and a more competitive season?
2007-07-07 02:23:33 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Definitly, preseason stinks
2007-07-07 02:26:46 · answer #1 · answered by jsyankees12 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Pre-season gives players time to develop offensive and defensive schemes. Everyone complains that players get injured during the pre-season and then the team suffers, but from the looks of recent actions by players around the league, it looks like riding a motor cycle is more dangerous to player than pre-season. These guys could get hurt anywhere, anytime. The number of injuries that occur in the pre-season is small compared to the amount of players on a teams roster. It just so happens that occasionally someone of significance gets hurt and then their fans and teammates start whining about it.
And for the record, I am a Redskins fan. The team that lost Portis in the first pre-season game last year and Jon Jansen in the HOF game two years before that. Injuries happen, that is why they have depth charts.
As for extending the season, I don't think they should supplant the pre-season with regular season games. It's too hot to play in August in most areas around the nation. Instead, how about extending the regular season by two games into January. Lambeau, Soldier, The Meadowlands, Lincoln Financial, Gillette and a whole bunch of other fields would be covered in snow and ice, just like it should be.
2007-07-07 10:35:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't understand how having an extra regular season game makes the season "more competitive." Maybe you can explain that to me.
However, I think this proposal might be a good idea, and the NFL has been considering doing something sort of like this. Every team has 3 preseason games, then a 17 game regular season, with 8 home games, 8 away games, and 1 game held outside the US.
Some NFL stars have spoken out against the preseason, but I think the preseason is valuable for backups who don't see action consistently during the regular season. LaDanian Tomlinson has been a particularly vocal critic of the preseason. I heard him say something like "I hate getting carries during the preseason, I never want to play in another preseason game ever again, and I think they should eliminate the preseason completely because it's just one more chance for players to get hurt for no good reason."
To the people who are against holding games outside the US: I think it would be great to get the rest of the world more interested in American football, because then international players will enter the league and the level of competition will go up. The MLB has players like Matsuzaka and Ichiro, the NBA has players like Yao Ming and Nowitzki, don't you want to see exciting foreign players like that enter the NFL? That would REALLY make it a "more competitive season"--when foreign talent starts coming to the NFL.
2007-07-07 09:50:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The third game is usually the only decent one. The first two, they're looking at draft picks and second and third stringers. The third game is when the starters get their big workout. The fourth game, they look at the bubble players and rest the starters, so yes.
Cut out that fourth game and extend the regular season.
Also, get rid of sudden death overtime. Either go to something similar to college overtime or at least give the other team the ball after the first OT score. Unless you enjoy the excitement of watching a team drive to field-goal territory.
2007-07-07 13:41:57 · answer #4 · answered by cigarsnbrew 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO. If you want to reduce the Pre-Season by a game fine BUT don't force another game in the regular season. What about the teams that play in the Playoffs? So why should they risk their players being hurt going INTO the playoffs?
2007-07-07 09:51:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
We shouldn't cut preason down to just one game. It can be cut to maybe three. But the thing is, you need these preseason games to get rookies some experience. Also its where the late round players get a chance to make an impact and possible bid for a starting spot. I was one who said the regular season should be extended but now I'm not so sure about this. The records won't mean as much because players will have extra games. One game may not seem like a lot but accumulate that over some years and it addds up. 2,000 yards rushing, 1,000 yards receiving, and 4,000 yards passing will be easier to accomplish diminishing their benchmarks. Maybe one game won't hurt but I don't know that it wold be fair to current record holders.
2007-07-07 10:04:21 · answer #6 · answered by vernon m 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I say they should have like 2 preseason games (just the ones who r trying 2 make the team) and have like 18 regular games
2007-07-09 23:48:51 · answer #7 · answered by Jason F 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honestly, I don't see the NFL increasing the length of the season beyond the current 16 games unless they add teams, and I believe they're at a comfortable 32 right now.
2007-07-07 10:09:38 · answer #8 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
try to keep focus of the reason for the pre season games...it is not to win but to give the managing team an opportunity to assess the team talent in game situations...it gives the coaches and gm one more chance to give players who dont have a starting spot to show what they have and get some game fitness into the team
2007-07-07 09:44:09 · answer #9 · answered by doingitright44 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We should actually cut 2 preseason games and add 2 real games.Starters dont need more than 2 games and dont play much in preseason anyway
2007-07-07 11:59:08 · answer #10 · answered by robert d 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋