NFL looking into expanding the playing field (1 Viewer)

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/nfl-considered-widening-playing-field-35-feet-may-190404198--nfl.htmlthat the league has talked about widening the field sideline-to-sideline from 160 feet to 195 feet, which is the CFL standard, and the league might look into the idea again this offseason.

 

[sho nuff]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

 

[lod01]

I would think that would really put a new emphasis on speed, especially RBs. Also, it would have mean more KO's are taking out of the endzone, which the NFL would not like.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Can't wait for the 2nd 50 yard line.

 

[roadkill1292]

Instead of three downs, though, the NFL should keep it four downs but make it 15 yards for a first down. Unless you're Jacksonville, 10 yards is too easy these days.We're getting there. Next up, kill that effin draft and replace it with something more entertaining. It's not 1960 anymore.

 

[flc735]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

i don't think that would be a tough problem to solve.more space means more offense. easier for WRs to get open, more break away plays ect... it would highlight the skill players on offense and lessen the importance of lineman. i am not sure what effect it would have on player safety. special teams may become more important since it would be more likely to return kicks. everyone would have to adopt a spread type offense or be left in the dust. they keep catering towards the offense and the passing game. this is making defenses less and less relevant. eventually, we will reach the point where defenses just don't matter in any significant way.

 

[Shane Falco]

Instead of three downs, though, the NFL should keep it four downs but make it 15 yards for a first down. Unless you're Jacksonville, 10 yards is too easy these days.

We're getting there. Next up, kill that effin draft and replace it with something more entertaining. It's not 1960 anymore.

Imagine an auction instead. Jerry Jones would be in heaven

 

[roadkill1292]

Instead of three downs, though, the NFL should keep it four downs but make it 15 yards for a first down. Unless you're Jacksonville, 10 yards is too easy these days.

We're getting there. Next up, kill that effin draft and replace it with something more entertaining. It's not 1960 anymore.

Imagine an auction instead. Jerry Jones would be in heaven

We'd all enjoy watching Jerruh screw it up. There'd still be a salary cap -- he couldn't buy his way out of his mistakes.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I've long been in favor of this idea.What I would like to see is an analysis of the number of serious injuries CFL players sustain. Is it a higher rate than NFL players? I get that they're not at the same level athletically, but it'd be a start.

 

[butcher boy]

One step closer to implementing my proposed change to field goals of hanging a special teams player on a wire between the goalposts as another means of blocking the kick.

 

[sho nuff]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

i don't think that would be a tough problem to solve.more space means more offense. easier for WRs to get open, more break away plays ect... it would highlight the skill players on offense and lessen the importance of lineman. i am not sure what effect it would have on player safety. special teams may become more important since it would be more likely to return kicks. everyone would have to adopt a spread type offense or be left in the dust. they keep catering towards the offense and the passing game. this is making defenses less and less relevant. eventually, we will reach the point where defenses just don't matter in any significant way.

You don't think it will be tough to fix in places like GB where people have had tickets for 50+ years and are not going to be asked to move?Some of these stadiums already don't have that much room on the sidelines. Take away 35 more feet and seats need to be moved.

 

[Riversco]

This should make the NFL/CFL merger go much more smoothly. Another 10 teams and add a third conference!!!!!!!!Notre Ligue.

 

[GregR]

I expect much like last year, they will examine the idea and reject it.

 

[Koya]

Much ado about nothing here. I could see a relatively small adjustment (add 10 yards maybe) but even that would be met with a huge amount of resistence IMO. I can see an arguement in that the bigger, faster athletes of today can be that much more entertaining on a wider field... But again that's a big change in and of itself.

 

[Insein]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

 

[Rockchild]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

 

[Insein]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

They will still be an extra 40 feet away from the game.

 

[sho nuff]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

Say they move row 1 to row 6.Do you think row 6 has the same number of seats (likely more right considering now a larger circumference.It shifts so much in a stadium to do as you are saying...plus as you say costing the top rows their tickets.People who waited for years on waiting lists for tickets...and you are now telling them they are screwed.The NFL going to refund their seat licenses...or force the teams to bite the bullet?Its simply a terrible idea and not as easy as some of you are trying to think it could be.

 

[Rockchild]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

Say they move row 1 to row 6.Do you think row 6 has the same number of seats (likely more right considering now a larger circumference.It shifts so much in a stadium to do as you are saying...plus as you say costing the top rows their tickets.People who waited for years on waiting lists for tickets...and you are now telling them they are screwed.The NFL going to refund their seat licenses...or force the teams to bite the bullet?Its simply a terrible idea and not as easy as some of you are trying to think it could be.

I'm not saying I agree with it just that those front row seats aren't the ones that would be eliminated.

 

[TxBuckeye]

more space means more offense. easier for WRs to get open, more break away plays ect... it would highlight the skill players on offense and lessen the importance of lineman.

This was already one of (the?) highest scoring seasons ever. Do we really need MORE offense to appease the ADD crowd?

 

[CapnJB]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

Say they move row 1 to row 6.Do you think row 6 has the same number of seats (likely more right considering now a larger circumference.It shifts so much in a stadium to do as you are saying...plus as you say costing the top rows their tickets.People who waited for years on waiting lists for tickets...and you are now telling them they are screwed.The NFL going to refund their seat licenses...or force the teams to bite the bullet?Its simply a terrible idea and not as easy as some of you are trying to think it could be.

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

 

[RUSF18]

This is all about safety, not about increasing offense. It's pretty simple...players are bigger, stronger and faster than they once were, but they're playing on the same size field. It's a logical next step. Of course that doesn't mean it will happen. It actually makes more sense for the NBA to do this, from a level of play standpoint, than the NFL.

 

[Novice2]

Sure if the defense can have 12 players.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

They would just stretch out the bench area to make up for the lesser depth they would have to work with.

 

[roadkill1292]

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

They would just stretch out the bench area to make up for the lesser depth they would have to work with.

Without thinking about it too hard, it seems to me that many more college stadiums would have problems increasing field size than the NFL would. The crowd is right on top of the sideline at some places, like Notre Dame. This also seems like another deal where, like tax change, the smart thing to do would be to phase it in gradually. Why change the game overnight when you could just add a foot to the field width every year until you hit the sweet spot?

 

[tdmills]

This is all about safety, not about increasing offense. It's pretty simple...players are bigger, stronger and faster than they once were, but they're playing on the same size field. It's a logical next step. Of course that doesn't mean it will happen. It actually makes more sense for the NBA to do this, from a level of play standpoint, than the NFL.

The debate shouldn't be about 100 fans upset about a seat, it should be about making this great game we love last forever. The safer it becomes, the better that chance.

 

[meyerj31]

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

They would just stretch out the bench area to make up for the lesser depth they would have to work with.

Without thinking about it too hard, it seems to me that many more college stadiums would have problems increasing field size than the NFL would. The crowd is right on top of the sideline at some places, like Notre Dame. This also seems like another deal where, like tax change, the smart thing to do would be to phase it in gradually. Why change the game overnight when you could just add a foot to the field width every year until you hit the sweet spot?

The entire premise of creating a safer game by increasing the size of the field is absurd. The game has had more injury issues after adopting spread offense because defensive players are running full speed to tackle someone.The most ingenious way I have heard to help with player safety, by Vic (beat write for the Packers), is to require all players to be within 10 yards of the ball when it is snapped. No more 2 deep safeties coming up full speed to crack on a seam route. Everyone has to stay with each other and players would literally have to BEAT THE OTHER GUY to get open. That's football. And I think it would drastically reduce injuries. 10 yards is more than you think ... since it's 10 yards to each side. I would love to see this adopted ... but it will never be since it might hurt FF stats and scoring has the potential to go down. I don't think it would impact scoring much, but Roger isn't touching anything that might lower fantay numbers because he knows it is driving the leagues popularity. So what does he do? Proposes more space. Hilarious.

 

[RUSF18]

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

They would just stretch out the bench area to make up for the lesser depth they would have to work with.

Without thinking about it too hard, it seems to me that many more college stadiums would have problems increasing field size than the NFL would. The crowd is right on top of the sideline at some places, like Notre Dame. This also seems like another deal where, like tax change, the smart thing to do would be to phase it in gradually. Why change the game overnight when you could just add a foot to the field width every year until you hit the sweet spot?

The entire premise of creating a safer game by increasing the size of the field is absurd. The game has had more injury issues after adopting spread offense because defensive players are running full speed to tackle someone.The most ingenious way I have heard to help with player safety, by Vic (beat write for the Packers), is to require all players to be within 10 yards of the ball when it is snapped. No more 2 deep safeties coming up full speed to crack on a seam route. Everyone has to stay with each other and players would literally have to BEAT THE OTHER GUY to get open. That's football. And I think it would drastically reduce injuries. 10 yards is more than you think ... since it's 10 yards to each side. I would love to see this adopted ... but it will never be since it might hurt FF stats and scoring has the potential to go down. I don't think it would impact scoring much, but Roger isn't touching anything that might lower fantay numbers because he knows it is driving the leagues popularity. So what does he do? Proposes more space. Hilarious.

How would offenses suffer with this? The defenses' main advantage in coverage is having the threat of the safeties over the top to take away the big play. You're going to put a bunch of LBs and safeties in man coverage against speedy slot-type WRs, good luck with that. All this would do is turn the league into even more of a passing league than it has already become.

 

[sho nuff]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

Say they move row 1 to row 6.Do you think row 6 has the same number of seats (likely more right considering now a larger circumference.It shifts so much in a stadium to do as you are saying...plus as you say costing the top rows their tickets.People who waited for years on waiting lists for tickets...and you are now telling them they are screwed.The NFL going to refund their seat licenses...or force the teams to bite the bullet?Its simply a terrible idea and not as easy as some of you are trying to think it could be.

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

Ive stood on that sidline when there was just a tour group and not a full team...players...coaches...doctor s...camer crews...officials...and it was tight.Its smaller than you think.And its not a handful of fans that is the problem...its the cost of renovating a stadium and relocating seats...the trying to force teams to have to pay it.

 

[roadkill1292]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

Say they move row 1 to row 6.Do you think row 6 has the same number of seats (likely more right considering now a larger circumference.It shifts so much in a stadium to do as you are saying...plus as you say costing the top rows their tickets.People who waited for years on waiting lists for tickets...and you are now telling them they are screwed.The NFL going to refund their seat licenses...or force the teams to bite the bullet?Its simply a terrible idea and not as easy as some of you are trying to think it could be.

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

Ive stood on that sidline when there was just a tour group and not a full team...players...coaches...doctor s...camer crews...officials...and it was tight.Its smaller than you think.And its not a handful of fans that is the problem...its the cost of renovating a stadium and relocating seats...the trying to force teams to have to pay it.

Let's just kick those obstructionists in Green Bay out of the league.

 

[tdmills]

Dumb...and is the NFL going to pay for teams to totally redesign their stadiums and any lost revenue for seats that have to be removed?Including long time season ticket holders with down low seats?

Got it in 1.

Technically, you don't lose the down low seats but the up top seats as everyone moves up. You still lose seating but not the higher priced ones.

Say they move row 1 to row 6.Do you think row 6 has the same number of seats (likely more right considering now a larger circumference.It shifts so much in a stadium to do as you are saying...plus as you say costing the top rows their tickets.People who waited for years on waiting lists for tickets...and you are now telling them they are screwed.The NFL going to refund their seat licenses...or force the teams to bite the bullet?Its simply a terrible idea and not as easy as some of you are trying to think it could be.

First, I don't think a handful of fans would stand in the way of any direction the NFL decides to take. But that said, I don't think anyone would have to lose seats regardless. Even in Green Bay, which is arguably one of the smaller stadiums at field level, adding 35 feet to the width of the field shouldn't be difficult. It's basically adding six yards to each side of the field. I took a look at the satelite view of Lambeau and using the yard markers as a frame of reference, this should give you an idea of how much space would be needed.Sure some things might require some adjustments, but I'd imagine they'd look into varying the size of team areas before removing 5 rows of seats.

Ive stood on that sidline when there was just a tour group and not a full team...players...coaches...doctor s...camer crews...officials...and it was tight.Its smaller than you think.And its not a handful of fans that is the problem...its the cost of renovating a stadium and relocating seats...the trying to force teams to have to pay it.

Let's just kick those obstructionists in Green Bay out of the league.

The Legend of Donald Driver that expands across the universe will likely keep them in the league.

 

[Nucker101]

I wonder how big the field will be in 100 years when robots are playing.

 

[GregR]

Not something the NFL is considering.PFT:

In response to the comments from former NFL G.M. Bill Polian that a wider field could make the NFL game safer, current NFL executive V.P. of football operations Ray Anderson says that it’s old news.“It was an idea bantered about two or three years ago as part of a safety discussion,” Anderson tells Albert Breer of NFL Network. “It didn’t get much traction at all then, and it’s not on the agenda for this upcoming series of Competition Committee meetings. I don’t see that as something to be discussed anytime soon.”We reported earlier today that, indeed, the subject isn’t on the Competition Committee’s agenda.