View Full Version : Expand Regular Season to at least 100 games

08-06-2002, 03:45 PM
Dear Mr. Stern,

82 games and playoffs .. thatīs a season from november to may ... give us at least 18 more games a season, thatīs one month more, hereīs a short list of advantages that would come along.

- at least 5 more home games for each team, thatīs more earnings for each team, and the remaining games could be played overseas (like in munich Mavericks vs. Kings) for marketing reasons
- shorter off-season: fans donīt get bored to hell, and players wonīt spent as much time fighting legal issues (thus destroying the image of the nba by bad reputation)
- more injuries to the superstars: more playing time for second tier guys, so more hustling and the chances that the non-injured superstars can kick ass vs. the second tiers, and since insurany companies will have to share some of the money, it could help the teams to lessen their expenses
- more rivalry games, if you add some knicks-heat or lakers-kings games
- if you break down the "penalty-per-game" money the nba is collecting (total amount of fees divided by the number of games played would give you a solid number of extra money by this misbehaviour, since some of those feeīs are stackable the increase would extent the percentual increase of games

So PLEASE - 5 months off season is BORING. Change it!

For the love of the mo... uhmmm ... GAME ...


08-06-2002, 04:07 PM
I hate the offseason as much as anyone but guys playing 100 games a year not including playoffs will hurt players.

Imagine if Dirk had to wait another month before having his offseason surgery. How effective would he be? How much could he improve during the offseason on such short rest?

Personally I think they ought to shorten it to able 60 games.

08-06-2002, 04:41 PM
I agree.. If they did that, we would be robbed of probably good quality 82 games atleast. So that players could preserve themselves for the playoffs, I could see players missing a week here and there to rest a sprained finger or something like that.. That would be the only reason I don't think that would be a good idea. HOWEVER I do HATE the offseason just like you and i wish HATE the feeling the day after the championship game because there's NOTHING to look forward to but I think it would sort of dilute the basketball season.

08-06-2002, 04:53 PM
Too many teams with too many guys coasting too many games as it is.

If anything, they need to play fewer games, with perhaps more time between games. None of the three games in four nights nonsense that results in diluted play.

And truth be told, the league could stand to contract by at least a few teams.

08-06-2002, 04:59 PM
<< And truth be told, the league could stand to contract by at least a few teams. >>

But if they contract, who is going to hire Layden? i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

08-06-2002, 05:02 PM
I heard he has a standing offer from the New Jersey Generals.

08-06-2002, 05:04 PM
well, actually it would be not much of a problem to play 82 games in 8 months instead of playing it in 5 and a half, as it is at the moment ...

my post was a little sarcastic, but this off season is BORING to hell ...

btw - deke just traded to the nets