Rating: (0 votes - average)

The first week of the 2010 NFL regular season has a lengthy injury list:

Kevin Kolb – Philadelphia Eagles quarterback (concussion)
Matt Moore – Carolina Panthers quarterback (concussion)
Charly Martin – Carolina Panthers wide receiver (concussion)
Kevin Boss – New York Giants tight end (concussion and neck injury)
Stewart Bradley – Philadelphia Eagles linebacker (concussion)
Matthew Stafford – Detroit Lions quarterback (right shoulder injury)
Leonard Weaver – Philadelphia Eagles fullback (torn ACL right knee)
Jamaal Jackson – Philadelphia Eagles center (torn biceps, right arm)
Jason Peters – Philadelphia Eagles left tackle (sprained right knee)
Chase Blackburn – New York Giants special teams captain (injured knee)
Paul Posluszny – Buffalo Bills linebacker (potential long-term knee injury)
Connor Barwin – Houston Texans defensive end (right leg injury)
And this is only the first week of the season. Fifteen more to go, not counting the post-season.

Everyone who plays the game, coaches the game or watches the game knows that injuries – often serious one – are an occupational hazard in football: from high school all the way through college and the pros -- for those who make it that far. This occupational hazard is understood, especially, by the players. During the season, as well as during the off-season most of them work hard, conditioning their bodies to absorb the brutal punishment that is intrinsic to the sport.

However there is no way to condition the head to absorb a jarring blow or a fall on it, even with a thick helmet on. Concussions are among the most serious injuries a football player can sustain but they are not the only ones. Injuries to nearly every other part of the body happen too, and they happen frequently. Oftentimes a player won’t acknowledge an injury and will continue playing with it until it is no longer possible to do so.

Yet despite the frequency of injuries that occur during the course of a 16-game regular season, the NFL and the team owners appear close to making a decision to expand the regular season to 18 games in 2012. Following a meeting of league officials and team owners late last month, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was quoted as saying, “We want to do it the right way for everyone, including the players, the fans and the game in general. There's a tremendous amount of momentum for it. We think it's the right step.”

I disagree. I do not believe this is a wise move to be making at this time.

Until such time as either players advance their current level of performance enhancement and lifestyle management status, the risk/benefit reward is not there, based on the current level of sophistication in the manner in which NFL players and /or teams effective manage the health and performance of their "assets." Tell me any business that would put their "assets" at such risk and convince their board of directors such actions were representative of sound business practices. Unless the "assets," in this case the human beings (players) were expendable, albeit the "stars," who should be protected at all cost to preserve the business.

read more

SmashMouth

NFL doc: Four concussions in Week 1 not a trend

DRsaints

These injuries might not represent trends in all cases, but I do believe changing the regular season to 18 games is the wrong move. The current format of 16 games already puts quite a pounding on the player's bodies. They need the offseason to rest and heal. Adding two more games also could mean a diluted playoffs that has a bunch of backups competing against each other. No one wants to see that. And if they are worried about teams who have already clinched playoff berths sitting players for the last few games of the season already, this would sure be a problem for them if you added two more games.

My Saints blog: http://dr3pts.tumblr.com

exiled

keep it to 16 or add 1/8 more players to the squad.

DRsaints

If you add more players to the squad that still doesn't help the quality of the game. The NFL wants to increase the spectator experience and the quality of the game. Adding two more games only serves to dilute the quality that the NFL brings to the spectator.

Rugby Saint II

It's all about the money.........

MatthewT

Like it or not the 18 game season is going to happen. For me, I think the 16 game season with the 8 divisions and rotating scheduling format are about as close as it gets to having a perfect league. What I would like to see as a compromise is to eliminate all European/overseas games. Having a teams play outside the country is a real joke. (Sorry to all the great European fans, I know there are many of you).

How in the world do you even schedule this? OK, the NFL starts after Labor Day because Labor Day weekend turned out to be a dud on the ratings. Reducing the preseason is probably a given, but what do you do from there? Eliminate the bye week that most teams desperately need? Eliminate the bye week leading from the championship games to the Superbowl? (OK, the eliminating the gap between championship and Superbowl not really a bad idea). Geezzzzzz Already bad enough weather wise to extend the season into January...

exiled

from Europe (ATM)
I would have agreed with this before I came here... I have had the veins stick out in my neck on the subject - but NOW I see the value in it...
big HOWEVER.... it either has to be zero games OR lots of games - so that everyone gives up a home game and that is WAY too many games...
so I say put several preseaon games here.

or something like ALL of the wildcard playoffs (perhaps add some wild cards to facilitate) but as it stands right now

I WAS PI$$ED!!! WHEN the poorest city in the NFL (NOLA) had to give up a home game to the richest city in the NFL (San Diego)

"it is from the lost, your culture has always been found." - chandler (9th ward new orleans #2)

saintfan

Part of the deal (I think) to go to 18 games is to increase the size of the rosters, and as much as I love football season, I think 18 games is the wrong move.

Someone earlier mentioned the quality of the game and insinuated a bigger roster will dilute the talent and adversely affect quality. I agree 100%. More injuries will result from both the additional games AND the lesser skilled players who will ultimately be forced into the game.

For the love of all things holy, the NFL makes enough money already, right? I get the 'we must move ever-forward' mentality, but this is just a bad move plain and simple.

C'mon Man...

Nemesis

I'm dismayed that this movement to add games has apparently gained traction. I think that 2 more games will actually shorten some careers, and lead to more primetime players being absent from postseason play. Stadium attendance is declining, so they expect fans to shell out even more for season packages and PSLs in this economy?