CBA & 18 Game Schedule

**Jrudi** · 02-10-2011, 11:43 AM

With the talks of a possible 18 game schedule happening within the next season, does anyone know how the league will go about scheduling the 2 additional games.

For Example; now a teams schedule is made up of:

- Each Team in it's Division twice (6 games)
- Yearly rotation of Inter Conference Divisional games (4 games) (Next season we play AFC East)
- Yearly rotation of Cross Conference Divisional games ( 4 games) (Next season we play NFC North)
- Inter Conference Divisional Standings (2 Games)
(For example we play the AFC East next year and we won the AFC West we will play the Divisional winners of the AFC South
and North since they finished the same rank in their division as us)

= 16 Total Games

Anyone have news on how they will determine who teams play the remaining 2 games?

My Brother and I were talking about Possibly Cross Conference Divisional Standings, so we would play the Division winners of each NFC Division which we weren't already playing (So the NFC South, East, & West). But there would be 3 Divisions and they are only adding 2 games so they would have to rotate this as well.

Any ideas or news? Thanks!

**OPLookn** · 02-10-2011, 12:51 PM

If they did go to a 18 game season my hope would be that they'd pick up another inter conference division and play them or pick two teams out of each remaining inter conference division. That way you'd get the best of the best out of each division come playoff time. Just my two cents, I'll take my change now.

As for when they'd schedule them my suggestion would be to take the two of the preseason games away so that you have a game to get the starters up to speed in the first half then play everyone else the second half. The second game play them for three quarters and then everyone else that last quarter. That leaves two weeks that would have been pre season games. You take one of those and make it a regular season game and the other and make it a bye week at some point in the season. That leaves one game left to take care of that you remove the week between the last playoff game and the super bowl. The pro bowl is meaningless and has been so play it the week after the super bowl. Again, just my thoughts.

**Three7s** · 02-11-2011, 03:37 AM

I'd hope that they do the same thing as the AFC. As the scheduling stands right now, it's one AFC and NFC divisional rotation, and the conference match up based on where you end up in the division.

I'd like to see that formula kept, only add it to the NFC. The problem is a division match would be left out for each team. I think the only way it's balanced is to set it up as a rotation as well. Let's say the Chiefs play the Steelers this year, as well as the Colts. Instead of facing the Colts, we play the Falcons, as well as the set NFC North.

After that, it rotates like everything else. That's about the only solution I have.

**4everchiefsfan25** · 02-11-2011, 12:25 PM

I hope that they really dont go to an 18 game schedule because I think it will hurt the game. If there is an 18 game season and say a team locks up their division in week 16 then there are three weeks that dont mean anything to a team that has their division locked up. What that team will probably do is play their starters for a half for week 17 and then a quarter in week 18 and then not play their starters at all in week 19. I think the move to 18 game schedule will just be a bad move.

**kckidd8870** · 02-11-2011, 09:57 PM

I love my football and I could watch it year round.18 games is just to much.These guys put a beating on each other.Adding two more games,will just shorten the players careers and seroius injury's do to fatigue.The league will do anything to make that money.Leaving things alone.It is just fine the way it is.Even though I'm already missing football but i'll survive.

**Hayvern** · 02-12-2011, 01:04 AM

Originally Posted by kckidd8870

I love my football and I could watch it year round.18 games is just to much.These guys put a beating on each other.Adding two more games,will just shorten the players careers and seroius injury's do to fatigue.The league will do anything to make that money.Leaving things alone.It is just fine the way it is.Even though I'm already missing football but i'll survive.

You see, I still don't get this. Everyone says that these two extra games would be too much. I say BS. They play those games anyway, and injury can happen as easily in a preseason game as it can in a regular season game.

An extra 2 games would potentially make your bench more important and give under utilized players a chance to play throughout the season instead of warming the bench all season.

Anyway, I like the idea. It is all going to come down to who wants there side more.

**Boxermm187** · 02-12-2011, 01:23 AM

For the money they are getting paid, to do something that is considered recreational.... just do it. they are living the life, yeah there are consequences, but look at how many players wish they could play one game in the NFL. two more games is just that....two games. the only teams that it would affect are the teams that haven't played in the playoffs consistant . just play!!

**chief31** · 02-12-2011, 01:52 AM

Originally Posted by Hayvern

You see, I still don't get this. Everyone says that these two extra games would be too much. I say BS. They play those games anyway, and injury can happen as easily in a preseason game as it can in a regular season game.

You see an injury as just as likely if you play one or two possessions as if you played the whole game?

Originally Posted by Hayvern

An extra 2 games would potentially make your bench more important and give under utilized players a chance to play throughout the season instead of warming the bench all season.

Yeah. The bench becomes more important because the starters suffer more injuries.

**tornadospotter** · 02-12-2011, 06:16 AM

The teams, imo, will need to increase the size of regular season roster, so that players are rotated more, this lessens the overwork. If players are concerned about the added stress of playing two more games, then allow, or demand, the owners to increase the team roster size. The Union gets more members, Teams get more players that understand and know the teams system from the start of the season. Players, may have get less money because owners have more employees to spread out the budgeted payroll, but having more players on the team, means more rotation, and that much less chance of injuries due to fatigue.

**matthewschiefs** · 02-13-2011, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by Hayvern

You see, I still don't get this. Everyone says that these two extra games would be too much. I say BS. They play those games anyway, and injury can happen as easily in a preseason game as it can in a regular season game.

An extra 2 games would potentially make your bench more important and give under utilized players a chance to play throughout the season instead of warming the bench all season.

Anyway, I like the idea. It is all going to come down to who wants there side more.

I agree with you

When it's all said and done it's not two whole games that are being added. You HAVE to take into account that they are takeing out two preseason games. The starters don't play much in the pre season but they do play some they do get hit in those plays and the hits still hurt like they do in the regular season. It's about 1 1/2 to 1 3/4 games added. I just think the whole thing is being overblown. Think about hockey. That is a very hard hitting game. Just look at a hockey players smile lol. They play more then 5 times the amount football players play. 18 games would not be a huge deal IMO.

The only reason that I am against the 18 game season is that records that some great players put up will fall easy. That's the only reason that I am against the 18 game season.