saying you want 18 games when so many players are getting hurt every week. And so on Friday, I asked my Twitter followers if they favored either:
a. Two preseason games and 18 regular-season games.
b. Four preseason games and 16 regular-season games.
c. Two preseason games and 16 regular-season games.
The results, over a 40-hour voting period, give us a pretty good sample -- 1,200 votes in all. How the voters came down:
C (2+16): 622 votes, 51.8 percent.
B (4+16): 363 votes, 30.3 percent.
A (2+18): 215 votes, 17.9 percent."
I become outraged whenever I hear Goodell claim that an 18 game schedule is what the fans want. It is the equivalent of a racketeering mobster saying that local businesses want to pay him for protection, even though he’s the one who they need to be protected from. Fans do not want two more regular season games. They want to stop paying $100 for an exhibition game just so they can keep their season tickets. Eliminating two preseason games does not necessitate adding two regular season games. But there's little hope of the owners giving up that revenue stream, no matter how much the fans dislike it.
When looking at an 18 game schedule, it’s easy to get excited at the prospect of two more weeks of football. But this change will not come without a cost. Whether it be the players, coaches, or fans, each party will have to pay a price. Everyone except Roger Goodell and the owners, of course.
Image found here.
Pete,
ReplyDeleteI wholly disagree with the arguments thrown out by you and the majority of football analysts. Ultimately football is a business and the supply/demand curve is so far out of wack, that it will take extreme reasons to stop an 18 game season from occurring. I'm not saying that a 22 game season is appropriate. It's just that currently there is too much money to be made by all involved parties for it not to happen.
1) Injuries are a part of football. For better or worse the physicality of football runs hand in hand with its popularity. While player health is certainly a huge concern for players I truly believe it comes down to dollars. As it is now, demand far outweigh supply for football. Adding two more games will add tremendous revenue to the league and add to players' salaries. The only question is - how much money will it take for players to say "it's bad for my long-term health, but that's a nice paycheck?" They do it already by choosing football over baseball, basketball, or accounting.
2) Have you ever not watched a Giants' game because one of the star players was injured? Have you ever not watched a playoff game for the same reason? While I agree, viewership increases when you have a star player. Look at the ratings for games where Michael Vick played. But I argue that football viewership is tied to team performance relative to other teams. And since they're all in the same boat - adding two extra games will only add to viewership and revenues overall. In other words - you may suffer slightly on per game viewership, but overall you're making out. Because after all - demand far exceeds supply.
3) I love cold-weather games. It's true football. Adding winter games only increases my desire to watch football. Additionally domed stadiums are becoming the norm. I think it's a non-factor here.
4) I agree - I like consistent records. This change concerns me the most because it detracts from the overall experience of football.
I also want to point out that they are replacing two pre-season games. How many pre-season injuries have we seen? Why not make two of them count? Other than a small few (myself included) why not add regular season revenues to games that players usually hate playing in?
It's going to happen. Get used to it. There needs to be an adjustment due to the extreme demand > supply. And by merely replacing two pre-season games with two regular season games I think it addresses this in the most responsible way.
Perhaps there's another way to address the supply/demand problem? Expansion teams? Make the pro-bowl meaningful?
-Mike
Also, one other point:
ReplyDeleteDon't overlook the importance of an 18-game season to the CBA negotiations. Owners keep complaining about the costs of building and running stadiums. Turning 2 pre-season games into 2 regular season games adds revenue and increases the value of those assets (for the owners).
Looking at it a different way: By adding 2 regular season games you are increasing the size of the pie. Sure, players will point to increased injuries. However, the pie will be increased to such a size that both parties will make out.
I think that's why we haven't heard any CBA plans where an 18 game season is not included.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteThanks for reading, as always, and thanks for responding. A few comments on your comments:
- I think you are, like the owners, overestimating the demand for the game. Yes, football is more popular than ever. But teams in smaller markets struggle to sell out games. TV blackouts are becoming a norm. Teams that open new stadiums are struggling to sell PSLs. Although viewership is at a high, in-game attendance leaves much to be desired.
- Yes, the costs of stadiums are going up and owners are taking a lot of risk and expense in building them (which is much of their argument in these CBA negotiations). But no one asked them to build a new stadium. The Giants, Jets and Cowboys didn't build new stadiums because their old ones were falling apart. They built them to make more luxury boxes, sports bars and other revenue streams. Unfortunately, they grossly overestimated the demand for those products and now they are putting pressure on the players to compensate for their lack of foresight.
- What is one way to increase supply to meet demand? Thursday Night Football. The opening night game shows that football on Thursday nights can be just as big as it is on Monday nights. Thursday is historically the best day of the week for TV ratings. So why hasn't the NFL capitalized on this more? Because it insists on keeping the games on the NFL Network. I love the NFL Network, but is there any doubt that ratings would double if the NFL gave those games to FOX, CBS or ESPN? But if it did, the league would lose its weapon in its war against cable providers.
And this is the main crux of my argument. When it comes to expanding revenue, the owners refuse to give up any of their interests and instead put the onus on everyone else to make up for their mistakes. They already overestimated demand when they assumed that fans would pay $20,000 to keep their season tickets. And now I fear that they're overestimating the ability of their players to maintain the same quality of product when they ask them to increase output by 12.5%.