This article explains it in more detail:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/634090-why-the-nfl-must-go-to-18-games-eventually

Simple Solution for 18 games: Increase the roster size

The owners are to greedy and the Players are to dumb and greedy

The real problem is, neither side gives a sh!t about the fans….
_______________________
Not so simple really. Bigger roster just means more backups. You think teams will pull their key players for games that could decide playoff spots? No, the starters would simply play 2 more games, further increasing the odds of injury. In other words, those larger rosters could end up representing all of the backups playing in the playoff games because even more starters are injured.

A much better option would be to go to a 3-17 setup, with a somewhat expanded roster (or just make all 53 players on the roster able to suit up for games) with an additional bye week for each team. They’d only be adding one additional game, and they’d give every player an additional week off to recuperate during the season. Oh, and they’d still end up with 2 additional weeks of programming to provide to the networks. Each week, there are plenty of games that don’t get broadcast other than in their home region (unless you have the NFL Sunday ticket with direct tv). This approach would make the league even more money than a 2 preseason, 18 regular season game scenario. They’d only lose one preseason game, and it would be replaced with two additional weeks of programming.

It needs to stay like it is. 4 preseason games and 16 reg games.

To achieve 18 games at very little cost, all you need to do is include the practice squad into the main roster giving 61 gameday guys; (who are already being paid).

You then say to the existing vets; you choose whether or not you want to play the two additional games or not.

That gives the NFL 32 games worth of additional revenue to pay everyone what they want……more dollar$$$$$$$$.

Players would welcome a 2nd week to rest their bodies, networks would welcome an extra week of national broadcasts, fans would welcome the same…and since it would not require teams to play an addition game, all the teams would get extra TV revenue with no additional cost.

Win, win, win.

The owners are missing boat on this preseason/18 game schedule nonsense.

I know it get’s cold in Philly, but I don’t think they have snow during preseason games.

Whoa, hold on a minute… there are diehard fans of catfighting fat chicks? (Or are they just bettors who have moved on from dogfighting, now that Mike Vick’s out of the business?)

The fans also will say “Fine. Do it.”

As for money, the players will certainly miss preseason when they realize their checks are smaller the following season. That said, two more regular season games gives them more revenue to draw from, which means more money.

Win-win.

Yes their may be some injuries, but with a shortened preseason, their will be less injuries in camp so it should even out.

If they increase roster size it should make the union happy.

I am sure its something they can negotiate, since its obvious after the last 4-5 months that money talks.

you mean 19 weeks with 17 games.

The preseason might have meant something from an entertainment standpoint before the 24/7/365 media cycle that we live in came about. These days football season never really ends with the continual promotion that free agency, the draft, the OTA’s, training camp and the fan sites on the web and the aforementioned media cycle creates.

In that environment the preseason is a boring interlude between all the speculation of the offseason and the actual start of games that mean something.

They could get rid of the preseason completely and most people just wouldn’t care.

Even if the players say no the owners will just bump up the prices on tickets, parking, …