Episode 1: How to Fix the...NFL

[Kekkonen]

Originally Posted by mikev

- Shorten the game. Less commercial breaks, it was disgusting to listen to the Niners/Seahawks game on the radio last weekend and be informed at least 4 or 5 times during the broadcast that a play was waiting and the players were doing nothing because of a TV time out. Just ridiculous.

I think the play clock is fine, but the commercial breaks are ridiculous. I watched the second half of the Monday Nightgame on Tuesday morning, and at one point you had the following progression:

Ravens score a TD. Packers challenge the catch.
*commercial break*
The ruling stands. The Ravens kick the extra point.
*commercial break*
The Ravens kick off. There is a fumble, but the Packers recover. On the next play, Rogers throws an INT.
*commercial break*
The Ravens need 3 downs to score another TD.
*commercial break*
Kick-off.
*commercial break*

I mean, please.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by The Funk

I think the first thing to do would be to speed the game up a tad. Take 5 seconds off the play clock. That'll speed things up a little bit, an extra play or two, a little more action. If everyone seems to cope alright with it maybe take another 5 seconds off.

I believe in the NFL it's legal to play 12 offensive players (or possibly more?) if you only play 10 defensive players (or possibly fewer?) - of course this has to be maintained for the whole game. How about if every team HAD to choose between having their 10 or 12 on offense or defense. That might be fun. Or they all could do it one week a season for a laugh.

Another thing, perhaps, no microphones.

I am fairly certain this ISNT a rule. Even if it were a rule it would make for some bad football. Either the offense playing against 12 would never move the ball or the offense playing against 10 would score every time. Im not sure how that would be exciting.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Kekkonen

I think the play clock is fine, but the commercial breaks are ridiculous. I watched the second half of the Monday Nightgame on Tuesday morning, and at one point you had the following progression:

Ravens score a TD. Packers challenge the catch.
*commercial break*
The ruling stands. The Ravens kick the extra point.
*commercial break*
The Ravens kick off. There is a fumble, but the Packers recover. On the next play, Rogers throws an INT.
*commercial break*
The Ravens need 3 downs to score another TD.
*commercial break*
Kick-off.
*commercial break*

I mean, please.

Unfortunately this was forced upon the networks to pay their bills. Unless watching football becomes PPV this wont change.

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Unfortunately this was forced upon the networks to pay their bills. Unless watching football becomes PPV this wont change.

Sure it can...the NFL can say F U to the networks and just play the game. I know that there are channels (CW? UPN?) that would GLADLY take on the NFL. They'd easily pay their bills if it meant having football - even if they had to take fewer commercials.

[Kekkonen]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Unfortunately this was forced upon the networks to pay their bills. Unless watching football becomes PPV this wont change.

Oh, I know the networks need their money. But when you can go something like 15 minutes with a maximum of three plays between commercial breaks, something's got to give. Make the breaks fewer and a bit longer, if nothing else works.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

Sure it can...the NFL can say F U to the networks and just play the game.

Not when the national television contracts amount to some $94 million in income for each team. In comparison, ticket sales and concessions only brought in an average of $59 million. DirectTV is only worth $22 million to each club.

Player costs were an average of $135 million per team.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Not when the national television contracts amount to some $94 million in income for each team. In comparison, ticket sales and concessions only brought in an average of $59 million. DirectTV is only worth $22 million to each club.

Player costs were an average of $135 million per team.

Well if the players agreed to a huge pay cut it would be possible, but it's naive to think they would lol.

[Ktulu]

Cut the play clock way down, it's stupid that you can run out the clock in the final minutes by doing nothing. Force the offense to move the ball to keep it out of the possession of the other team.

Also cut the number of timeouts down to one or two.

Finally, disallow the ability to call a timeout to "ice" the kicker.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by Ktulu

Cut the play clock way down, it's stupid that you can run out the clock in the final minutes by doing nothing. Force the offense to move the ball to keep it out of the possession of the other team.

I like the AFL rule on that, which is that inside 2 minutes the clock stops if the offence lose yards. Ok, it just results in teams doing QB sneaks, but that's more risky than a kneel down.

[Ragnar]

The worst is when you have TD-commercial, kickoff-commercial. Then the quarter ends after running one play. They go to commercial again! BTW, how does soccer manage to have no commercials throughout the game?

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

It's a gimmick that works, though. It's better than sudden death OT.

I don't like any overtime period that makes you alter the way the game is played. Win the game the way the game is played. Don't start changing everything for OT. The college system is horrible.

Two suggestions that I have heard that i liked. The single 10 minute period. Leader wins or it is a tie.

One 15 minute period, but the first to score 6 wins. If the OT ends at 3-0, that team wins. So sudden death goes from 3 to 6. That would stop the march 40 yards and end it with a FG.

[Ragnar]

Here is my idea.

Get rid of the salary cap. I don't think it helps. As it is now they do revenue sharing, correct? That is something baseball does not do.

IMO this season in the NFL has more flat out bad teams than any other season I have seen. Or it could just be a lack of consistancy. I think that has to do with all of the player movement. I think the game would be better served if more players stayed put and got used to playing as a team with the same team.

It's not like the cap helps the poor teams. All it does is bring down the top so that the bad teams don't look so bad. Even so I still see the same good teams every year. Just like before the cap. I seriously think that in the NFL, the salary cap does more harm than good.

[jbergey22]

Its a mystery to me what some teams do with their salary cap room.

The Vikings were a poor team in 06 however because they had salary room were able to bring in players such as Hutchinson, Berrian, Taylor, Leber, Longwell and Leber to improve their situation. Other than Hutchinson non of these acquisitions would be considered great but they've been key in getting the Vikings back to the playoffs.

I wonder if most bad teams are just simply bad because their front office has no clue.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

TBTW, how does soccer manage to have no commercials throughout the game?

Well, they have ads on the player uniforms as well as ads lining the field of play. The league sponsor is also part of the official league name, e.g. Barclays Premier League.

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Get rid of the salary cap.

This is all but guaranteed for the 2010 season. The NFL owners have indicated they will opt out of the current CBA early (which it allows them to do). The result of such early opting out means no salary cap next season.

Originally Posted by Ragnar

As it is now they do revenue sharing, correct? That is something baseball does not do.

MLB has revenue sharing, but its less extensive in the NFL.

MLB revenue sharing only involves a relatively small portion (31% base rate) of a club's total local revenue (minus stadium expenses). Local revenue accounts for about 80% of a club's income.

The majority of a club's NFL income is from the national television contracts, which is split equally between all the clubs (MLB's national revenue is similarly split equally). The NFL also shares ticket revenue, which involves 40% of the revenue being put into a pool which is then divided equally amongst all the clubs (previously, it used to be the visiting team in a game received 40% of the ticket sales revenue generated by that game).

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Well, they have ads on the player uniforms as well as ads lining the field of play. The league sponsor is also part of the official league name, e.g. Barclays Premier League.

This is all but guaranteed for the 2010 season. The NFL owners have indicated they will opt out of the current CBA early (which it allows them to do). The result of such early opting out means no salary cap next season.

MLB has revenue sharing, but its less extensive in the NFL.

MLB revenue sharing only involves a relatively small portion (31% base rate) of a club's total local revenue (minus stadium expenses). Local revenue accounts for about 80% of a club's income.

The majority of a club's NFL income is from the national television contracts, which is split equally between all the clubs (MLB's national revenue is similarly split equally). The NFL also shares ticket revenue, which involves 40% of the revenue being put into a pool which is then divided equally amongst all the clubs (previously, it used to be the visiting team in a game received 40% of the ticket sales revenue generated by that game).

Excellent news indeed. I was never a fan of the salary cap. Plus with the amount of sharing the NFL does, I don't think it is needed.

I think MLB should go the route of the NFL (which i doubt will ever happen). Then let them spend as much as they want.

Maybe the NFL should add some ads on the walls circleing the field. The commercials in that game are worse than any other major sport. They even stop play to go to commercial sometimes if need be. I don't recall them ever going to commercial in baseball in the middle of an inning unless there is a pitching change.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Excellent news indeed. I was never a fan of the salary cap. Plus with the amount of sharing the NFL does, I don't think it is needed.

I think MLB should go the route of the NFL (which i doubt will ever happen). Then let them spend as much as they want.

Maybe the NFL should add some ads on the walls circleing the field. The commercials in that game are worse than any other major sport. They even stop play to go to commercial sometimes if need be. I don't recall them ever going to commercial in baseball in the middle of an inning unless there is a pitching change.

This isnt good news at all actually. Its a 1 year uncapped year, after that we will be right back to a salary cap. Which means guys are going to be going all over next year and the Cowboys will benefit in a large way because of all the revenue they can generate from the new stadium. Its going to be a bad year for a lot of teams.

If you want to see a team buy a Super Bowl, you will see it next year.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

This isnt good news at all actually. Its a 1 year uncapped year, after that we will be right back to a salary cap. Which means guys are going to be going all over next year and the Cowboys will benefit in a large way because of all the revenue they can generate from the new stadium. Its going to be a bad year for a lot of teams.

If you want to see a team buy a Super Bowl, you will see it next year.

I am a Cowboys fan. And if you know something about football then you'll know you cannot buy a SB. You still need coaching. That is huge in Football. It's not like baseball where you can buy pitching. The NFL is quite different.

The crap teams will always be crap and the good teams will always find a way back to the top. Cap has nothing to do with it.

Personally I don't care how much money an owner spends. I'm tired of watching mediocre football from 70% of the league. Let these guys put the best team on the field to win a championship for their city. They share revenue up the wazoo......what more do you want?

But it will be bad news if they go back to a cap.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

I am a Cowboys fan. And if you know something about football then you'll know you cannot buy a SB. You still need coaching. That is huge in Football. It's not like baseball where you can buy pitching. The NFL is quite different.

The crap teams will always be crap and the good teams will always find a way back to the top. Cap has nothing to do with it.

Personally I don't care how much money an owner spends. I'm tired of watching mediocre football from 70% of the league. Let these guys put the best team on the field to win a championship for their city. They share revenue up the wazoo......what more do you want?

But it will be bad news if they go back to a cap.

How do you know you cant buy a Super Bowl? Its never been an option. The economics of the game have never even allowed a team to attempt such a thing. These are professional level coaches so they all should atleast be capable of winning with a talented team. Brad Childress for example is pretty bad but he has turned a talented team into a great team.

Of course they are going back to the salary cap with some changes. You may not like it but Im sure a lot of people wont like cheering for a team that has no chance of winning or being a threat either. The cap is working how the NFL is wanting it to, there are very few teams that havent made the playoffs since the cap was started.

What is going to happen next year is any good free agent is going to leave their bad situation(opting out of contracts, demanding trades) as the resource pool is going to be unlimited. The Cowboys will realize this is a one year uncapped year and go all out to bring in every good free agent that will sign with them. Its going to be a joke unless you are a cowboy fan that has a rich owner.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Of course they are going back to the salary cap with some changes. You may not like it but Im sure a lot of people wont like cheering for a team that has no chance of winning or being a threat either. The cap is working how the NFL is wanting it to, there are very few teams that havent made the playoffs since the cap was started.

What are you going by? Remember, they added two teams at some point. And people cheer for teams that have no chance now. I can name about 15 of them. Just flat out bad teams. Is the cap working if the Jags make the playoffs? They suck. I'd rather have good teams make the playoffs instead of all of this crap just so people are happy.

Even before the cap....the Tampa Bay Bucs I believe went to the NFC championship game within a few years. They didn't need a cap to do well within 5 years.

All the cap does it water down the league. That is exactly what it does. It forces a spread of talent so we get all of these average teams in the playoffs. You're right, I don't like it. So as a result we have an undefeated Patriots team. And now two teams that are so good that I can't even envision them losing. Back when the 49ers and Giants were 10-0, I never even considered that either of them would go undefeated. Why? Because there were a lot of good teams that could knock them off. That certainly is not the case now.

Originally Posted by jbergey22

What is going to happen next year is any good free agent is going to leave their bad situation(opting out of contracts, demanding trades) as the resource pool is going to be unlimited. The Cowboys will realize this is a one year uncapped year and go all out to bring in every good free agent that will sign with them. Its going to be a joke unless you are a cowboy fan that has a rich owner.

That is what is so great about football. It's not like basketball where 2 guys can get you a championship. In football you have to play like a team. I'll tell you right now. If Wade Phillips is still coach next season it won't matter who the Cowboys get in FA. They are not winning squat.

I am of the opinion that any decent team can beat an allstar team from either conference. That is what is special about the NFL. You have to work together for awhile. You have to be in sync.

An owners job is to bring his city a Championship, not worry about what other owners do. If a team sucks, get out of the city.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

What are you going by? Remember, they added two teams at some point. And people cheer for teams that have no chance now. I can name about 15 of them. Just flat out bad teams. Is the cap working if the Jags make the playoffs? They suck.

The Jags do not suck. If they made the playoffs this year it would not be a product of their division (They would not win it, they would be the Wild Card).