There's nine teams this year that have to play three games within ten days.

Really good read in general about this year's scheduling. Sharp is claiming it's historically bad for some teams since going back to at least 1990.

Ravens have a +16 net rest advantage and the 49ers have a -21 net rest disadvantage. Pretty interesting.

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/be...rity-2024/

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

From that article:

Three Games in 10 Days
I’m annoyed by simply having to insert this section into this analysis. That’s because it never existed in any previous iteration.

In the several years that I’ve spent hours and hours post-schedule release doing this detailed equity analysis on the NFL schedule, there never was a single instance where a team played three games 10 days apart.

NFL VP of Broadcast Planning Mike North had the following to say about the situation:

“It was a unique challenge trying to find these four teams, knowing they’re going to have to play Sunday, Saturday, Wednesday. That’s three games in ten days, that’s a lot. There’s a handful of other teams that will play three games in ten days, a Monday, Sunday, Thursday sequence. So everybody’s going to share in the challenges this created, but really excited to see where we can go with it.”

The real questions that North never was asked were: Is this normal at all? Doesn’t this happen once or twice a year?

Obviously, the Wednesday games aren’t normal. But how often do teams play three games in 10 days?

2019: 0 times
2020: 0 times
2021: 0 times
2022: 0 times
2023: 0 times
It hasn’t happened once in the last five years. It’s happened only twice in the last 10 years combined.

How many times is it happening in 2024?

Nine times!

NINE!

The first four teams this happens to are not surprising:

Sunday-Saturday-Wednesday: Steelers, Ravens, Texans, Chiefs

We know that is a unique situation, as the NFL wants to play on a Wednesday (Christmas).

To do that, these teams had to play on a Saturday to allow the same amount of rest as a typical Sunday-Thursday night turnaround (three off days between gamedays).

But once the NFL introduced that ridiculously short turnaround on the guise of taking hundreds of millions in money from Netflix, the NFL said, “Hey, why don’t we just sneak this rest sequence into the schedule in other places and see if anyone says anything?”

Well here I am, to say something. Here are the other five teams and the sequence they are facing:

Monday-Sunday-Thursday: Bengals, Bears, Seahawks, Saints, Cowboys

The Bengals play Week 14 Monday night in Dallas, Week 15 Sunday in Tennessee, and Week 15 Thursday vs. Cleveland.
The Bears play Week 15 Monday night in Minnesota, Week 16 Sunday vs. Detroit, and Week 17 Thursday vs. Seattle.
The Seahawks play Week 4 Monday night in Detroit, Week 5 Sunday vs. NY Giants, and Week 6 Thursday vs. San Francisco.
The Saints play Week 5 Monday night in Kansas City, Week 6 Sunday vs. Tampa Bay, and Week 7 Thursday vs. Denver.
The Cowboys play Week 11 Monday night vs. Houston, Week 12 Sunday in Washington, and Week 13 Thursday vs. NY Giants (Thanksgiving).
The four teams forced to play these “three games in 10 days” for Christmas?

Understandable.

They’ll not be happy about the rest at the end, but the NFL is getting $150 million from Netflix for those two games.

Do they split that with the 4 teams they’re screwing? No. Teams get an equal share of money gained from TV contracts after the NFL takes its share.

So it doesn’t benefit the four teams more than any of the other teams, which stinks for them since they’re dealing with the ramifications.

But at least these two factors exist in the Christmas situation:

All four teams are playing opponents each week dealing with the same “three games in 10 days” predicament, so all will be on equal rest.
It’s generating an extra $150 million for the NFL, which they’ll get a small taste of.
But the other five teams who were given Monday-Sunday-Thursday sequences?

They’re all at a rest disadvantage, both during and by the end of the sequence.

Look at the Bengals, for example. They START with a rest disadvantage vs. the Cowboys.

Look at these games:

Week 14 Monday night in Dallas – Dallas has a three-day rest edge because Dallas played the prior Thursday
Week 15 Sunday in Tennessee – Tennessee has a one-day rest edge because Cincy is off MNF
Week 15 Thursday vs. Cleveland – Cleveland did not play three games in 10 days, so hasn’t been strained like Cincy entering this game
That’s just a brutal stretch for every one of those five teams being forced to play this gauntlet for no reason.

Again, look at the history of the NFL forcing this “three games in 10 days” sequence on its teams historically:

This year alone (2024): 9 times
Prior 5 years (2019-2023): 0 times total
Prior 10 years (2014-2023): 2 times total
Prior 20 years (2004-2023): 9 times total
Prior 30 years (1994-2023): 11 times total
The NFL is forcing in nine times (most in NFL history) something they didn’t do once in the last five years and did nine times total in the prior 20 years.

What does this say for player safety? Playing three NFL games in 10 days? Particularly late in the season?

This seems like a terrible idea. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to reach that conclusion.

What does it mean for team performance?

I went back and did the work for you, so you don’t have to speculate.

Since 1990, teams in their final game of three games in 10 days:

Won just 5 of 13 games (38.5%) despite being favored by an average of 1.6 points in those games
Covered the spread (aka out-performed expectations) in just 4 of 13 games (30.8%)
Nasty work.

Unnecessary, and nasty.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---