NFL's Switch To an 18-Game Season: A Cost/Benefit Analysis

When the idea of an 18-game NFL season was first introduced, two distinct benefits became immediately evident: more football and more money.  Who couldn't like that?

We fans would get to watch our favorite teams play in two more meaningful games.  They would have two more chances to win the division or steal a Wild Card spot.  And most importantly, we wouldn't have to suffer through four boring preseason games anymore, eagerly waiting around until the games really mattered.

The owners would make more money.  The players would make more money.  TV networks and advertising companies would make more money as well.  There is no question that there would be a guaranteed financial gain for all parties involved.

At first glance, this seems to be a no-brainer.  The NFL is one of the most successful businesses in the world.  Why not expand?  Why not have more of what we love?

A lot of people, mostly players, have come out and said that they were either against the idea, or only in favor of it if a few changes were made.  Some of those changes include adding another bye week and expanding game rosters.

One of the unfortunate side effects of more football is more injuries.  Many players can barely make it through a 16-game season.  If the schedule is expanded, the Super Bowl winning team will have played 23-24 games (two preseason, 18 regular season, three-four playoff).  The regular season would go from 17 weeks to 20.  How many players, especially veterans, would be at full strength in time for a playoff run?

Additionally, two more weeks of football means two more opportunities for concussions.  It does seem a bit contradicting on the part of NFL executives.  They are concerned about and want to limit the number of concussions, yet are pushing to add two more games?  We would see even more players missing time with concussions.  Even more fines.

Preseason games have always been the subject of scrutiny.  The third preseason game is the only one where the starters see significant playing time.  The rest of the time is made up of young hopefuls trying to make the team, with coaches and coordinators evaluating the backups and long shots.  It may not make the best TV, but isn't it important?  If the league takes two preseason games away, that's two less games for coaches to gauge the level of talent, depth and development they have on their team.

Another risk the league runs by expanding the number of games is having more meaningless games at the end of the regular season.  If your team clinches the division after Week 17, what kind of football are we going to watch the last three weeks? Will all the starters rest?  Is it worth buying tickets for that?

You can take the other side of the argument too. What if the starters feel pressured to play even though they've already clinched and they get hurt? The playoffs would be lost.

There's no question American football is an amazing spectacle.  The NFL is the most successful sports business in the country, possibly the world, and it deserves to be.  Is it possible to have too much of a good thing?

It remains to be seen whether or not this change actually goes through.  Most seem to think it likely will. 

But answer this: Isn't it pretty darn good the way it is?