Why NFL commissioner really floated idea of cutting preseason

Now would probably be a good time for a refresher course on one of the NFL’s most important truths: Roger Goodell works for the owners. Even if he must punish one on occasion, the commissioner works to enrich them. Perhaps you were tempted to think otherwise earlier this week when Goodell expressed little enthusiasm for preseason football.

"I feel what we should be doing is always to the highest quality, and I'm not sure preseason games meet that level right now," Goodell said, via the Associated Press. "I’m not sure, talking with coaches, that four preseason games is necessary anymore to get ready for a season to evaluate players, develop players.”

If he followed that up with “and that’s why I think it’s important for the health of our players and the health of our sport to cut the preseason in half, while maintaining our current 16-game regular season,” it would have been headline news. But he didn't. Here's the real story:

Goodell and the owners want an 18-game regular season. They’ve talked about this publicly since at least 2011. Their motivation is greed. Turning two preseason games into regular-season contests means more money for owners. Tickets and parking would be at premium prices. Concession sales would be robust. Stadiums would mostly be filled. Business would boom even more for all 32 franchises.

The collective bargaining agreement expires in 21 months, and lengthening the regular season will be a major issue when the NFL and NFLPA sit down to hammer out a new deal. Goodell aims to get out ahead of that issue early. Fans hate preseason, so even though the cost of two more regular-season games would fall on them, most are willing to pay the price.

The players aren't.

The physical toll of playing 18 regular-season games is exorbitant. Steelers offensive lineman Ramon Foster, the team’s NFLPA representative, is one of many players against the idea. 

“To add two more regular-season games, you’re beating guys down, you’re shortening careers if that’s what you want to do,” he told a Pittsburgh radio station. “You might have a higher profit margin, but the product might not be as well. I think it’s a little bit of over-saturation if you add two more games.”

Last August, NFLPA president Eric Winston was even more blunt.  “Let’s look at it from a common-sense standpoint,” he said. “Does anybody think playing two more games is safer for players?” 

Hall of Fame coach Tony Dungy, a former player, cut right to the chase as well. "I'm watching the NBA playoffs now and you see the effects of this long season," he said earlier this week on Pro Football Talk. "Kawhi Leonard limping up and down the floor, Kevin Durant out, Klay Thompson may be out, that's not what people want to see in the playoffs. We'd get some of the same thing if you add more games. I don't think it'd be good for the players."

Few rational people think a longer regular season would actually be safer. Cowboys owner Jerry Jones tried to make that argument, but he’s not exactly a neutral party.

Adding an extra bye week to offset the two extra regular-season games has been floated as a possible remedy, but that seems like a half-measure at best. More regular-season play would mean more money for the players, but their resistance despite that fact underscores how serious they are about the safety risk 18 games would pose.

Of course, how Goodell dressed up the critique of the current preseason format was smart. He concentrated on football reasons, cited conversations with coaches, and focused on player evaluation and development. 

No owner wants to sacrifice money by cutting four preseason to two -- unless two regular-season games are added. Who wins with an 18-game regular season? The owners, because they make more money, and the fans, because they get to watch more “real” football, or perhaps more accurately, don’t have to watch as much of the meaningless variety.

Who loses? The players. They always do.