The introduction of fair into football probably steams me more than the idea itself. So much of society is now basing things on fair and "leveling the playing field" to suit some notion of fairness. Each team has an equal chance at winning the coin toss before it is flipped. The advantage of winning the random coin flip is to choose to receive the ball. Now this exercise - which did concede the coin flip was fair in the article before the toss - suddenly states it is not fair since the winner of the ball - or one on offense first - wins the game 60% of the time. It is a random contest in flipping the coin to win the rights for first possession. The outcome of contests after that are now somehow unfair before the one losing the coin flip historically has a 40% chance of winning. Then play better defense. Every time I hear the comment that we are going to make things fair, I know someone is getting screwed. Seems to me if the league really is concerned about fairness then the winner has two choices. 1. Take the ball but start on your own 10 yard line 2. Concede the ball to the other team that starts on their twenty. But then even that is not fair. See how this now gets muddled. You start with a fair idea and the outcome suddenly makes it unfair.