Would an 18-game NFL Season Be Doomsday For The Players?

Last week, former NFL writer Peter King appeared on ESPN's "Pardon the Interruption" to discuss his new book and the current status of the NFL. During the segment, the idea of a 18-game NFL season was brought up by Peter. The NFL currently has a 17-game season, but Peter is afraid more Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) cases, with a longer season, would happen with more repeated trauma to the head. He goes on to say that many former NFL players suffer from CTE, and it's insidious and something many fans don't realize to what degree it effects former players. Indeed, fans often look at the number of concussions as a major culprit, but medical personnel think the repeated hits to the head is more harmful in the long run. Because the expansion of the NFL season is relatively new, many other football analysts, including Dan Patrick's Show, oppose extending the NFL season. They claim greed is the biggest driver behind owners wanting to extend the season.

First, I enjoy watching the NFL, absent the commercials, and I also worry about CTE. However, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Put differently, we can't accuse the NFL owners and commissioner of being tone-deaf about the proposed longer season without knowing the details of their plan.

Let's pretend that the NFL today proposes a longer season but with caveats. For example, what if the owners suggest increasing the current roster size by 20%. Currently, the roster size is 53, but with a 20% increase (10.6), they suggest adding 11 additional players to each of the 32 teams. Let's also assume the owners suggest that, under this proposal, each of the 64 roster spots can play only 17 regular-season games. As a result, Pro Bowl quarterbacks, All-Pro defensive linemen, and Pro Bowl cornerbacks would be limited to 17 games, regardless of their skill level or fame. Meaning, with the increased length, no players would experience more violent collisions or "car crashes." Opponents of the longer NFL season focus on the fact that players would experience another 65 potentially violent collisions by adding another game, but with the restriction of all players only playing 17 games, the risk of CTE would not be any greater than it is today. (Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for more violent collisions; I'm just trying to explain another way to handle an added game.)  

A more radical proposal to reduce CTE is to reduce the amount of games to 16 for all players, even with a longer regular season. In this scenario, you may have to increase the active roster to 66 to account for this new restriction. Owners would be less likely to be labeled as "greedy" and may gain some goodwill in the process. In addition, with newer helmet and pads technology, the game might become safer moving forward.  

Could this not be a win-win? The owners get their 18-game season, and TV brings in more money. Broadcast partners may not complain, given how popular the NFL is so that they can sell more ad revenue. According to the Business Insider, for 2025, 83 of the top 100 programs were NFL games. The stars and all players in the league could play only 17 games, but with more money shared between owners and players, these popular players may earn more without playing more games. The fringe players will play more, increasing their value. Plus, under the new system, more fringe players may make the team, so they can earn money playing a game they love. So I ask, "Would an 18-game NFL season be doomsday for the Players?" Not with this alternative way of looking at it.

ADDITIONAL WRITER'S NOTE: It’s ironic that you have certain podcasts (I’m speaking of you, Dan Patrick) that greed is driving the owners wanted to institute a longer season. Let’s be honest, where isn’t there greed in the NFL among the owners, players, broadcasters, analysts, and podcasters? No one is exempt from greed; they all want a bigger slice of the pie. For example, you have commentators on ESPN and on the Dan Patrick Show complaining that gambling is addictive, especially among younger men and could ruin the game. At the same time, they all accept revenue from gambling companies advertising during their shows. They continue to rail on the dangerous of legalized gambling, but aren't shy about taking advertising money; do what I say, not as I do.