PDA

View Full Version : End the 6 weeks of Bye Weeks


awfullyquiet
10-08-2009, 10:06 AM
make it 4 weeks (save fantasy football) or 2 weeks (screw fantasy football).

I'm just thinking of how much it must be unfun, week 17, after 13 weeks of football without a break.

While teams that get bye-week 8 or 9, don't have such worries.

So, start bye weeks at week 7. go to 10. 8 teams per week. week 7 only has 10 games in a row, week 10 only has 9 games in a row, 8 and 9 both have... 8 in a row. Much fairer.

jag
10-08-2009, 10:19 AM
Bye weeks were invented to help create extra television revenue, not help the teams rest.

They are world class athletes. I'm sure they're fine.

awfullyquiet
10-08-2009, 11:05 AM
Bye weeks were invented to help create extra television revenue, not help the teams rest.

They are world class athletes. I'm sure they're fine.

And they did. By adding ANOTHER week of football. aka week 17.

I'm not looking at the 'their world class athletes'. I'm looking at the fairness and readiness.

d34ng3l021
10-08-2009, 01:21 PM
Very much agree. The Falcons just had their bye week in week 4 and now must play 13 (hopefully more) games in a row, while also facing 4 teams coming off of their byes. They need to make the bye weeks more in the middle of the season.

If I remember correctly, didn't the Ravens have a really early bye week last year, before making the AFCCG? Imagine if they had rested a bit later and weren't dead tired by the time they made playoffs.

terribletowel39
10-08-2009, 01:27 PM
If I remember correctly, didn't the Ravens have a really early bye week last year, before making the AFCCG? Imagine if they had rested a bit later and weren't dead tired by the time they made playoffs.
They still would have lost in the AFCCG. :D

But I agree. I like the idea of middle of the season byes for everyone. You could even do it in 2 weeks. And just have half of the league off week 8 and half of the league off week 9. Then switch it the year following.

Halsey
10-08-2009, 01:42 PM
I'd like to see all teams take their bye in one week. That way no teams have to face an opponent coming off a bye when they've been playing 6 weeks in a row. The Falcons this year face the Giants, Cowboys and Redskins all coming off byes. That's some BS. Some college games or something could be played during the time slots normally taken by NFL games that week.

awfullyquiet
10-08-2009, 01:44 PM
They still would have lost in the AFCCG. :D

But I agree. I like the idea of middle of the season byes for everyone. You could even do it in 2 weeks. And just have half of the league off week 8 and half of the league off week 9. Then switch it the year following.

the problem is, those two weeks would KILL fantasy teams, and unfortunately, i don't think that's something that the NFL would like to do either.

Bengalsrocket
10-08-2009, 01:46 PM
the problem is, those two weeks would KILL fantasy teams, and unfortunately, i don't think that's something that the NFL would like to do either.

Fantasy leagues could just have a 2 week bye. I know the NFL gets revenue based on Fantasy Football (if a person has a fantasy team, he'll watch games based on his players) but I don't like the league making rules based around a side game played by fans.

awfullyquiet
10-08-2009, 01:54 PM
Fantasy leagues could just have a 2 week bye. I know the NFL gets revenue based on Fantasy Football (if a person has a fantasy team, he'll watch games based on his players) but I don't like the league making rules based around a side game played by fans.

I don't either. 2 weeks, albeit the best from a performance standpoint, wouldn't be bad by 4 weeks either.

Shane P. Hallam
10-08-2009, 02:50 PM
Fantasy leagues could just have a 2 week bye. I know the NFL gets revenue based on Fantasy Football (if a person has a fantasy team, he'll watch games based on his players) but I don't like the league making rules based around a side game played by fans.

4 weeks would kind of suck for fantasy teams too. Let's be honest, the way it is run now is getting the NFL the most money. The more teams that have byes in a given week, the less fans you get watching/caring.

drowe
10-08-2009, 03:28 PM
for me, it's not totally broke, so don't fix it. it works best for the league and any reconfiguration of the schedule would cause just as many problems as they solve.

and, as a huge fan of NFL football, bye weeks are kind of a part of my fall winter mentality. i grow to miss not only my home team, but any team on a bye week. i feel like the football fanatic part of my brain currently is hanging a 'Welcome Back' banner for the Cardinals, Panthers, Eagles and Falcons.

Smooth Criminal
10-08-2009, 03:52 PM
There would be too few games if every team had bye weeks within 2-4 weeks. Hell half of the league would be off if they went with two.

Its fine as it is now. Sure it sucks to get and early bye typically, but its not a huge deal.

awfullyquiet
10-08-2009, 04:09 PM
4 weeks would kind of suck for fantasy teams too. Let's be honest, the way it is run now is getting the NFL the most money. The more teams that have byes in a given week, the less fans you get watching/caring.

Nay. It's the same amount of fans every year.

There's only 8 games in one week, 8 games in the next week.
everyone gets shown 6 regional games for the 1-2 slot, SNF and MNF that week.
aka. a full set of football 2 weeks in a row. when you reduce the choices in teams, viewership doesn't necessarly go down. how many people don't watch football on sunday when their team isn't playing? sure, a percentage of them. you wouldn't even have to do it by division, 2 teams in each conference. bam. that way you still have some regional flavor in it as well.

in a 4 week structure, you'd have one team from each conference each week bump out. meaning you still only lose 1 week of vierwership one way or another.

if you're not going to watch football if your team isn't playing, you're not going to get revenue one way or another. so, i don't see how their losing money, when every year, one week of the year, there's a bye for that particular team. and a percentage of people don't watch.

insofar as fantasy? meh. 4 weeks, 8 teams don't play, which is similar to playing FFB on weeks 7-9 where 6 are on byes... again, not hard, just gives you something else to consider. when it's 2 weeks, i'd say it's much more difficult.

Job
10-08-2009, 05:40 PM
So let's imagine the byes are all in a 2 week span. That makes 8 games a week for two weeks. I don't see how that kills fantasy football. You either a) keep playing and just have less players on the field for those weeks or B) just make that FF week last 2 weeks, therefore everybody plays and FF teams kinda have only one bye week. Heck, the NFL would probably like it since FF players would catch more games (percentage wise).

Am I the only one who always thinks Final Fantasy first when seeing FF somewhere?

RAVENS/WIZARDS/ORIOLES
10-08-2009, 05:44 PM
So let's imagine the byes are all in a 2 week span. That makes 8 games a week for two weeks. I don't see how that kills fantasy football. You either a) keep playing and just have less players on the field for those weeks or B) just make that FF week last 2 weeks, therefore everybody plays and FF teams kinda have only one bye week. Heck, the NFL would probably like it since FF players would catch more games (percentage wise).

Am I the only one who always thinks Final Fantasy first when seeing FF somewhere?

Yes. Especially on a sports forum

Bengalsrocket
10-08-2009, 05:53 PM
Am I the only one who always thinks Final Fantasy first when seeing FF somewhere?

I do occasionally, but I'm not a huge fan of the Final Fantasy games. I mean I've played some of them, particularly the more popular ones like 7 & 8, but I don't have a boner for them or anything.

BlindSite
10-08-2009, 07:27 PM
I hate seeing my team cop their bye early in the year, except they've been draggin' ass and tend to come out better after the bye each year.

All I know is, despite their class as atlete's the amount of pounding their bodies take, giving them one week without that impact every season isn't too much to ask and shouldn't be taken away just because some geek's miss out on a few points.

You can strategise around Bye weeks. It's part of being a complete fantasy GM.

JT Jag
10-08-2009, 09:02 PM
They should change the bye week system so it spans over eight weeks. Each week, from weeks 4-11, one full division would be off.

aNYtitan
10-08-2009, 11:21 PM
Personally, I say just leave it along. I understand the whole fairness issue with the "well if you team has a bye like week 3 and another has a bye week 8, obviously the week 8 team has a better bye week". But in regards to injuries and rest, all these teams undergo the same stress and issues, and I wouldn't want to see a whole bunch of backloaded teams have bye weeks and then come with like only like 12 games a week. My personal opinion. It also comes up what if you have a key player that has a serious injury like week 3, and you have a bye week 4. In this scenario, that bye week worked out to your advantage. I'm spitballin here

Iamcanadian
10-08-2009, 11:50 PM
I completely agree that bye weeks shouldn't come too early in the season, it's totally unfair if you happen to get your bye week early. However, you have to understand that for many years the Super Bowl games were blowouts because not all teams could adjust to long layoffs before the SB was played. When they set up the byes, the NFL didn't know if teams could handle a bye week and play well after sitting out for that time period so they were extremely careful to put bye weeks starting early in case teams all lost the following game. They didn't want it to impact on the playoff races late in the season.
Now that teams have become accustomed to bye weeks and shown that it has almost no impact on winning or losing, the NFL should adjust the bye weeks to start later in the season.

Yes the bye weeks were invented to make more TV money but the player's union and the NFL saw a second reason in that it gave the players a week off to recover their health from a long grueling season. I don't think fans realize how painful it is to play pro football. I remember a piece on Bettis, the bus. He couldn't get out of bed the day after a game, that's how much pain he was in. By Tuesday he could just manage to get down the stairs in his home by holding on tightly to the banister. By Wednesday. he felt well enough to attend practice and by Sunday he was ready to play again. Football is a tough sport where every player is in pain from the 1st game on. Most of us wouldn't be able to get out of bed for a week if we put our bodies through a pro football game.

yodabear
10-09-2009, 12:21 AM
Some teams get 2 bye weeks, they play the Rams. Or if ur lucky enough to play in the NFC West, u get three bye weeks.

awfullyquiet
10-09-2009, 09:28 AM
So let's imagine the byes are all in a 2 week span. That makes 8 games a week for two weeks. I don't see how that kills fantasy football. You either a) keep playing and just have less players on the field for those weeks or B) just make that FF week last 2 weeks, therefore everybody plays and FF teams kinda have only one bye week. Heck, the NFL would probably like it since FF players would catch more games (percentage wise).

Am I the only one who always thinks Final Fantasy first when seeing FF somewhere?

No, I think of it too.

But, having to deal with 16 teams on byes... Eh. Not so much.
8 teams, much more doable.

Suppose a 2 week bye schedule looked like:
week 8: MIA, NWE, CLE, CIN, TEN, JAX, KC, SD, SF, SEA, TB, CAR, CHI, DET, NYG, WAS.
week 9: BUF, NYJ, BAL, PIT, IND, HOU, OAK, DEN, ARI, STL, ATL, NO, GB, MIN, DAL, PHI

I'd make drafting a QB much more... interesting... and then you have RBs on top of what you can play? It just becomes a very different game for 2 weeks.

Not the point though, FFB is just an aside (and when I say FFB, most of the time I think of frostfire bolt, but that's just me)... and think that the 'it's not broke, don't fix it' line is wearing thin.

Shane P. Hallam
10-09-2009, 11:25 AM
Nay. It's the same amount of fans every year.

There's only 8 games in one week, 8 games in the next week.
everyone gets shown 6 regional games for the 1-2 slot, SNF and MNF that week.
aka. a full set of football 2 weeks in a row. when you reduce the choices in teams, viewership doesn't necessarly go down. how many people don't watch football on sunday when their team isn't playing?


A lot. Probably the majority of fans. It would just be dumb for the NFL to set all of that up in a two week span. Add onto the fact you have fans who will watch a great match-up if their team isn't playing, but not mediocre ones. Having only 8 games that week increases the odds for only mediocrity.

Giantsfan1080
10-09-2009, 11:51 AM
Would it make any sense if the NFL just gave every team off after Week 8? A league wide bye week.

yodabear
10-09-2009, 12:22 PM
Would it make any sense if the NFL just gave every team off after Week 8? A league wide bye week.

It might, but then losers like me wouldn't have anything to do on their weekend.

vikes_28
10-09-2009, 12:30 PM
Some teams get 2 bye weeks, they play the Rams. Or if ur lucky enough to play in the NFC West, u get three bye weeks.

I lol'd at this post. I think the bye weeks are fine the way they are.

wordofi
10-09-2009, 02:26 PM
make it 4 weeks (save fantasy football) or 2 weeks (screw fantasy football).

I'm just thinking of how much it must be unfun, week 17, after 13 weeks of football without a break.

While teams that get bye-week 8 or 9, don't have such worries.

So, start bye weeks at week 7. go to 10. 8 teams per week. week 7 only has 10 games in a row, week 10 only has 9 games in a row, 8 and 9 both have... 8 in a row. Much fairer.

I'd like to see every team have a bye week during week 9, but throw a coin in a wishing well, because it isn't going to happen.