The handwriting is on the wall. NFL owners want to eventually expand the regular season from 17 games to 18. The owners usually get what they want, so it seems like a matter of when, and not if, we see an expansion.

The current collective bargaining agreement runs through 2030, but NFL owners, officials and leaders of the NFL Players Association have already begun very preliminary discussions on what an 18-game season would look like and what kinds of concessions each side would have to make to facilitate such a change. But the two sides are nowhere close to hammering out an agreement.

For now, the majority of NFL players we spoke to oppose the idea of an 18-game season. Of the 108 players who answered when asked for The Athletic’s second anonymous player poll, 64 said they are not in favor of the league adding an 18th game. Meanwhile, 29 players said they would be in favor of the move and 15 described themselves as undecided.

Those opposed to the idea are staunchly opposed.

“No. Hell no,” one player said. “It’s too much on our bodies.”

“F— no. F— no,” a second player responded. “For what? F— no. F– no. F— no. Make it shorter.”

Said a third, “No. The money’s not worth it. And it doesn’t affect the playoff bracket. One more extra game is not gonna affect the playoff bracket.”

More football sounds great to fans and owners, but many players have other factors to consider.

“No, because players barely make it through 17, so adding 18, we don’t know what type of implications that’ll have long-term,” one player said, “because you’ll see guys have high use one year and the whole next year they battle injuries. Physically, I think it’s too much, and I know from the standpoint of the NFL, they see the money, but they’re gonna lose a lot of star players to injuries.”

GO DEEPER

Why NFL players trust a football outsider to navigate 18-game-season negotiations and more

Another player worried that continued expansion of the schedule would decrease the magnitude of each game.

“What makes football great is there are so few games, and each game matters like 10 baseball games and five basketball games. So they all matter,” he said. “And 17 is kind of nice, because nobody is going to be .500. We’re not doing ties. You’re either over .500, or under .500. If it ever does happen, it has to be mandated grass (fields) across the league.”

Players always take issue with the NFL’s claims of caring about player safety when they also hear of owners wanting additional games. But they understand the driving factor behind such a decision.

“The NFL is all about making money, so they’re going to add another game of course,” one player said. “It’ll be more money coming in.”

He hit the nail on the head: The NFL is all about making money. Conversely, the players want to increase their earning potential as well. Because of that mutual desire, even players who strongly oppose the idea of the expansion to 18 games acknowledge they may have to relent to continue to grow their portion of the economic pie.

“I get it, it’s the money side,” a player said. “You know, get the money while you can, you just keep on adding games. But I think it has more wear and tear on the body. If they’re going to make an 18th game, they’re going to have to change something somewhere else. So I’ll be curious to see what they would do.”

Players are concerned about adding more wear and tear to their bodies if the NFL ultimately adds an 18th game. (Ken Blaze / Imagn Images)

Said another, “No. Unless they’re giving us some more money, then no. This is a long season as it is, you know? Adding the last one, it was what, 16 at first, and then to 17. Eighteen is just crazy.”

Players currently receive 48.8 percent of all revenue and the owners take in the remaining 51.2 percent, but that split would most definitely have to change if the league expects to sway players on the 18th game. Players were also asked a follow-up question as to what the NFL would need to adjust to accommodate a potential 18th game. The most common response was an additional bye week, while others cited changes to the preseason and offseason schedule and, of course, more money.

“I am in favor if that means more revenue share for the players and if there’s an additional bye week worked in within the season,” one player said.

“If it means more money, I’m down,” another said. “A lot more money, though. Not just another game check. (And) two bye weeks.”

Another player, thinking of the earning potential, also said he would sign off on an 18th game.

“Yes, if the salary, regardless of inflation, is gonna reflect it, and you up the amount of practice squad players per team,” he said. “Just because I always think about the little guys, so I’m looking at minimum salaries and practice squad players. I just want the bread. I just want another $100K or $200K. I’m not tripping off getting extra rest as long as it’s all the same playing field and everybody else get the same rest. It’s cool with me, but then again, I’m a grinder. I’ll play 20 games for another $500K.”

A few players liked the idea of an 18th game simply because they enjoy playing.

“Love the game,” one said. “You wanna add more? Add more.”

They believed with proper adjustments to the preseason and with the implementation of a second bye, players would find ways to manage and adjust to the additional wear and tear.

“Two real bye weeks,” one player said. “Not a three-day week that the league tries to get away with after Thursday games. Two full weeks and that gets you to the Presidents Day holiday for the Super Bowl like they want.”

GO DEEPER

Roger Goodell idealizes 18-game schedule, moved back Super Bowl

Players surveyed seem to know that no matter their reservations, an 18th game is coming, and there is little they can do aside from work to negotiate the best possible financial and benefits package.

As one veteran said, “I hope by the time we get to the point, way later down the road, that I’m out of the league. But I know it’s coming.”

(Top illustration: Dan Goldfarb / The Athletic; photos: Ryan Kang and Chris Unger / Getty Images)