NFL 2011: Why a 17-Game NFL Season Makes Sense

I'll be the first to admit, I think an expanded NFL season is about the worst idea in the history of the world.

We've seen plenty of teams that could not even field a competitive team by Week 17 (every team's 16th game). Heck, the Saints were down to their eighth-string running back by the end of their playoff game versus Seattle. 

But it seems Roger Goodell and the NFL owners will indeed lockout the players until they get their way, which means an 18-game season. 

I have a suggestion. How about 17 games?

Quickly, let me shoot down the naysayers. I know this will never pass. And I realize others have mentioned this as a possibility, although I've never heard anyone add the wrinkle I am going to.

Here's the basis of my proposal:  

Seventeen games allow the owners one more game in which they can collect revenue (win for the owners).

Seventeen games mean no more .500 teams make the playoffs (a win for everybody).

Adding even one extra game would necessitate the loss of two preseason games and could even open up the other current proposal—an extra playoff team being added to each conference.

And the new wild card in play, as proposed by a friend of mine—we’ll call him Jake—is that 17th game is played at a neutral site stadium.

What’s so special about this idea, especially since the NFL has been dabbling with games in Europe and other places abroad?

Another site for such a game could be—drum roll please…Los Angeles!

Think about it for just a second. AEG just announced naming rights for a new booming stadium that is going to be erected in the near future in The City of Angels.

Currently, no team exists in LA—duh!  But it also does not seem as if there is a natural fit out of the existing teams to move.

Yet the NFL and the city of Los Angeles need each other. LA is the second-largest market in the country. Additionally, due to the transient nature of the city’s population, getting behind one team the way Green Bay or New Orleans does seems very unlikely.

Instead, by playing maybe eight neutral site games a year in the new stadium, the stands will still be full, and they will be filled with true fans.

The NFL could then use the other eight neutral site games to maybe play a few each year abroad and pick some other locations—maybe Las Vegas, maybe to a deserving city on the East Coast or in the Midwest—to combine to host those other eight games.

The nature of our society today is that many people are transplanted fans living in different locations. Each team playing one neutral site game a year would allow more fans the opportunity to see their team in person.

Adding a 17th game helps in that teams would not have to give up a home game when they play a neutral site game as in years past.

Of course there are many issues that would need to be worked out in order for this to become a reality, but it seems to be the fairest compromise I can think of.

Owners would share the revenues of the 17th game 50-50.

Teams would always have eight home games.

Every team would have to travel for a ninth game, maintaining competitive balance.

LA's market reopens to the NFL, again creating more revenue for the league.

Finally, those television contracts probably get renegotiated to make the NFL even more money.

I’m not saying this is what I want. I want it to stay just the way it is, minus two preseason games. But there is a part of me that doesn’t believe that’s realistic, so I’m just hoping for the next best thing.