Why? Why give the rookies 2 less games to prove themselves and learn the NFL? The reasoning behind shortening the pre-season generally centers around vets getting injured, but that's stupid. That's the team's fault. The games don't mean anything, DON'T PLAY YOUR VETS IF YOU DON'T WANT THEM HURT! You don't have to shorten it for everyone else. That time is invaluable for rookies to translate their talent to the NFL, to learn the play book, and to determine who makes the team. Cutting the pre-season short is not a good idea, IMO.

One solution I've heard for reducing the number of pre-season games is they would increase the roster size from 53 to something like 70. That sounds like a smart move.

I think the real reason people dislike the preseason is that they're asked to pay full price for tickets. The NFL can't try to pass off an inferior product as the real thing (they certainly tried their best this preseason).

With an 18 game schedule, the rosters will grow to meet the needs of the team. That means we will most likely get to dress all 53 that we have now for each game and the practice squad would grow to about 7 players so that the total roster is 60 players per team.

Then the draft will probably grow to 8 or 9 rounds. And unless the rookies are complete morons, every one of them will make at least the practice squad and that would give them about 3 years to prove their worth. NOT JUST 2 GAMES. Caps for emphasis. Not yelling.