It seems somewhat strange the NFL is attempting to move to a 17-game season without adding an additional bye week. After such a format was initially rumored, it did not take off.
This CBA proposal includes a 17-game season — which would begin as early as 2021 — and three preseason games. The TV networks’ past stance against a double-bye schedule influenced the owners to keep the single-bye setup this time around, Mark Maske of the Washington Post tweets.
The NFL, which used 16-week seasons from 1978-89, introduced the 17-week campaign in 1990. In 1993, the league placed two byes on the schedule. However, the 18-week season turned out to be a one-year experiment. And TV networks’ past issues with the double-bye format look to have intervened in these CBA talks.
The league has placed obvious importance on the next round of TV deals, and Maske notes the prospect of networks remaining against the two-bye setup led to this CBA proposal not including it. NFLPA executive committee member Aaron Rodgers expressed disappointment owners did not introduce the 17-game concept until midway through the talks and offered that a 16-game season with two byes would make more sense (Twitter links via Ryan Wood of the Green Bay Press-Gazette). Word of the 17-game season did not emerge until late September — months after the talks began.
Some owners may still be holding out hope for 18 games, which would be odd given that such a format would induce a 19-week schedule ownership just opted to avoid. During these CBA talks, the players deemed the long-rumored 18-game schedule a non-starter.
The only 17 game scenario that makes sense to me is every team plays 8 home and away plus 1 international game in London, Mexico, Canada, etc. It’d also include a two-bye format where byes are strategically placed the week after the international game and also the week before a team plays on Thursday (if applicable) to improve the quality of those games and not force players to play twice in 5 days. And finally in this 19 week regular season format the Super Bowl would always be on Presidents Day so almost everyone gets the Monday after off work. You’re welcome Roger.
I agree with all of this
This makes absolute sense.
Rootedinoakland,
I think the owners are stupid. While it would create more revenue for them with a 17 game schedule, the players would demand more money! So, they would still pretty much be in the same boat they are now or even worse! Players would retire earlier in their careers, players would be injured more often.
Also, most people do not get Presidents Day off! Yes banks are closed and the mail is not delivered! The Super Bowl should be played on a Saturday night.
What’s the higher likelihood that you have “President’s Day” off – or “Monday After The Super Bowl Day” off?
I’ve been saying this for the single bye, 17wk season for years now.
If they don’t add a bye or a week 18, they still need to use the bye to buffer the effects of TNF and London games.
…and for craps sake, stop with the TWO teams on one bye week and then EIGHT on another.
Yeah, honestly they could do all the bye weeks in a two week period. You can still have 8 games on the schedule for those two weeks.
Not exactly groundbreaking stuff here.
to the clueless owners it is though
What is the issue with a double bye system as far as the networks go?
greed?
Lack of quality games
Meaning greed…..
Uh no, if you’re paying billions of dollars for something you’d want some sort of ROI. Own a business and maybe you’d have some sense in the world.
The networks are looking out for the fans. How would you feel if your team wad off and the most interesting game was Bengals vs Browns?
I agree with gator below besides what I posted.
I’ve seen plenty of Thursday and Monday night games like the Bengals vs. the Browns. it sucks but we watch anyway
The networks really should be supportive of the double bye schedule. It’s better for player health, and saftey.
To those saying the system will lead to a poorer selection of games, I ask this: If, say, Aaron Rodgers gets hurt from the extra grind, is GB vs. Chi that much more marketable than Cle vs. Cin? Sure, market size plays a part, but I’m asking nationally? I mean Cleveland has stars.
Players make the games. Player safety should be foremost. Either leave things as they are, or go to the 2 bye system.
They would have to pay the NFL more money.
Looking out for the fans ???
Do you have any idea what has made the NFL the top sport ? It’s gambling & any degenerate will bet on Bengals vs Browns just as fast as any other game.
Between legal sports betting and fantasy popularity every game no matter the participants has value.
Assuming you add an extra Bye Week… All teams would still play weeks 1-3 and Weeks 17-19
Total Inventory 272 Games
Total Inventory Weeks 4-16 176 Games
Games Peer Week for weeks 4-16 13.5 Games
Take out MNF, TNF & SNF you’ve got 10.5 games per Sunday under assumption of 2 Byes, 17 games & all teams playing 1st & last 3 weeks of the season…
So Fox gets 5 & CBS 5.
This format hurts the early window. It’ll also hurt one of the secret golden gooses for casual fans fantasy football. It’ll put huge pressure on National Games in the 4 PM window to deliver ratings.
Ultimately, the 2 Byes should be an issue for networks. Especially when you factor in NFL is going to sell the London game to streamers for the 10 AM window. It really hurts CBS / Fox’s inventory, plus forces them to pay their employees for an extra week of work.
You do raise a point about the networks having to pay their employees an extra week, but I’d counter they’re also bringing in an extra week of ratings an ad money.
As for game selection, if it’s that much of an issue, eliminate TNF. It’s unnecessarily hard on players, and is a bit of a competitive disadvantage anyway on the short week.
Furthermore, as to your point about streaming, they could simply make an international week. Everyone gets a bye coming off of it, creating a level play field. I mean I think that’s the league’s goal anyway.
oh please, can someone be fine with any of these proposals?