My son, the Man-Cub ™ asked me this today at lunch. Why is it that football has SO few games compared to hockey? They do not compete for playing field space, even though their seasons coincide.
I was about to launch into some 100% b.s. fluff about Network scheduling and revenues and whatnot, when I wisely told him, : Let’s ask the Teeming Millions".
Anyone know the real reason why the NFL season is roughly 16 games, and a hockey season is many many more?
My kid, he’s home sick today. It’ll make him feel better to find out the Straight Dope here, ok? Have some pity !!!
I believe the answer is that pro football is a an outgrowth of school football. Schools had a number of reasons for limiting the season (expense, limiting the distraction, risk to the student body, etc.). Personally, I LIKE the fact that it is a short season. It makes it something to look forward to. Pro hockey, on the other hand, has extended the season so long that it is now something to fervently pray will end. (And, I used to be more of a hockey fan than a football fan.)
I always assumed the low number of games in football relative to the other three major league sports is because of the relatively high probability of injury due to tackles, sacks, etc. While physical contact occurs in the other sports, and can be quite rough, in no other sport is direct bone-crunching physical contact such an integral part of the game. (Although in hockey fights may be an integral part of the sport as it is played, they are not directly required by the game.)
I must admit I don’t know much about the details of how the NFL is currently funded, but apparently they function on a revenue-sharing system which means that no team is dependent on ticket sales to stay solvent. This is not really the case in other sports; you could just as easily have picked baseball as hockey, or basketball. So some of the reason why football’s season has not expanded recently the way other sports’ have is because they don’t need to economically.
American football is brutal. The players need more time between games to heal compared to the other stick and ball sports.
I imagine an 80 game NFL season would be a blood bath. With all the injuries, the quality of play would suffer and careers, short as they are, would be even shorter.
In the long run, an 80 game NFL season would be suicide for the sport.
I agree with Colibri - football is so physically punishing that one game per week is about all the players can stand. Even hockey, for all its tough-guy reputation, doesn’t seem to be nearly as abusive. NHL teams play, what, something like 2 or 3 games a week on average? (I could look, but won’t right now.)
The NFL could perhaps scooch things down to, say, a game every five days on average without too much increase in injuries and such. But that would get them out-of-synch with their current orgy-of-football-every-Sunday schedule, which I think is a large part of the attraction - I can’t see them wanting to do that.
Two games a week (once on the weekend and once on Wednesday or Thursday) would keep that, but I don’t think there’s any way the current game could be played that often.
Of course, if the league simply said, “Games every three days,” the teams would find ways to play them. This would involve lots of playing time for backups, larger rosters (thinning the talent pool even more), scads of injuries, and generally piss-poor play as saving oneself for the next game would become much more critical. I don’t think many folks would want to watch this - I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t.
I guess I didn’t articulate it well. I agree with all of you. ( or, if you’re in Philly, all of Youse ). However- they start training camps in August, why can’t they let the season run up against the beginning of major league baseball? Instead of stopping the NFL regular games in December, let them run till mid March??? Most if not all teams play down south till April or May.
Just a thought. I’ll tell the little whippersnapper to stop asking me such annoying questions, and we’ll just leave it at that !!
It would cost a lot of money to play 80 football games as teams would have to have a lot of players on hand to fill in for injuries.
That’s one advantage hockey has. Teams only dress 20 players per game, but they can have many more on the major league roster. So when a player gets hurt and misses a game, one of the extra players takes his spot.
This exists to a certain extent in football, but there are many more restrictions.
…Nice, how I didn’t finish the last thought. If the NFL can run games concurrently with the Major League Baseball fellows in Aug, Sept and Oct, why can’t they do it at the other end of the season.
Of course, only one game a week. I spent some time around professional football players. They are astonishingly LARGE specimens of the race but I do agree, they sure as heck suffer for their game.
Think of it- 8 extra weeks of regular season. IMAGINE !!!
I think it’s impractical to play basebal in the summertime as it is not a warm-weather sport. Those games in September are usually pretty awful in most parts of the U.S.
And it’s only been in the last 30 years that the NFL season stretched into late December and then into January and last year February. For the most part, it’s too damn cold to play outdoors.
There’s a reason why the Grey Cup is held in November. Who’s going to sit outside in Edmonton around Christmastime to watch a game?
The subject of a longer season comes up every spring at the owner’s meetings. Usually those in favor want to shorten the preseason by 2 games and add those to the regular season. Every year the idea is vetoed becuase the majority likes the extended preseason.
I think the potential injuries is what’s keeping the NFL season where it is. The NFLPA would surely have a vote on expanding the season and they would probably vote “no” for the well-being of the players.
For nwow I would tell the little guy that the season is 16 games so the rookies can still adjust to the game. They already have a hard time adjusting and playing more games than 16 would be even harder on them.
Having played both football and hockey, I can state with complete confidence that hockey is much more physically punishing than football. When people are frequently smashing into you at 20 or 30 MPH (far faster than 99.999% of football players can achieve) and you are in “sprint” mode for minutes at a time (vs. a few seconds at a time for football), there is no comparison. Most professional hockey players have to struggle to maintain their weight during a season.
I’ve been a starting running back, linebacker and defensive lineman. It doesn’t begin to compare to hockey.
WRT to reason for the shorter football season, I’d point to a combination of tradition and cost: there’s roughly three times as many players on a football team as a on hockey team, with the attendant increase in support staff and coaches.
I couldn’t agree with Cerowyn more. I too have played both sports. Hockey is FAR more demanding. Perhaps the lack of a big TV contract means hockey teams need more gate revenue to be profitable.
Having played both sports also, I strongly feel that while hockey may be more physically demanding, in terms of stamina and such, it certainly isn’t more brutal in terms of causing injuries. I was always much more banged up and sore after a football game than a hockey game (of course, I played football at a much higher level also)
This site (PDF) shows the NCAA injury rates for various sports in both practice and game situations. The numbers for the 2001-2002 season are (in injuries per 1000 exposures)
Football - 8.1 (spring practice) 4.2 (Fall practice) 36.9 (game)
Hockey (men’s) - 2.0 (practice) 19.7 (game)
Oddly, I can’t find pro injury rates.
Note: I’m certainly not trying to start a “who’s tougher” argument at all. Just answering the question by showing that in order to play a 50+ game schedule, NFL rosters would have to be probably around 200 players. Then you have the cost, quality of play, and dilution of the hype buildup each week. Also, don’t discount the fact that with only 16 games, most teams are in the playoff hunt up until the last couple of games.
). However- they start training camps in August, why can’t they let the season run up against the beginning of major league baseball? Instead of stopping the NFL regular games in December, let them run till mid March??? Most if not all teams play down south till April or May.