Nov 29, 2017 2 min read

In regard to the NFL being greedy, as you stated in a Nov. 17 editorial, the organization is guilty as charged. Greedy in so many ways.

Yes, football after only four days “rest” for a Thursday night game, especially when one team travels for it, and one or both may have traveled on the Sunday before, is just unfair to the players. But it might not be necessary to throw the baby out when emptying the bathwater.

First, there is already a small competitive advantage in playing Thursday night games. Unlike Monday night, when a team has a short week to the next Sunday, but their opponent has a full week’s rest, the Thursday night rest advantage is this: Both teams then have a week-plus of rest, healing and preparation before their next game. Not so for their next opponent. Small advantage there.

But how about the short week from Sunday to Thursday? Simply schedule every Thursday night game after each team’s “bye week.” A week and four days rest from their last game, and a week and three days rest following Thursday night before their next game. That’s still a competitive advantage over their next opponent. I suspect the schedule-makers can work out the details so likely attractive Thursday night matchups can be arranged – after all, up to six teams are scheduled off every week.

In fact, teams having a bad game from “rust” coming back from two weeks off should be less common with the more balanced rests. More rest, less rust, what’s not to like? I suspect the players would love this schedule. And fans can get their midweek fix.

By the way, I agree with the editorial. Adding two weeks to the schedule – going to 18 games – would be an awful money-grab at the expense of player well-being.

Joseph Bogo

Avella