gollum
Member
- Messages
- 747
- Reaction score
- 0
I've got a real problem with the Pro Bowl...make that several problems...
It needs to mean something. The trick is finding something that would encourage all players who are in it to really try their hardest. Also, encouragement needs to be given so players don’t crawfish out of it for petty reasons.
Homefield advantage in the Super Bowl(like in baseball) wouldn't work and would make it inequitable anyway. Besides, the Super Bowl isn't played in one of the participants home stadiums...at least not until 2011. However, four interconference games are played each year, two home and two away. This affects every team so everyone would have a vested interest. The problem with that is how can you justify taking away one or two home games from paying fans(many of whom have already paid for season tickets). They only get eight opportunities to support their team at home and now you want to take away one or two of them?
What about changing the rules so that the winning conference gets some perk in those interconference games...4 timeouts per half, up to 4 replay challenges, kick off from the 40 instead of the 30, receive the kickoff both halves, Field Goals count 4 points in that game, or 5 points beyond 50...etc; something that would give the winning conference a small competitive advantage that would make the game mean something, but not skew the results so far as to make it unfair.
As far as participation, I'm torn. The players have long hard seasons. Many of them are injured...legitimately. Some play through the regular season in severe pain that we don't know about. But there needs to be some "benefit" to actually playing in the game. After all, the players, coaches, and fans want to see those players play. Could some minimum requirements be placed on possible future Hall of Fame induction? Perhaps played in at least 75% of Pro Bowl games voted to? I don't know. Suggestions?
One of my biggest pet peeves is that the game has become no more than a popularity contest. One saving grace is that players and coaches can protect the integrity to some extent from fan ignorance and possible fraud. I like the 1/3 each value from those segments, but when Brendon Ayanbadejo gets nearly twice as many votes in one week as in the prior six weeks, something smells rotten in Denmark. I'll be the first to admit that I don't like it when fans vote repeatedly trying to get their teams' players voted in, not because they are the best player, but because they want their favorite teams' players to be represented. I think all teams' fans are guilty of it, even ours, but that doesn't make it right just because someone else is doing it.
A change in the voting ballot is a definite must. This making it fast and easy for the casual, non-intelligent voter is for the birds. I'd like to see tighter voting requirements made so that each person's vote is "earned". I'd like to see something like a minimum time requirement per vote session...say 10 minutes. Some of you will say that is cruel, but if this game is going to mean anything, is 10 minutes of your time too much to ask to assure the right people earn the honor? Do you want people who can't read or write picking the leaders of your country? Or does it bother you when people vote without knowing the issues? Should the leader be decided entirely how he feels on one issue, such as allowing you to choose what item you want with your combo meal? Why is this, other than the fact that it is still a game...any different. This is NOW the American pastime...let's protect its integrity.
During the ballot selection process, all of THIS YEAR'S stats would be presented to the voter, sortable for each position. Not everyone will take the time to be unbiased and see that Eli Manning(or insert your favorite overhyped player) really isn't having a better year than Tony Romo, but hopefully at least some people will open their eyes. Currently, they just list the name and team.
There are 82 players who will be voted in(according to the ballot)...41 in each conference. No ballot submitted would be valid unless all 82 players have been selected. You say you don't know 82 players or don't pay attention to players on other teams? Two questions...are you really qualified to determine who the all stars are then?...and are you doing the sport a disservice by voting for something you are not qualified for?
On top of this, on each page of player’s positions, the players will be randomly listed each time the page is opened. That way, Mr. Ayanbadejo doesn't get the benefit of having a first name starting with "A" in the position of Special Teams which is the last position voted for when people just want to finish the ballot. I'm sure that is part of what has happened here. Also, it requires people to think before they vote, or at least hopefully the non-thinkers will cancel each other out.
Remember that 10 minutes that was cruel earlier...that's 7.31 seconds per person. I'd say you have to be super knowledgeable, have eagle eyesight, and a relatively fast computer and internet connection to accomplish this. Also, even though we have straight ticket voting in elections, I would put a restriction that no more than 30 players from any one team can be submitted on a ballot!!! This is supposed to select the best players, not your favorite players.
The voting has no business starting on or around October 29th. That is barely after Week 8. Eight teams have not even had their bye week by then! No voting is to occur until after week 14 of the regular season has concluded. Voting will remain open to the fans until midnight of the Friday before the Wild Card round begins. That way, what happens in the playoffs doesn’t affect the vote. That's three weeks...plenty of time.
Each team will submit its candidates who will appear on the ballot. Teams may submit a maximum of 45 players names to be included on the ballot. This will allow for teams who feel they have a very strong group of one position to possibly submit more than one player for a position such as running back. To be eligible to be on the ballot, the player must not be on IR, had no suspensions by the league for more than 1 game for any reason, and be active in at least 10 games during the year. I understand that will present possible problems of what’s right and wrong, especially the IR part. For instance, let’s say Tony Romo gets an ACL injury in week 13 after throwing for 5,000 yards and 58 touchdowns with 3 interceptions and gets put on IR. The greatest single season ever by a quarterback and he can’t even be on the ballot when he accomplished that in a single season. If we’re voting for awards, without a doubt he deserves to receive all of them. But we’re voting for players to play in a game. Tony ain’t gonna make it. Why vote for him then? Makes zero sense. Honor him with all the postseason awards you want, but he’s not eligible for the Pro Bowl. That puts the onus on the team then…leave a deserving player on the ballot and be shorthanded a player for a few games or put him on IR for the stretch run. I’ve gone back and forth on this one, but the bottom line is we’re voting for who will play in the game.
Players and coaches who are still employed by the team on the date the season ends will get a ballot to complete and not receive their final check until this ballot is submitted to the proper officials(not the zebras). Any ballot not submitted received within five business days will be invalid. Any ballot from a team’s players and/or coaches can not have any votes for members on their own team…whether deserved or not.
Online voting will be more secure in that no two votes may come from the same IP address. This isn't a fail safe way to prevent fraud, but will reduce the frequency somewhat.
These are my thoughts...suggestions? ideas?
It needs to mean something. The trick is finding something that would encourage all players who are in it to really try their hardest. Also, encouragement needs to be given so players don’t crawfish out of it for petty reasons.
Homefield advantage in the Super Bowl(like in baseball) wouldn't work and would make it inequitable anyway. Besides, the Super Bowl isn't played in one of the participants home stadiums...at least not until 2011. However, four interconference games are played each year, two home and two away. This affects every team so everyone would have a vested interest. The problem with that is how can you justify taking away one or two home games from paying fans(many of whom have already paid for season tickets). They only get eight opportunities to support their team at home and now you want to take away one or two of them?
What about changing the rules so that the winning conference gets some perk in those interconference games...4 timeouts per half, up to 4 replay challenges, kick off from the 40 instead of the 30, receive the kickoff both halves, Field Goals count 4 points in that game, or 5 points beyond 50...etc; something that would give the winning conference a small competitive advantage that would make the game mean something, but not skew the results so far as to make it unfair.
As far as participation, I'm torn. The players have long hard seasons. Many of them are injured...legitimately. Some play through the regular season in severe pain that we don't know about. But there needs to be some "benefit" to actually playing in the game. After all, the players, coaches, and fans want to see those players play. Could some minimum requirements be placed on possible future Hall of Fame induction? Perhaps played in at least 75% of Pro Bowl games voted to? I don't know. Suggestions?
One of my biggest pet peeves is that the game has become no more than a popularity contest. One saving grace is that players and coaches can protect the integrity to some extent from fan ignorance and possible fraud. I like the 1/3 each value from those segments, but when Brendon Ayanbadejo gets nearly twice as many votes in one week as in the prior six weeks, something smells rotten in Denmark. I'll be the first to admit that I don't like it when fans vote repeatedly trying to get their teams' players voted in, not because they are the best player, but because they want their favorite teams' players to be represented. I think all teams' fans are guilty of it, even ours, but that doesn't make it right just because someone else is doing it.
A change in the voting ballot is a definite must. This making it fast and easy for the casual, non-intelligent voter is for the birds. I'd like to see tighter voting requirements made so that each person's vote is "earned". I'd like to see something like a minimum time requirement per vote session...say 10 minutes. Some of you will say that is cruel, but if this game is going to mean anything, is 10 minutes of your time too much to ask to assure the right people earn the honor? Do you want people who can't read or write picking the leaders of your country? Or does it bother you when people vote without knowing the issues? Should the leader be decided entirely how he feels on one issue, such as allowing you to choose what item you want with your combo meal? Why is this, other than the fact that it is still a game...any different. This is NOW the American pastime...let's protect its integrity.
During the ballot selection process, all of THIS YEAR'S stats would be presented to the voter, sortable for each position. Not everyone will take the time to be unbiased and see that Eli Manning(or insert your favorite overhyped player) really isn't having a better year than Tony Romo, but hopefully at least some people will open their eyes. Currently, they just list the name and team.
There are 82 players who will be voted in(according to the ballot)...41 in each conference. No ballot submitted would be valid unless all 82 players have been selected. You say you don't know 82 players or don't pay attention to players on other teams? Two questions...are you really qualified to determine who the all stars are then?...and are you doing the sport a disservice by voting for something you are not qualified for?
On top of this, on each page of player’s positions, the players will be randomly listed each time the page is opened. That way, Mr. Ayanbadejo doesn't get the benefit of having a first name starting with "A" in the position of Special Teams which is the last position voted for when people just want to finish the ballot. I'm sure that is part of what has happened here. Also, it requires people to think before they vote, or at least hopefully the non-thinkers will cancel each other out.
Remember that 10 minutes that was cruel earlier...that's 7.31 seconds per person. I'd say you have to be super knowledgeable, have eagle eyesight, and a relatively fast computer and internet connection to accomplish this. Also, even though we have straight ticket voting in elections, I would put a restriction that no more than 30 players from any one team can be submitted on a ballot!!! This is supposed to select the best players, not your favorite players.
The voting has no business starting on or around October 29th. That is barely after Week 8. Eight teams have not even had their bye week by then! No voting is to occur until after week 14 of the regular season has concluded. Voting will remain open to the fans until midnight of the Friday before the Wild Card round begins. That way, what happens in the playoffs doesn’t affect the vote. That's three weeks...plenty of time.
Each team will submit its candidates who will appear on the ballot. Teams may submit a maximum of 45 players names to be included on the ballot. This will allow for teams who feel they have a very strong group of one position to possibly submit more than one player for a position such as running back. To be eligible to be on the ballot, the player must not be on IR, had no suspensions by the league for more than 1 game for any reason, and be active in at least 10 games during the year. I understand that will present possible problems of what’s right and wrong, especially the IR part. For instance, let’s say Tony Romo gets an ACL injury in week 13 after throwing for 5,000 yards and 58 touchdowns with 3 interceptions and gets put on IR. The greatest single season ever by a quarterback and he can’t even be on the ballot when he accomplished that in a single season. If we’re voting for awards, without a doubt he deserves to receive all of them. But we’re voting for players to play in a game. Tony ain’t gonna make it. Why vote for him then? Makes zero sense. Honor him with all the postseason awards you want, but he’s not eligible for the Pro Bowl. That puts the onus on the team then…leave a deserving player on the ballot and be shorthanded a player for a few games or put him on IR for the stretch run. I’ve gone back and forth on this one, but the bottom line is we’re voting for who will play in the game.
Players and coaches who are still employed by the team on the date the season ends will get a ballot to complete and not receive their final check until this ballot is submitted to the proper officials(not the zebras). Any ballot not submitted received within five business days will be invalid. Any ballot from a team’s players and/or coaches can not have any votes for members on their own team…whether deserved or not.
Online voting will be more secure in that no two votes may come from the same IP address. This isn't a fail safe way to prevent fraud, but will reduce the frequency somewhat.
These are my thoughts...suggestions? ideas?
