The NFL has voted to double the number of short-week games that every team can be scheduled to play. The NFL Players Association has, so far, said nothing.
Players have had something to say. Some don’t like the idea of being required to play on a Sunday and then play on a Thursday not once per year but twice.
Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes tweeted a facepalm in response to the news. Teammate Justin Reid said this: “Multiple Thursday night games will be terrible for player safety. If fans want to see a better product on Thursday nights, forcing beat-up players to get suited up for a surprise Thursday night game with no time to really game plan for is not the way to do it.”
The league justifies the expansion of short-week games by pointing to the notion that the injury rates are no different in games played with normal rest and in games played on short rest. But that’s only part of the story.
Players who suffer an injury on a Sunday sometimes aren’t even able to play on Thursday, even though they may have been able to suit up and go if the game had been played on Sunday.
Also, without seeing the specific parameters of the league’s study, it’s impossible to know whether, for example, the numbers are based on players who weren’t on the injury report before a given game, or whether it also includes players who enter the game with some sort of injury.
Then there’s the fact that the injury report is hardly a reliable indicator of the impact of playing a football game on player health and safety. Some injuries don’t get reported to the team. Many injuries are simply bumps and bruises that don’t result in any treatment or missed practice time, but they are still injuries.
Overlooked in this equation as well is the cumulative impact of multiple four-day-turnaround games on players who are now playing 17 regular-season games.
Reid’s other concern is valid, too. It’s something Chris Simms mentioned during Wednesday’s PFT Live. With only Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday to prepare, the game planning is more basic and limited. The preparation is truncated. The best team may not win, because the best team may not have the best chance to prepare. And neither team will be at its absolute best.
Under the prior scheduling formula, teams at least had a chance to account for the Sunday-Thursday turnaround in their overall planning for the season. The Thursday flex, if/when (when) it passes, will force teams to adapt on the fly to a shift in having six days between games to having three.
But, again, those are just the opinions of specific players. What do the players collectively think? What is the NFLPA’s position?
Can the NFL make this change without clearing it first with the union? Does the union agree to it?
And, really, where does it end? The league’s belief that there’s no impact on player health and safety from playing with three days off between games could become a very potent starting point for more three or four or five short-week games per year, along with other creative scheduling ideas that entail significantly less rest, recovery, and preparation than the usual Sunday-to-Sunday approach.
The league obviously doesn’t care. Does the union care? Any players who don’t like it need to get the Players Association to say and/or do something about it.
