|
|
Post by frozendisc on Aug 2, 2022 7:17:29 GMT -7
TT has built a roster capable of winning the Super Bowl......I say they do just that! I hope so... This can be our year finally! I believe it will come down to which team has the most left in the tank at the end of the season and playoff momentum. I don't necessarily agree with them adding more games to the season, I think we're getting down to the point where they will need to give teams 2 bye weeks... I believe it comes down to health...... Expansion of the season has reached it's maximum without expanding roster, which I think should be done anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by frozendisc on Aug 2, 2022 7:19:18 GMT -7
I hope so... This can be our year finally! I believe it will come down to which team has the most left in the tank at the end of the season and playoff momentum. I don't necessarily agree with them adding more games to the season, I think we're getting down to the point where they will need to give teams 2 bye weeks... expanded rosters too. I am all for it, but adding players will add costs, and those costs must be considerably less than revenue generated by additional game/games.
|
|
|
|
Post by joemcrugby on Aug 2, 2022 9:05:44 GMT -7
I am all for it, but adding players will add costs, and those costs must be considerably less than revenue generated by additional game/games. With the massive new television / streaming deals in the pipeline, I'm not so sure about that. The NFL was pushing heavily for an 18-game schedule for that reason, but they were forced to compromise at 17 games due to the NFLPA's and players' resistance to more games. The extra players on the roster will be NFL minimum contracts, and even when considering all of the other related costs for a player to be on a roster the extra game would bring in billion(s) in additional revenue when totaling all of the different deals.
|
|
|
|
Post by frozendisc on Aug 2, 2022 17:13:33 GMT -7
I am all for it, but adding players will add costs, and those costs must be considerably less than revenue generated by additional game/games.With the massive new television / streaming deals in the pipeline, I'm not so sure about that. The NFL was pushing heavily for an 18-game schedule for that reason, but they were forced to compromise at 17 games due to the NFLPA's and players' resistance to more games. The extra players on the roster will be NFL minimum contracts, and even when considering all of the other related costs for a player to be on a roster the extra game would bring in billion(s) in additional revenue when totaling all of the different deals. I figured the media deal would be the area that clubs found refuge from the costs of adding players. It is clear why the clubs want to add regular season games, but perplexing why the PA would not be all in as well. More players on rosters simply has to be good for the PA. Unless it is a stipulation in any new agreement that allows for additional rostered players, why would those contracts be locked in at LM? I would think the cap goes up X amount, and the clubs/GM's spend it as they see fit, creating a competition for quality depth players. The PA might want to stipulate that the roster spots must be filled, with LM as the bottom contract as usual. I could see a twenty game regular season, with an additional 10-15 rostered players, with a stipulation every player must miss 3-4 games. Making managing the roster throughout the season quite interesting, as well as an increased importance of depth players (thinking reserve QB, and Kickers)..... Does that change the game too much? Does that create a entirely new business thread for gambling?
|
|
|
|
Post by totallybolted on Aug 2, 2022 18:37:06 GMT -7
With the massive new television / streaming deals in the pipeline, I'm not so sure about that. The NFL was pushing heavily for an 18-game schedule for that reason, but they were forced to compromise at 17 games due to the NFLPA's and players' resistance to more games. The extra players on the roster will be NFL minimum contracts, and even when considering all of the other related costs for a player to be on a roster the extra game would bring in billion(s) in additional revenue when totaling all of the different deals. I figured the media deal would be the area that clubs found refuge from the costs of adding players. It is clear why the clubs want to add regular season games, but perplexing why the PA would not be all in as well. More players on rosters simply has to be good for the PA. Unless it is a stipulation in any new agreement that allows for additional rostered players, why would those contracts be locked in at LM? I would think the cap goes up X amount, and the clubs/GM's spend it as they see fit, creating a competition for quality depth players. The PA might want to stipulate that the roster spots must be filled, with LM as the bottom contract as usual. I could see a twenty game regular season, with an additional 10-15 rostered players, with a stipulation every player must miss 3-4 games. Making managing the roster throughout the season quite interesting, as well as an increased importance of depth players (thinking reserve QB, and Kickers)..... Does that change the game too much? Does that create a entirely new business thread for gambling? I was thinking 7 to 10 players 18 games. I think they should also allow a team to protect 1 or 2 players on the PS as well or at least make it a little costly to nab them off. I'm not in favor of the must miss time. Better to let the players decide. Vets. They can take off 2 games, but negotiated with the team as to which ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by frozendisc on Aug 2, 2022 19:29:00 GMT -7
I figured the media deal would be the area that clubs found refuge from the costs of adding players. It is clear why the clubs want to add regular season games, but perplexing why the PA would not be all in as well. More players on rosters simply has to be good for the PA. Unless it is a stipulation in any new agreement that allows for additional rostered players, why would those contracts be locked in at LM? I would think the cap goes up X amount, and the clubs/GM's spend it as they see fit, creating a competition for quality depth players. The PA might want to stipulate that the roster spots must be filled, with LM as the bottom contract as usual. I could see a twenty game regular season, with an additional 10-15 rostered players, with a stipulation every player must miss 3-4 games. Making managing the roster throughout the season quite interesting, as well as an increased importance of depth players (thinking reserve QB, and Kickers)..... Does that change the game too much? Does that create a entirely new business thread for gambling? I was thinking 7 to 10 players 18 games. I think they should also allow a team to protect 1 or 2 players on the PS as well or at least make it a little costly to nab them off. I'm not in favor of the must miss time. Better to let the players decide. Vets. They can take off 2 games, but negotiated with the team as to which ones. If they were to increase the regular season to twenty games, that is a very big jump in revenue, for everyone. Clearly the PA will be against twenty games, but not if every player could only play 16 or 17 games maximum, which is where they are now. Players would love playing 17 games, but receiving 20 game checks. It would also introduce an entirely new strategy of roster management, and you just know there would be many differing approaches. It could prove to be a win for everyone...... Is twenty regular season too many games for the fans? Will the fans lose interest?
|
|
|
|
Post by chargerfreak on Aug 3, 2022 5:20:17 GMT -7
I was thinking 7 to 10 players 18 games. I think they should also allow a team to protect 1 or 2 players on the PS as well or at least make it a little costly to nab them off. I'm not in favor of the must miss time. Better to let the players decide. Vets. They can take off 2 games, but negotiated with the team as to which ones. If they were to increase the regular season to twenty games, that is a very big jump in revenue, for everyone. Clearly the PA will be against twenty games, but not if every player could only play 16 or 17 games maximum, which is where they are now. Players would love playing 17 games, but receiving 20 game checks. It would also introduce an entirely new strategy of roster management, and you just know there would be many differing approaches. It could prove to be a win for everyone...... Is twenty regular season too many games for the fans? Will the fans lose interest? Can you imagine your team sucking for 20 whole games. The agony would seem never ending.
|
|
|
|
Post by totallybolted on Aug 3, 2022 5:29:46 GMT -7
If they were to increase the regular season to twenty games, that is a very big jump in revenue, for everyone. Clearly the PA will be against twenty games, but not if every player could only play 16 or 17 games maximum, which is where they are now. Players would love playing 17 games, but receiving 20 game checks. It would also introduce an entirely new strategy of roster management, and you just know there would be many differing approaches. It could prove to be a win for everyone...... Is twenty regular season too many games for the fans? Will the fans lose interest? Can you imagine your team sucking for 20 whole games. The agony would seem never ending. Just like basketball.
|
|
|
|
Post by frozendisc on Aug 3, 2022 6:45:36 GMT -7
If they were to increase the regular season to twenty games, that is a very big jump in revenue, for everyone. Clearly the PA will be against twenty games, but not if every player could only play 16 or 17 games maximum, which is where they are now. Players would love playing 17 games, but receiving 20 game checks. It would also introduce an entirely new strategy of roster management, and you just know there would be many differing approaches. It could prove to be a win for everyone...... Is twenty regular season too many games for the fans? Will the fans lose interest? Can you imagine your team sucking for 20 whole games. The agony would seem never ending. Try 60 games out of 82.......
|
|
|
|
Post by afboltfan on Aug 3, 2022 7:39:40 GMT -7
Lions fans would be pushed over the edge loool....
|
|
|
|
Post by chargerfreak on Aug 3, 2022 8:04:31 GMT -7
Lions fans would be pushed over the edge loool.... You want a darkhorse team this year ? One of them is watch those pesky Lions this year ........... they were 3-13-1 last year, and the HC has them playing with all heart. They played in 9 one score games last year. They drafted well for a change.
|
|
|
|
Post by chargerfreak on Aug 3, 2022 10:37:37 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by ohioboltfan on Aug 3, 2022 13:55:43 GMT -7
Lions fans would be pushed over the edge loool.... You want a darkhorse team this year ? One of them is watch those pesky Lions this year ........... they were 3-13-1 last year, and the HC has them playing with all heart. They played in 9 one score games last year. They drafted well for a change. Since this is the "Time to go on record" thread, I'll predict that this year's dark horse team will be the Jacksonville Jaguars! Yes, that is black hole level dark. But I really like Doug Pederson as a head coach and I think they have slowly added quality players from the last few drafts and free agency. I think they will have a winning record this year and give a lot of teams ( we play them in week three!) more trouble than the original "circle that game as a win for us" preseason expectations.
|
|
|
|
Post by chargerfreak on Aug 4, 2022 4:58:15 GMT -7
You want a darkhorse team this year ? One of them is watch those pesky Lions this year ........... they were 3-13-1 last year, and the HC has them playing with all heart. They played in 9 one score games last year. They drafted well for a change. Since this is the "Time to go on record" thread, I'll predict that this year's dark horse team will be the Jacksonville Jaguars! Yes, that is black hole level dark. But I really like Doug Pederson as a head coach and I think they have slowly added quality players from the last few drafts and free agency. I think they will have a winning record this year and give a lot of teams ( we play them in week three!) more trouble than the original "circle that game as a win for us" preseason expectations. I can see that. Pederson, they had high draft picks, and were really active in FA.
|
|
|
|
Post by joemcrugby on Aug 4, 2022 12:20:45 GMT -7
Since this is the "Time to go on record" thread, I'll predict that this year's dark horse team will be the Jacksonville Jaguars! Yes, that is black hole level dark. But I really like Doug Pederson as a head coach and I think they have slowly added quality players from the last few drafts and free agency. I think they will have a winning record this year and give a lot of teams ( we play them in week three!) more trouble than the original "circle that game as a win for us" preseason expectations. I can see that. Pederson, they had high draft picks, and were really active in FA. A lot will depend on Trevor Lawrence’s speed of development in 2022. Unfortunately for him, 2021 was a lost year, but sometimes adversity can fuel growth. |
|
