Should the Preseason be shorter?

[BallHawk]

IMO, yes, because the risk of a year-altering injury is just too high.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I would like make the pre-season shorter by two weeks and have the regular season longer by two weeks.

[mmmdk]

I say; only 3 preseason games but camp length is OK. Maybe more mandatory practices in shorts/no pads.

[Creepy]

You have to evaluate talent, can't do that without some kind of game assesment. The first two Pre-season games is to get a look at who will be playing back-up and who will go to #3 on the charts. You have to cut players fast in the pre-season, no game and you mayt be cutting somebody that is too good.

Everybody wants to cut the pre-season diown due to risk of season ending injury. That is a lot of hogwash, we have already lost Klemm & Barry befor epre-season started. Injuries happen, and they are compunded when players haven't had the time to practice and get into game shape.

Nobody klnows when an injury will happen, shortening the pre-season does not minimize the injury risk. Not playing together at game time and getting technique and timeing does. If GB had went with two pre-season games players like Hsslebeck may not have ever got to play in the NFL. GB migfht have passed on Driver because of the time and not seeing his abilities in pre-season games. Six was toomany, but 4 is just right.

If you want to go to a 18 game schedule the shorten the week between the SB and start the regular season on Labor Day weekend. IT won't eefct the start of the season or the end, and it will forever get rid of the crap on TV for 2 weeks before a SB.

Not

[GBRulz]

When you compare the percentage of pre-season games to regular games vs other sports, football is the highest. Personally, I think that 2 is enough, but also require more mandatory camp workouts.

If baseball played 25% of their regular season schedule based on the number of regular season games, they would have approx 40 spring training games. On average, they play about 25 games, some more, some less as weather is a factor and games aren't really made up.

If hockey played 25%...it would equate to 20 pre-season games. They usually play 7

I have no clue about the NBA as I don't follow it at all, maybe someone else can elaborate...

[Willard]

For a veteran team like the bears who are returning 22 starters and their coaching staff-- the sooner the season starts the better. Injuries like the one to Benson during pre-season can potentially mess up the season.

For the Packers though, they need the full duration of pre-season to get ready. They have a new head coach, DC, and OC --all of whom are first timers in their roles. They have 3 new starters on the OL including 2 rookies. They have potentially 2 other rookies who will start, as well as 3 or 4 other FAs vying to start. Their top 3 RBs are coming off injuries.

The Pack is not ready to face the division champs, and I wouldn't want to face the bears in 2 weeks from now either. I for one am happy the Pack has another month to get their act together. Sept. 10 will be here soon enough!

[mraynrand]

It may be just me, but it seems like football overwhelmingly relies on real-game situations to evaluate talent. You can figure out if a baseball player can hit and field in practice. You can figure out whether a basketball player has the moves and defensive skills in a bunch of team scrimmages. But live-tackling football is dramatically different than any practice, and it has the unique problem of also dramatically increasing the probability of injuries. Also, the team/scheme concept seems much more complicated in football over other sports, which can only really be assessed again in live-tackling games. If you also consider how hard it is to set up plays so that you can look at a particular player in a particular circumstance, you realize how hard it is for coaches to make player assessments, and trying to make sure the starters get enough practice time to be effective groups. So you have to balance all these needs versus the worry of getting someone exposed to more chances for injury. That's why coaches, GMs, and players (not exectutives trying to squeeze more money out of the system) should determine the length of training camp. Coaches would want it a little longer andplyers would want it a little shorter (older vets would want 0 camp, and the raw rookies probably want camp to last long enough for them to make a few good plays). My gut feeling is that three games is enough, and the camp portion is fine.

[woodbuck27]

My position on this is that the length of the TC as we see it and four Pre-season games offers but one thing. More adversity in the form of the risk of serious season ending injury.

The players must be in serious great shape, long before TC begins or that risk is enhanced. TC isn't to get in shape, but to prepare for game one by arriving at the team Roster. It shouldn't take 4-5 weeks to decide what in most cases is likely in TRUTH decided already.

DAM ! Right now PACKERRATS can agree on that 53-man in a few days time.

4 Pre season games is too much.

The length of the season is also adequate, as is the playoff format.

GO PACKERS ! HOLD THE FAITH.

[TPF]

IT's defintely too long. It should be 3 games.

[Tony Oday]

I like the preseason set up because there are just too many guys that need to be evaluated in real game situations. Its a nice tune-up and I know there are injuries but injuries can happen in practice, in the home and anywhere they are heck could be at a bar and get their foot crushed by a keg or something.

I like the preseason because that is where you get the "team" feel back when you incorporate new rooks and new FA signings.

[jack's smirking revenge]

I'm going to go out on a limb here-- ZERO preseason games. More inter-team scrimmages (to take the place of preseason games). Longer regular season (maybe 18 weeks). If a player has to play in a game against an opposing team, it should count for something (especially if there's a risk of injury).

I know all about the tooling and retooling of offense and defense and development of chemistry, but all of those things can happen in a real game scenario. They do throughout the year all of the time. Every team has to adjust personnel, schemes and gameplans during the regular season. Why not just make the regular season longer and see who is REALLY good at getting a team prepared without full-contact activity?

NFL players and coaches are PROFESSIONALS after all...do they really need 4 chances to get it right before they have to get it right?

tyler

[havanother]

I have an idea! Let's let all the players hook up to an Xbox for each game and play the entire season in virtual reality, that way no one gets hurt. But then the thumb injuries would bring up the same discussion.

What the hell, It's football, injuries suck, but they happen to everyone. The preseason is basically a big scrimmage that's aired on Nat'l TV. The players need it to get starting jobs and the coaches need it to play the best possible team in week 1.