NFL Lockout: Thoughts on an 18-Game Season and How It Could Work

So I've been doing some reading about the NFL lockout.  Since there is none of the normal offseason news to read about, I finally ended up reading about the 18-game schedule. 

It seems to me the only group that truly wants an 18-game NFL season is the owners.  It also seems that the majority of season-ticket holders are against it mostly because they don't want to pay for two more games. 

Their reasoning is that they already pay the full boat for 20 games, four of which mean nothing.

Taking away two preseason games and making them count seems agreeable to many, except the players. It would make most season-ticket holders happy, as they get two more real games for the same price.  Players don't like it because they have two more real, hard-hitting games in which to potentially get hurt.

What about this: an 18-game schedule with players only allowed to play 16?

It would quash the players' argument about being hurt in an extra game.  Season-ticket holders will still be paying for a real game, even if Peyton Manning isn't playing.

This would add intrigue to the entire season.  Do you start the top players all season in hopes of being locked into the playoffs by the time you have to sit them?  Do you start Ryan Mallett against a team with a terrible defense, saving Tom Brady for the last game of the season against the Jets?

We've all seen young, rebuilding teams go on a late-season winning streak and miss the playoffs by one game.  How much fun would it be if they had one or even two division games left?

Rosters would have to be expanded. It seems both sides are in agreement that extra games would demand a larger roster. So be it.

These are just my thoughts.  In an offseason with no free agency, camps, trades or real football news, what else is there to think about?