Think the NFL is happy the Cowboys missed the playoffs?

[cern]

the salary cap and its ensuing parity have made the game average. people like dynasty's whether they admit it or not. parity just doesn't get it. the league charges advertisers based on an assumed viewership. when that viewership is low, the league has to pay the advertisers back money. they typically do this by letting them run free ads. ergo, too many ads today.

 

[MarcusRock]

Individual refs and the NFL are two different things.

Guys who want to ref games likely are fans of the game. More fans hate the Cowboys than any other team.

There’s a bias among refs that affects their ability to be completely fair. It may be subconscious It may also have to do with going out of their way not to seem partial to the most popular team as Blandino was accused of doing. That must’ve clouded his already questionable judgement on the Dez catch.

It’s hard for me to believe a fair minded person could miss the tackle hold on Irving on the second to last play of the playoff game vs the Packers considering a ref was less than 10ft from the play.

The no holds for 9 games or whatever despite several screen shots of players being tackled or their jerseys being stretched out 3 feet is hard for anyone to explain. The two on here that try look bad in their weak half hearthed attempts and offer no similar examples because there aren’t any.

I think the burden of proof for wild accusations should be on the accuser as it is in courts. Not sure seeing inside someone else's head for intent is exactly a believable form of proof. I'm a rules buff so I like actually trotting out the rule book when it comes to "conspiracy" calls on the field and by that same rule book the Dez play was clearly a no-catch and yes there was clear evidence on replay to justify overturning it (the ball coming out of his possession for that split second). Irving's "tackle hold" happened while he was being double-teamed. Are you aware that there are special rules regarding holding when a defender is being double-teamed that make a holding call less likely? I've asked this about the no opponent holding calls for however many games on the closed board with zero replies: Is this the first time this has happened in the history of the game? If not, how often has it happened before so we know if it's even a rare thing or happens every year?

Don't get me wrong, I love to see the creativity people come up with to explain away why things didn't go their way, but those sorts of excuses as a default with nothing behind it is not a good look.

 

[CouchCoach]

Gino and Quick, agree with your points about the broadcast of the games.

And one really hit home for a guy that's been around watching as long as I have, there's nothing special about it. You give a kid candy every day and Halloween ain't nuthin'.

I grew up with 3 games, at the most, on Sunday. And about the same on Saturday's with college. The playoffs were special because I got to see good teams that I had not seen a lot of during the regular season. And the NFL was on CBS and the AFL on NBC and that was all I got. The NFL was mostly smash mouth and lower scoring games while the AFL, the future of today's game, was wide open pinball football. It was great and I looked forward to those weekends more than parole.

Now, it is over saturation with year round coverage and if that's not bad enough, the proliferation of sports cable channels makes sure all of the off season exploits of these players is exposed.

When I was a young man, I didn't know how much these players made or anything about their extracurricular activities so I didn't dislike any of them except when they played my team. They were just football players providing escape entertainment. Today, they act like reality TV stars.

Every play they're paid to make they act as if they've won the game, pound their chest and pose for the cameras. Players have actually openly complained about their role after a win! Think about that in the ultimate team sport. I dislike too many players and that makes it hard to devote an enormous amount of time to the sport any longer.

I don't know if everyone caught the Champs game on Monday but something happened that I still haven't gotten past. Jalen Hurts, the winner of 25 of 27 games and superstar of the Tide, got benched for a young kid that had not played a serious down of football all season. First off, that was most the most impressive decision I have ever seen any HC make in a game of that magnitude. Some might hate Saban like they do Belichick but there's no denying great coaching.

But, that's not what I can't get past. It was Jalen Hurts reaction to being benched in the most watched college game of the season and losing his chance at redemption in losing the previous season, although he was stellar in that game. There he was not only still cheering his team on but the kid that had just replaced him. What's the matter with him? Doesn't he know he supposed to sulk on the sideline like Bledsoe being replaced by Romo?

I long for that again. Players suppressing their own egos for that of the team. Players more interested in the team than their face time on TV. Players that forget we're watching because it's just them and the other team on the field.

And here's where the Cowboys fit in. I no longer have the passion because they don't have it. My team used to take losses harder than I did but no more. It's just another day at the office and another game check. Maybe FA and teams not being together long enough to form that bond is the culprit or the size of the salaries but the individualism is ruining the game for me. I can remember when a player made a play, he reacted to his teammates first, now it's to the cameras.

 

[sean10mm]

the salary cap and its ensuing parity have made the game average. people like dynasty's whether they admit it or not. parity just doesn't get it. the league charges advertisers based on an assumed viewership. when that viewership is low, the league has to pay the advertisers back money. they typically do this by letting them run free ads. ergo, too many ads today.

Wait, did the Patriots stop existing when I wasn't looking?

Because if so a lot of people are going to be happy!

 

[Quickdraw]

I think there really is some truth in the statement that there are too many games. It may be contributed to the NFL having to make so much money from ads that adding more games is their solution. Maybe this all started when players stared demanding outrageous salaries and owners actually paid them.

When Staubach played, his salary was only like $25K a season. Winning the Superbowl meant something because the payday was almost as much as their yearly salary. Ain't like that now.

 

[MarcusRock]

I think there really is some truth in the statement that there are too many games. It may be contributed to the NFL having to make so much money from ads that adding more games is their solution. Maybe this all started when players stared demanding outrageous salaries and owners actually paid them.

When Staubach played, his salary was only like $25K a season. Winning the Superbowl meant something because the payday was almost as much as their yearly salary. Ain't like that now.

Players didn't demand outrageous salaries, they demanded fair salaries commensurate to the tons of money the league brought in of which the lion's share was kept by the owners before they were forced to share with the actual stars of the show. Fans either forget or are willfully ignorant of this so they can character assassinate players making truckloads more than they are in my opinion. However, people seem to say very little about the owners making planeloads more.

 

[DandyDon52]

Goodell didn't want the cowboys in.
Being PC is more important than ratings.

 

[DandyDon52]

What is the pay for SB now?

 

[CT Dal Fan]

Goodell didn't want the cowboys in.
Being PC is more important than ratings.

The NFL is a sinking ship with Goodell at the helm.

Jerry Jones was right- giving Roger that extension was a huge, huge mistake.

 

[rkell87]

Jacksonville is going to the super bowl this year, that's what the deal is for anyone that puts new money into the league except for jerry. I expect Minnesota next year and the raiders the year after.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Yes but I love football . I do the same on Saturday’s for College football and try to attend a high school game on Fri night

That's awesome bro, you should post a pic of your man cave sometime, I bet yours is the best on this board.

 

[Diehardblues]

That's awesome bro, you should post a pic of your man cave sometime, I bet yours is the best on this board.

I would if I knew how to post a pic.

 

[Mad_max]

I think there really is some truth in the statement that there are too many games. It may be contributed to the NFL having to make so much money from ads that adding more games is their solution. Maybe this all started when players stared demanding outrageous salaries and owners actually paid them.

When Staubach played, his salary was only like $25K a season. Winning the Superbowl meant something because the payday was almost as much as their yearly salary. Ain't like that now.

An answer to too many teams is to go back to uncapped. Let each team spend whatever they like on players.Get rid of teams fast.

 

[DogFace]

I think the burden of proof for wild accusations should be on the accuser as it is in courts. Not sure seeing inside someone else's head for intent is exactly a believable form of proof. I'm a rules buff so I like actually trotting out the rule book when it comes to "conspiracy" calls on the field and by that same rule book the Dez play was clearly a no-catch and yes there was clear evidence on replay to justify overturning it (the ball coming out of his possession for that split second). Irving's "tackle hold" happened while he was being double-teamed. Are you aware that there are special rules regarding holding when a defender is being double-teamed that make a holding call less likely? I've asked this about the no opponent holding calls for however many games on the closed board with zero replies: Is this the first time this has happened in the history of the game? If not, how often has it happened before so we know if it's even a rare thing or happens every year?

Don't get me wrong, I love to see the creativity people come up with to explain away why things didn't go their way, but those sorts of excuses as a default with nothing behind it is not a good look.

First of all, and this has been said over and over, so please pay attention, I said a bias. A bias. Not a conspiracy. There is a difference so please understand that.

Secondly, how would I prove a conspiracy if that was what I was alleging? How can I prove a bias? Maybe I’ll open an investigation and get Robert Mueller to lead it. Or if he says no I’ll quit my job and dedicate my life to finding the answers. If I did that how could I prove it?

I could tell them very sternly to tell me how they felt during certain calls. I could ask them to submit to therapy so they could understand how their subconscious works. Those seem like practical alternatives and I’ll let you know if I go that route.

Or maybe I’ll go on this very message board and lay out the circumstances and listen to some explanations.

“Special rules” for double teams don’t allow one player to grab the defender from behind around the face and neck while then tackle the player while the other holds the inside of the shoulder pad. Please Tell me more about the special rules please and provide links so I can understand.

The Dez catch: search @percyhoward and the Dez catch. He laid out very clearly how and why Dez was a runner and not a receiver when he hit the ground. A common misconception among those that didn’t pay attention is that the receiver rule applied to him during that entire play. I short football move equals being a runner—by the rules of 2014. Are you aware of that?

The no holds for 9 games while players are routinely tackled and shirts pulled out 3ft is indefensible. I’m not sure how to help you understand that. The sack leader was literally held in check by the other teams.

I believe it’s posible the opposing coaches(after a few games passed with very obvious blatant holds uncalled) instructed their team to hold if beaten. After Mueller is done with the other cases I’ll ask him to get on top of this possible accusation by me right away.

Clearly it’s not a good look to say the refs possible bias played a role in a loss. For some reason I don’t care, very much, what some people think about my crying about the refs. I find it an interesting topic to discuss and am amazed by the blind obedience and fear of questioning the integrity of authority.

 

[sean10mm]

Players didn't demand outrageous salaries, they demanded fair salaries commensurate to the tons of money the league brought in of which the lion's share was kept by the owners before they were forced to share with the actual stars of the show. Fans either forget or are willfully ignorant of this so they can character assassinate players making truckloads more than they are in my opinion. However, people seem to say very little about the owners making planeloads more.

I always find that pretty funny. Some trust fund douchebag making huge money automatically deserves my respect... why, exactly? Meanwhile the guy doing the dangerous job that I actually care about watching is a jackass for wanting to get paid...why, exactly?

(It's because most sports fans are morons.)

Also there are some players making crazy money, but most of them make WAY less, and most of them are only in the league a few years. If you make league minimum for 3 years you have a nice nest egg for sure, but you're probably still going to have to go out and get a real job like everybody else sooner rather than later. For every $100 million man there are 100 guys who will make 1% of that over their careers.

 

[Aviano90]

I always find that pretty funny. Some trust fund douchebag making huge money automatically deserves my respect... why, exactly? Meanwhile the guy doing the dangerous job that I actually care about watching is a jackass for wanting to get paid...why, exactly?

(It's because most sports fans are morons.)

Also there are some players making crazy money, but most of them make WAY less, and most of them are only in the league a few years. If you make league minimum for 3 years you have a nice nest egg for sure, but you're probably still going to have to go out and get a real job like everybody else sooner rather than later. For every $100 million man there are 100 guys who will make 1% of that over their careers.

The time to support players in their quest for money against the owners is during the CBA negotiation. Once the players agree to their % in that agreement, the battle with owners for money pretty much stops. They then essentially battle each other for how much of their team's salary cap they can obtain. If a few players make a ton of money, a bunch of players aren't going to make that much.

That's the issue I have with individual players making so much. Well, at least on the Cowboys. I wish other teams paid outrageous salaries to their stars so it negatively impacts their ability to field an overall better quality team. I would be very happy if Dez went to the Eagles and made $20 million a year and wouldn't begrudge him at all. I just want the Cowboys to be smart in the distribution of the salary cap dollars to field the best overall team they can. Overpaying some players will eventually lead to underpaying others.

 

[MarcusRock]

First of all, and this has been said over and over, so please pay attention, I said a bias. A bias. Not a conspiracy. There is a difference so please understand that.

Secondly, how would I prove a conspiracy if that was what I was alleging? How can I prove a bias?

You can't. That was my point. You are free to make wild assertions if you wish but then don't complain when asked for proof or when presented with evidence to the contrary.

“Special rules” for double teams don’t allow one player to grab the defender from behind around the face and neck while then tackle the player while the other holds the inside of the shoulder pad. Please Tell me more about the special rules please and provide links so I can understand.

Please show me the video of this happening because the tackling part clearly never happened. As for the rules:

ARTICLE 3. ILLEGAL BLOCK BY OFFENSIVE PLAYER.
Blocking Notes:
(1) When a defensive player is held by an offensive player during the following situations, Offensive Holding will not be called:
(a) if the runner is being tackled simultaneously by another defensive player;
(b) if the runner simultaneously goes out of bounds;
(c) if a Fair Catch is made simultaneously;
(d) if the action clearly occurs after a forward pass has been thrown to a receiver beyond the line of scrimmage;
(e) if the action occurs away from the point of attack and not within close line play;
(f) if a free kick results in a touchback;
(g) if a scrimmage kick simultaneously becomes a touchback;
(h) if the action is part of a double-team block, unless the defender splits the double team, gets to the outside of either blocker, or is taken to the ground; or
(i) if, during a defensive charge, a defensive player uses a “rip” technique that puts an offensive player in a position
that would normally be holding.
Exception: Holding will be called if the defender’s feet are taken away from him by the offensive player’s action.
(2) If a blocker falls on or pushes down a defender whose momentum is carrying him to the ground, Offensive Holding
will not be called unless the blocker prevents the defender from rising from the ground.
(3) If the official has not seen the entire action that sends a defender to the ground, Offensive Holding will not be called.

LINK: https://operations.nfl.com/media/2646/2017-playing-rules.pdf

The Dez catch: search @percyhoward and the Dez catch. He laid out very clearly how and why Dez was a runner and not a receiver when he hit the ground. A common misconception among those that didn’t pay attention is that the receiver rule applied to him during that entire play. I short football move equals being a runner—by the rules of 2014. Are you aware of that?

The only thing I saw was an ignoring of the "going to the ground" rule which clearly applied. You can take 5 or 6 steps on your way to the ground but if that's your direction that's the rule that applies. Anyone who argues it was catch HAS to ignore that rule to believe they have a point so they don't even try to explain why that rule didn't apply which is telling in itself.

The no holds for 9 games while players are routinely tackled and shirts pulled out 3ft is indefensible. I’m not sure how to help you understand that. The sack leader was literally held in check by the other teams.

I believe it’s posible the opposing coaches(after a few games passed with very obvious blatant holds uncalled) instructed their team to hold if beaten.

You didn't answer my question. Has it been done in the history of holding stats and if so how often has it happened? "Looks funny" is nothing without an actual investigation. Or is it a case of you just feel it in your bones and everyone should just trust that?

... about my crying about the refs.

Awareness is the first step to recovery.

 

[MarcusRock]

The time to support players in their quest for money against the owners is during the CBA negotiation. Once the players agree to their % in that agreement, the battle with owners for money pretty much stops. They then essentially battle each other for how much of their team's salary cap they can obtain. If a few players make a ton of money, a bunch of players aren't going to make that much.

That's the issue I have with individual players making so much. Well, at least on the Cowboys. I wish other teams paid outrageous salaries to their stars so it negatively impacts their ability to field an overall better quality team. I would be very happy if Dez went to the Eagles and made $20 million a year and wouldn't begrudge him at all. I just want the Cowboys to be smart in the distribution of the salary cap dollars to field the best overall team they can. Overpaying some players will eventually lead to underpaying others.

It makes more sense when presented like this. But when you get the "Oh, the yore of yesteryear when star players made way less," it just smacks of jealousy to me; as if wanting a market rate of pay for your services is a moral failing ... in a capitalist country no less.

 

[percyhoward]

The only thing I saw was an ignoring of the "going to the ground" rule which clearly applied.

It didn't apply though-- or at least it shouldn't have. Dez became a runner when the catch process was completed with control, two feet, and the football move. The only way you can apply the part about a receiver who goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass is to say that Dez was still a receiver. That's why the football move has always been the key issue. He obviously had control and two feet, but did he complete the process with a football move, making "going to the ground" irrelevant?

Reaching to try to break the plane has always been considered a football move, but the league explained that Dez needed to make the reach "more obvious" by "extending his arm" or by "using two hands." That was the explanation by Blandino after the fact when questioned about the football move, and it's an explanation that had never been used by him or anyone else prior to that play. In short, according to the rules at the time, reaching to break the plane was a football move, and you could break the plane with the ball in one hand, but they said reaching to break the plane with one hand was not a football move.

 

[MarcusRock]

It didn't apply though-- or at least it shouldn't have. Dez became a runner when the catch process was completed with control, two feet, and the football move. The only way you can apply the part about a receiver who goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass is to say that Dez was still a receiver. That's why the football move has always been the key issue. He obviously had control and two feet, but did he complete the process with a football move, making "going to the ground" irrelevant?

Reaching to try to break the plane has always been considered a football move, but the league explained that Dez needed to make the reach "more obvious" by "extending his arm" or by "using two hands." That was the explanation by Blandino after the fact when questioned about the football move, and it's an explanation that had never been used by him or anyone else prior to that play. In short, according to the rules at the time, reaching to break the plane was a football move, and you could break the plane with the ball in one hand, but they said reaching to break the plane with one hand was not a football move.

I agree that it needed to be more obvious. I think it was the intent of Dez to reach out the ball for the goal line but he was too low to the ground (after "going to the ground") to complete it to make it more obvious so it looked just looked like Dez' natural progression to the ground. The fact that Blandino hadn't used that explanation before doesn't matter. Had a reach come into question before on a controversial call and he had to explain what happened? In fact, I remember the discussion with the Fox studio guys after the game and Howie Long tried to make the same point about Dez reaching while asking Mike Pereira. Pereira said the same thing: that it wasn't enough of a reach. We all know it was Dez' intent, but he didn't execute, thus going to the ground still applied. When the ball left his hands for the split second, that is what got the call overturned.