What if the NFL... (1 Viewer)

[PatsWillWin]

Wow did this thread turn into a fast!

It started out as one.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Maybe the NFL should examine the ever increasing sucky QB play. By the way TD passes are way off this year AND RB TD's also thru 14 games. It's been steadily worse since 1995 except for the Manning/Culpepper 2004 blowup.

Speaking of anyone in particular?

 

[rhawkins68]

Maybe the NFL should examine the ever increasing sucky QB play. By the way TD passes are way off this year AND RB TD's also thru 14 games. It's been steadily worse since 1995 except for the Manning/Culpepper 2004 blowup.

The problem with QB play in the NFL is that defenses are too violent and subject the QB to too much punishment, thus lowering their stats. The NFL has tried to solve this problem by strictly protecting the QB, but that obviously hasn't been enough. I propose that starting next year the league require defensive linement to count to two-mississippi before they can rush the passer. That way, bad teams that happen to have good pass-rushers won't have such an advantage over superior teams with crappy pass-blocking.

I heard a rumor that David Carr has been bugging management to put this exact rule into place.

 

[Hell Diablo]

Yeah, and while we are at it, let's eliminate letting receivers run after the catch. When they catch the ball, they cannot advance the ball, and the play is over. That makes about as much sense as the original idea in this thread.

Add to it that no play can go over say 15 yards. That would eliminate those flukey 70 yard runs and long passes where the defender gets burned real bad.

Especially since when players have long runs it really boosts their stats and makes them look much better than they really are.For instance, LT would have just had a regular game yesterday without his 85 yard TD run. Or FWP in the Super Bowl or last week against the Ravens. We need to come down to Earth on how good these players really are. Averaging 6-7 yards a carry per game is rediculous and likely makes the defensive team feel too bad. We should make sure they are upbeat and happy. The Cleveland Browns have the right idea. They will never let their RBs show up a defense and I applaud them for it.

 

[Iron Mike Tomczak]

This post is the most rediculous thing ever, but its funny to read.

My 2 cents are if players cant be "substandard" in their ettiquite on the field, then kickers should be abolished since they are substandard athletes who cant be on the field. Only sebastian janikowski can, since he doubles as a lineman.

And there could never be run backs since there are no kickers.

Or better yet, teams just start on the 20, screw special teams.....

Watch Canadian football if you wanna change of rules, dont mess the best sport in the USA. Its pretty much perfect minus some debatable issues (instant replay, certain penalties and sensitivity)

Changing the whole scheme of the sport is unforgivable at this point, even minor changes should be discouraged.

 

[Keg]

I think the idea makes sense from a certain point of view.When there is a turnover, until the ball is downed, it essentially puts all the offensive players on defense and all the defensive players on offense. While these are top athletes and they are paid enormous sums of money, they are not paid to excel in that situation. You do not pay LaDainian Tomlinson for his ability to tackle. You do not pay Ed Reed to run block. So, during a turnover runback, you are not seeing the clubs play at an NFL-level.Its a bit like watching a pitcher bat. A pitcher is not paid for his hitting ability. You are getting a substandard product.I think the drop in quality of play is offset by the excitement of the runback in the NFL. I've never understood what benefit you get from seeing a pitcher bat, however. It is not exactly exciting...

so you are saying stop the play immediately and then use replay to change the defensive players to offensive ones and the offensive ones to defensive ones(replay to put people in the exact same spots)....then when the ref blows the whistle the play continues :BRILLIANT:

 

[Swamprat]

I think the idea makes sense from a certain point of view.When there is a turnover, until the ball is downed, it essentially puts all the offensive players on defense and all the defensive players on offense. While these are top athletes and they are paid enormous sums of money, they are not paid to excel in that situation. You do not pay LaDainian Tomlinson for his ability to tackle. You do not pay Ed Reed to run block. So, during a turnover runback, you are not seeing the clubs play at an NFL-level.Its a bit like watching a pitcher bat. A pitcher is not paid for his hitting ability. You are getting a substandard product.I think the drop in quality of play is offset by the excitement of the runback in the NFL. I've never understood what benefit you get from seeing a pitcher bat, however. It is not exactly exciting...

so you are saying stop the play immediately and then use replay to change the defensive players to offensive ones and the offensive ones to defensive ones(replay to put people in the exact same spots)....then when the ref blows the whistle the play continues :BRILLIANT:

No, don't stop the play. Let them substitute the players like they do in hockey.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

As a football fan, nothing gets me more "worked up" than when I see one team drastically outplay an opponent in all phases of a game but loses on the scoreboard (dominates both lines of scrimmage. moves the ball on offense effortlessly, stiffles the opposition on defense, sound special teams play, wins the time of possession battle, commits fewer penatiese, etc)

I agree, the returns are exciting to watch. As a long-time football fan, I'd gladly give up some of the excitement of the game if a rule change helped better serve getting the team a victory that better performed on the field of play that day. If the defensive created turnover was forced in the redzone then they have in essense taken a minimum of 3pts off of the board from their opponent (high % fieldgoal) and potentially 7pts. If a team blocks a field goal attempt, they just prevented their opponent from scoring 3pts. A friendly bounce into defenders hands that goes back for a TD now changed the game by 10pts. Was that single play really worthy of creating a 10pt scoring differential? Its not really that impressive is it, when you consider how much more impressive it would be for an offense to move down the field against an opposing defense (whether it be 1 big play by RB run or a QB to WR catch or a 10-15 play time-consuming scoring drive that can only generate a maximium of 3pt to 7pt scoring differential?

That is my point I suppose....I just think those TD return plays aren't that remarkable or impressive in respect to the overall game play on the field, but yet are probably the most significant and major impact to the scoreboard and wins/losses in the NFL

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Wow did this thread turn into a fast!

It started out as one.