Going into the Bye

[RiverDog]

You can't have a bye as early as we get ours this season, and it's a day longer than usual, with our next game being on MNF. Does the fact that we get our bye so early change how the coaching staff manages it? Is it too soon to give the players the extra day or two off that's customary for most byes? Are we better off getting some rest or do we keep the pedal to the metal?

I'm also curious as to how the byes are determined, specifically why do the Niners get their bye in a more natural place in Week 8 when the rest of the division has to take theirs in Week 3? In a league that prides themselves in parity, you'd think that if they couldn't put the Niners bye in Week 3 with the rest of us that they'd give it to them in Week 4.

[savvyman]

No doubt the Seahawks drew a tough schedule this year with the week 4 bye.

Also toward the end of the year - in a 5 week stretch - the Hawks play Arizona twice, San Fran Twice & Philadelphia once.

[Long Time Fan]

Play the hand that was dealt. Give the boys a few days rest early in the week and get back to business thereafter.

[mykc14]

I have no idea how they determine bye weeks, but I know there are a few 'rules.' Like the amount of times you can be a road team facing a team who had a bye the previous week, stuff like that. I have heard it is a random draw but I have a feeling that the networks have their hands all over which teams are taking a bye at any given time, to make sure they still have a marquee matchup every week.

As far as the Hawks, it is certainly not ideal in any way to have the bye this early. I hope they use it to recapture some of the offensive creativity they had in the first game and really expand upon the fly/jet sweep and read option plays as it feels like they are just showing the tip of the iceberg, which could be on purpose. On a similar note I would like to see them get Percy more involved in the offense, find a way to get him some more touches. personally I think he should be getting at least 10 offensive touches per game, really percy and Beast should be getting at least 27-30 combined touches per game IMO. On D I don't think there is much to work on really. Yeah there were some mistakes on the back end late in the game but Manning only had like 220 yards and 1 TD until the last drive, Maxwell followed his receiver into the middle too far on two of those throws and they were able to open his zone, I think the will learn from that and be fine.

[Uppercut]

I always thought everyone should have a bye after week 8. I also have thought that Thursday night FB is not good either. The problem with a long bye is staleness may set in like after 10 days between GB and SD. Maybe they need to have a mock game this coming Sunday to stay in sync.

[RiverDog]

I have no idea how they determine bye weeks, but I know there are a few 'rules.' Like the amount of times you can be a road team facing a team who had a bye the previous week, stuff like that. I have heard it is a random draw but I have a feeling that the networks have their hands all over which teams are taking a bye at any given time, to make sure they still have a marquee matchup every week.

As far as the Hawks, it is certainly not ideal in any way to have the bye this early. I hope they use it to recapture some of the offensive creativity they had in the first game and really expand upon the fly/jet sweep and read option plays as it feels like they are just showing the tip of the iceberg, which could be on purpose. On a similar note I would like to see them get Percy more involved in the offense, find a way to get him some more touches. personally I think he should be getting at least 10 offensive touches per game, really percy and Beast should be getting at least 27-30 combined touches per game IMO. On D I don't think there is much to work on really. Yeah there were some mistakes on the back end late in the game but Manning only had like 220 yards and 1 TD until the last drive, Maxwell followed his receiver into the middle too far on two of those throws and they were able to open his zone, I think the will learn from that and be fine.

It's definitely not random. It's not a coincidence that so many teams within the same division all have byes in the same week.

[Zorn76]

We're one of 6 teams that have a week #4 bye (Sea,Stl,Az,Cin,Cle,Den), so there was an 19% chance that we'd land in that group to begin with. The other 6 team byes fall on weeks #9 and #10, with the latter being our bye week in 2013 (I think).

It is what it is.

I'm not a fan of Thursday games, either. Too short a week to prepare for, and it's barely 4 days rest. Our matchup with GB didn't matter since it was week #1. The Thanksgiving game makes for good holiday drama, but I'd still rather play the 49ers on a Sunday, especially since we're the ones traveling.

Seattle is in a good spot right now, and this group has the wherewithal to handle a long stretch going into the playoffs.

EDIT: We were a week #12 bye a year ago, not #10.

[Hawktown]

I would prefer all teams had mid to 3/4 season bye weeks but as close to 3/4 season as possible. Equality IMO, would say all teams mid OR 3/4 season, not in that span but either or.

Why not give half the teams a bye week the same week (3/4 season) and schedule the best possible match-ups for that week. Then the following week, the other half of the league would be on a bye. Again, all would be 3/4 season and all the stupid networks would still have games to show (8 of them). Regardless, we all have a week where we have to watch some other team to get our football fix (or just an excuse to dink beer and act interested in the game to stay out of chores, well unless we are rooting against the 9ers!).

[HumanCockroach]

IMHO there should be NO byes prior to week six and none later than week eleven. The purpose of a bye is to allow teams a "break" to recover, but a week four bye doesn't do that. To me it's comparable to having a twelve hour day and having your lunch scheduled for two hours after you start, it makes no sense what so ever to schedule a bye so early in the year ( and honestly it makes no sense to have them as late in the year as they do) it isn't remotely necessary for scheduling purposes, so WHY does the NFL insist on doing it? There are more than enough games to accomplish the tasks in four or five weeks of the season, and it does indeed give an advantage to teams later in the season. Hell, simply go back to the two bye system if you desire an early and late bye schedule. It isn't real complicated, yet they role out that stupid week four bye every year.

At the end of the season teams NEED byes, as the have been beat up for months at that point, what logical purpose does a week four break serve ( well other than to make it that much more difficult for a team to get to or win a SB)?

[RiverDog]

IMHO there should be NO byes prior to week six and none later than week eleven. The purpose of a bye is to allow teams a "break" to recover, but a week four bye doesn't do that. To me it's comparable to having a twelve hour day and having your lunch scheduled for two hours after you start, it makes no sense what so ever to schedule a bye so early in the year ( and honestly it makes no sense to have them as late in the year as they do) it isn't remotely necessary for scheduling purposes, so WHY does the NFL insist on doing it? There are more than enough games to accomplish the tasks in four or five weeks of the season, and it does indeed give an advantage to teams later in the season. Hell, simply go back to the two bye system if you desire an early and late bye schedule. It isn't real complicated, yet they role out that stupid week four bye every year.

At the end of the season teams NEED byes, as the have been beat up for months at that point, what logical purpose does a week four break serve ( well other than to make it that much more difficult for a team to get to or win a SB)?

I agree 100% (or for us baby boomers, McGovern's 1000%). That would be the most desirable solution if the object of this is to enhance the quality of the game.

But alas, the object is not competition, parity, or the quality of the game. The object is to make as much money as humanly possible. The reason the NFL spreads the byes so thin is that they can maximize their revenue by showing the most possible games on any given weekend.

[HumanCockroach]

I'm aware of the financial aspect, just also know that they could easily compensate for it ( for instance scheduling a couple heavy weight games to be shown in cities on buys, like say for instance a Seattle/ Niner game scheduled during a buy week, or a Ravens / Pittsburgh, Atlanta/New Orleans, hell even a Dallas / Washington game will do in a pinch, though for the life of me I don't understand why). The buys are going to happen regardless, and I'm not talking about more games per week missing, just a more fair time frame. 5 Or 6 weeks for 32 teams ( or 6 teams a week during that timeframe) isn't going to keep the NFL from making money in the least, as all the games are still going to be played, and it actually IMPROVES the product when it matters, late in the season.

[RiverDog]

I'm aware of the financial aspect, just also know that they could easily compensate for it ( for instance scheduling a couple heavy weight games to be shown in cities on buys, like say for instance a Seattle/ Niner game scheduled during a buy week, or a Ravens / Pittsburgh, Atlanta/New Orleans, hell even a Dallas / Washington game will do in a pinch, though for the life of me I don't understand why). The buys are going to happen regardless, and I'm not talking about more games per week missing, just a more fair time frame. 5 Or 6 weeks for 32 teams ( or 6 teams a week during that timeframe) isn't going to keep the NFL from making money in the least, as all the games are still going to be played, and it actually IMPROVES the product when it matters, late in the season.

Time to edit that auto spell check, HC. 'Bye'.

Although I might not like it, I understand why byes are spread thin rather than grouping more of them in the middle part of the season. My thing is that they should make every attempt to at least keep parity status between divisional teams. There's no reason that I am aware of why they can't give the Niners their bye closer to what their other 3 divisional teams have.

[Long Time Fan]

My thing is that they should make every attempt to at least keep parity status between divisional teams. There's no reason that I am aware of why they can't give the Niners their bye closer to what their other 3 divisional teams have.

Seems a reasonable request.

Parity is the Robin Hood of the NFL.

[HumanCockroach]

That's just it though RD, they aren't "spreading it thin" as they still have three of those weeks with a six team bye week week four, week nine and week ten. They aren't spreading it thin for financial reasons, at least none that I can deduce, they are simply spacing things out randomly., I don't see a scheduling issue if the have six teams in week six, seven, Nine, eleven and four the other two weeks, do you? The only difference is eliminating additional weeks of only two team byes, otherwise you still have three weeks with six teams on byes, doesn't seem to be like a huge financial or scheduling problem to me.

If the NFL is really about "parity" as they profess, there shouldn't be some sort of drastic difference in when these byes take place, and yet there is.

http://fftoolbox.scout.com/mobile/nfl-b ... s.cfcfmshe

[RiverDog]

That's just it though RD, they aren't "spreading it thin" as they still have three of those weeks with a six team bye week week four, week nine and week ten. They aren't spreading it thin for financial reasons, at least none that I can deduce, they are simply spacing things out randomly., I don't see a scheduling issue if the have six teams in week six, seven, Nine, eleven and four the other two weeks, do you? The only difference is eliminating additional weeks of only two team byes, otherwise you still have three weeks with six teams on byes, doesn't seem to be like a huge financial or scheduling problem to me.

If the NFL is really about "parity" as they profess, there shouldn't be some sort of drastic difference in when these byes take place, and yet there is.

http://fftoolbox.scout.com/mobile/nfl-b ... s.cfcfmshe

I honestly don't know how to explain it, either, HC. All I know is that everything the NFL does is driven by money, and if they've figured out some way to maximize their revenue by manipulating byes, they'll do regardless of any parity issue.