NFL adds 17th game: Giants at Dolphins

While there are many reasons to rationalize what the NFL does (and why), adding a 17th game clearly comes down to greed.  Greedy owners, greedy TV networks.  Greedy Roger Goodell.

Seriously, does anyone on earth buy into Goodell’s lie about how he just wants to spread the NFL to new audience by giving them more opportunity to see a game for the first time, etc.?  It’s all about revenue, which is fine.  Just admit it!

So now the Giants at Dolphins will end the season.   The NFL’s insanely unfairly unbalanced schedule just got even more unbalanced.  This season, we are already slated to play the NFC South (with hard teams Tampa and New Orleans, and improving Atlanta and Carolina.)  And now the league just randomly tosses in an NFC East opponent.  Why?

If you’re committed to adding a 17th game, why not make it a conference game?  Conference games are more meaningful in the playoff scenarios, so why add an unimpactful, throwaway game instead of something meaningful?  Greed.

Also, and again this is clearly just my own opinion, but I HATE the fact the the regular season now moves into mid-January.  That means the Super Bowl will drift further into February.   In a few years, they’ll be playing the Super Bowl in April if this keeps up.  December/January games give a gigantic advantage to cold-weather home teams, and the NFL just keeps helping those teams more and more.  Why not start the season a week earlier?  How about eliminating the bye week? Start the season in August and eliminate the useless pre-season week 3?

Oh well.  A 17th game is not the end of the world, it’s just something I feel in unnecessary.   No one will ever be .500 again.   Well unless there are ties and someone goes 8-8-1.

 

 

Share Button

7 Comments

  1. Tell me something ADMIN.. I mean, in your honest opinion, do you think with a seventeen game regular season, the Dolphins might’ve had a better chance to make the playoffs last season, or do you think they still wouldn’t have made it?

    1. Author

      A great question. Let’s use 2020 as an example. We lost in Week 16 and thus finished 8th in the AFC. The top 7 teams made it in. So we missed out by one spot. We were 10-6, and four other teams were 11-5. If we went to a Week 17 vs. the NY Giants and win, we’d still need help in that one of the 11-5 teams would have to lose. That is very likely. That woulda put us at 11-6, and one/some/all of those 11-5 teams would lose and become 11-6 as well.
      So it comes down to those pesky tiebreakers. You have to figure that we would win a tiebreaker somewhere in there. So yes, I do believe that one extra game would have made us a playoff team last season.
      But now next year, that same scenario could work against us. Say we are the 7th seed after Week 16. In the past, you celebrate because the season is over and we’re playoff-bound. But with an extra week, we could be leapfrogged. it works both ways. Having only 16 games last year ended our season, and I have a bad feeling that an extra 17th game will hurt us next season.

      1. You forgot to say that the fans win Admin! The more games the better in my book although I agree cut the preseason down to 2-3 games good enough. Go Fins!

  2. Author

    DeVonta Smith and Jaylen Waddle; Penei Sewell, Ja’Marr Chase and Florida tight end Kyle Pitts.

    All good players. but none of them can rush the opposing QB. THAT is our prime need.

    1. I could be wrong but there is no edge rusher this year that would be considered elite. However, all those players, you mentioned, are elite. This allows you future draft capital if you dont have room for them (which the Phins do). These talents are too good to pass up to just draft for need. Plus, you can get some edge rusher later in the draft.

      1. Author

        Well, WFF, I have never seen Micah Parsons play, but his name kept coming up over and over when I studied the draft. Then in February, his name dipped lower and lower, and he was no longer a Top 10 draft pick. But he recently impressed everyone at the pro day, so his stock is rising again. I understand what you mean about not just drafting for a need, but sometimes that exactly what you have to do. We didn’t “need” another backup defensive back last year, but we picked Noah I in the first round because someone thought he was elite. Then he proved he cannot cover a simple crossing route. I’m not saying we don’t need or want a stud WR, but if New England ends up with Chase and Buffalo ends up with Pitts, I can live with that. If those teams end up with Parson? That spells trouble for Tua for years to come.

        1. I agree I think it’s coming down to Pitts or Parsons seeing this more and more often. Here’s the thing if both are sitting at 6 Pitts won’t last long but Parsons may slide a little bit longer although who knows what Detroit may do. Do you risk trading back if Parsons is your guy especially with the need at LB? Probably not it would be ballsy to move back again.

          You could also argue that Pitts is a one of a kind special talent. LB can still be had at 18 I’ve seen a lot of love for Collins. Pitts will also help Tua so I’m a little torn between the two. My gut tells me Parsons but it sure would be easier if Pitts was already gone.

Leave a Reply