Who thinks that the NFL is becoming too weak?

[Juke99]

Todays players could never handle the older days.overpaid-wussies.im 33 so i dont remember that far back but my grandad tells me helmets used to break,etc....

Uh, little Juke...I'd love to see you walk out on the field and call one of these guys a "wussy".

You wanna see guys beat the crap out of eachother, watch boxing.

If you wanna see a football game, where guys still hit with the force of a car collision, the NFL is just fine.

 

[Doomsday101]

I see it as the rules being the same.

It's all about evolution.

Yes, these rules are tougher...but that's because the rules have to evolve with the players. These guys are bigger, faster, quicker than ever.

With the same rules as 15 years ago, there wouldn't be a single team who would be injury riddled at some point in the season.

Ya think the game is mediocre now?

We'd be watching games that looked like the replacement games.

I'm fine with the rules regarding contact.

I just wish it was not so 1 sided. Defense is the one who suffers with each new rule and the fact is defense is part of the game and it seems they are turning the NFL into a pitch and catch league. Defensive player goes up to knock the ball down and comes down and touches a QB's helmet and that is roughing? You are correct that players are bigger and faster but that goes for the offensive players as well.

 

[Juke99]

I just wish it was not so 1 sided. Defense is the one who suffers with each new rule and the fact is defense is part of the game and it seems they are turning the NFL into a pitch and catch league. Defensive player goes up to knock the ball down and comes down and touches a QB's helmet and that is roughing? You are correct that players are bigger and faster but that goes for the offensive players as well.

Well, guys on the offensive line now get away with murder when it comes to holding...but I understand where you are coming from.

Most of the rules are in place to protect the QB...and really, I dont have a problem with that. The talent level in the league at QB is pretty thin...I'd hate to watch games with second string and third string guys starting.

The problem that I have is with PI calls. Now that's where the defense should be allowed to have more contact.

 

[MiStar]

pass interference calls are the worst, mainly because it seems to be totally based on opinion, same with holding calls. IMO the unless a DB seriously impedes the route of a reciever or basicly tackles him it should be fair game. im soooo tired of those phantom holds

I agree, pass interference calls are getting to be rediculous. Anything short of a premature takedown should be fair game.

 

[Doomsday101]

Well, guys on the offensive line now get away with murder when it comes to holding...but I understand where you are coming from.

Most of the rules are in place to protect the QB...and really, I dont have a problem with that. The talent level in the league at QB is pretty thin...I'd hate to watch games with second string and third string guys starting.

The problem that I have is with PI calls. Now that's where the defense should be allowed to have more contact.

You have QB's who can run a 4.3 40 defensive players can't afford to treat them like a china doll. I'm all for calling roughing the passer but call it when they actually rough the passer, grazing a helmet in an attempt to swat the ball is far from roughing and I don't think it would be hard to determine if a defensive player is slapping a QB head compared to touching the helmet. Heck may as well put a yellow jersey on the QB like they do in practice and just call them down when the defender gets close to them and tell the QB's no more running your a QB not a football player.

 

[superpunk]

The NFL decided a long time ago they wanted more scoring, and that's what it's all about. Protect your skill players, make it easier for said players to prosper.

Most of us on here would be every bit as happy watching the top two defensive teams slug it out and ram the ball down each other's throats for 60 minutes, culminating in a 13-10 game. But many folks can't understand why that's exceiting, or what's going on.

But one thing everyone understands, is the ball going into the end zone. So that's what the NFL wants to deliver to the "casual" fan. More points. All sports strive for that, just to reach a larger group of people with their product. Us purists may not like it all that much, but that's where we're at. Learn and adjust.

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree, pass interference calls are getting to be rediculous. Anything short of a premature takedown should be fair game.

Make it 15 yard foul and have a break away foul that is a spot foul should the defender intentionally takes the WR down because he was beat. I don't know if that is the solution but watching teams get bailed out by very questionable calls when the WR is being just as physical as the DB is hard to swallow

 

[Doomsday101]

The NFL decided a long time ago they wanted more scoring, and that's what it's all about. Protect your skill players, make it easier for said players to prosper.

Most of us on here would be every bit as happy watching the top two defensive teams slug it out and ram the ball down each other's throats for 60 minutes, culminating in a 13-10 game. But many folks can't understand why that's exceiting, or what's going on.

But one thing everyone understands, is the ball going into the end zone. So that's what the NFL wants to deliver to the "casual" fan. More points. All sports strive for that, just to reach a larger group of people with their product. Us purists may not like it all that much, but that's where we're at. Learn and adjust.

I agree that is what has driven the constant rule changes that we see every single year.

 

[Juke99]

You have QB's who can run a 4.3 40 defensive players can't afford to treat them like a china doll. I'm all for calling roughing the passer but call it when they actually rough the passer, grazing a helmet in an attempt to swat the ball is far from roughing and I don't think it would be hard to determine if a defensive player is slapping a QB head compared to touching the helmet. Heck may as well put a yellow jersey on the QB like they do in practice and just call them down when the defender gets close to them and tell the QB's no more running your a QB not a football player.

Well, my friend, we'll agree to disagree.

How many teams lost starting QB's last year? Only 14 QB's played in all 16 games. I'd hate to think of what would happen if the rules were loosened.

Bledsoe got sacked, what 50 times???...doesn't sound to me like he was wearing a yellow jersey.

These QB's still take a beating.

 

[Doomsday101]

Well, my friend, we'll agree to disagree.

How many teams lost starting QB's last year? Only 14 QB's played in all 16 games. I'd hate to think of what would happen if the rules were loosened.

Bledsoe got sacked, what 50 times???...doesn't sound to me like he was wearing a yellow jersey.

These QB's still take a beating.

Yet he continues to get up and play. I think the QB is a football player and thus should be treated like a Football player. But your right on this topic we will just have to disagree.

 

[superpunk]

Well, my friend, we'll agree to disagree.

How many teams lost starting QB's last year? Only 14 QB's played in all 16 games. I'd hate to think of what would happen if the rules were loosened.

Bledsoe got sacked, what 50 times???...doesn't sound to me like he was wearing a yellow jersey.

These QB's still take a beating.

Just a little side point taken out of there...

Bledsoe is one tough guy.

That is all.

Does the 14 number include guys who sat out for no apparent reason - i.e. Playoffs cliched/no reason to play/name is Kyle Orton....?

 

[jman]

I agree. I think they have gone overboard on the protection of the QB and Pass Interference calls

What you have to realize is the protection of the QB has nothing to do with being weak. It's the highest paid position on the team and it's there to protect the teams investment. Nothing more, nothing less.

Same could be said for the PI calls. Scoring pays. And rules are always going to lean towards more offense and more revenue.

It's all about the money. Period.

 

[VirusX]

I would love to see a rule stating if the QB crosses the LOS then he is fair game. No more sliding BS.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Well, my friend, we'll agree to disagree.

How many teams lost starting QB's last year? Only 14 QB's played in all 16 games. I'd hate to think of what would happen if the rules were loosened.

Bledsoe got sacked, what 50 times???...doesn't sound to me like he was wearing a yellow jersey.

These QB's still take a beating.

I'm with Dooms on this one Juke. I don't see a problem with losing your QB. All that means is that teams have to be sound defensively because you can't just load up with offensive players and expect to be there. I like the idea of teams depending on a strong defense and running game to get you through to the show. Anymore, such a premium is on offensive players that you can't afford to have both. To me, it would only right the ship a bit. It would balance out the numbers and teams would build across the board like they used to. Now, it's an offensive game and it will continue to be an offensive game so long as the defense is hog tied. I just think that the game was developed with both sides of the ball in mind. What you call evolution is changing the game to the extent that it may become so different that it's no longer football. I like having both sides of the ball deciders in who wins and who loses.

 

[WoodysGirl]

from Carucci's NFL.com blog of the Owner's meetings...

On officiating...
"We've heard a lot of discussion this week about perception versus reality as it pertains to officiating in the NFL. The perception is that officiating is as bad as it has been in a long time. The reality, according to the people who oversee officiating for the league and the NFL's competition committee, is that the vast majority of calls made within the 39,000 plays in the 2005 season were correct. But perception is a powerful force, and much of it is driven by some highly controversial calls in the playoffs and the Super Bowl that received a tremendous amount of publicity. How powerful? Mike Pereira, the NFL's head of officials, said his own father has even complained to him about the state of officiating. 'I want to kill him,' Pereira joked. He admits that the NFL always strives to improve officiating, but he also believes the league is working with the best crews it has ever had. Will perception ever change? Probably not. There always will be calls that infuriate certain fans, coaches and players. And, with constant enhancements in video technology, replay will always provide a means for officiating to be scrutinized with ever-increasing intensity."

On QBs and their ball-rubbing
"Excuse me if I roll my eyes. I have a feeling there might be a few other observers of the game doing the same at the news that quarterbacks have convinced the NFL competition committee to propose that beginning with the 2006 season, each team's offense use its own footballs. Apparently, quarterbacks around the league are concerned that when they are on the visiting team, they use balls that are "rubbed down" by the opponent. Rubbing down is a process to eliminate a factory coating that makes the balls slippery to hold, and quarterbacks prefer that they or members of their own equipment staff handle that for all games, not just those played at home, and have a set of footballs to take on road trips. A group of quarterbacks got together to petition the competition committee to put together the proposal, which would entail Wilson, the company that manufactures footballs for the NFL, stamping the team name on each team's footballs. 'We never wanted the quarterbacks concerned with the quality of throwing balls,' said Atlanta GM Rich McKay, co-chairman of the competition committee. That's understandable, but still, this will do nothing to help the quarterbacks' image as being overly pampered."

Keyshawn on rule changes
"In co-hosting a show with fellow NFL.com columnist Pat Kirwan this morning on Sirius NFL Radio, I had a chance to speak with Keyshawn Johnson. Not surprisingly, he talked brashly about the Carolina Panthers, his new team, having the pieces in place to end up in Miami for Super Bowl XLI. But Johnson has no interest in the league implementing proposed rules to bring greater protection to the quarterback or any other player. He says football is a physical and violent game, and everyone should be subjected to the same level of protection ... which is none. He doesn't even want to see the expansion of the horse-collar tackle to include the inside of the jersey rather than just the shoulder pad. Why? Because he says he wouldn't hesitate to use the tactic to bring down a defender on an interception return."
​

LINK

 

[Juke99]

I'm with Dooms on this one Juke. I don't see a problem with losing your QB. All that means is that teams have to be sound defensively because you can't just load up with offensive players and expect to be there. I like the idea of teams depending on a strong defense and running game to get you through to the show. Anymore, such a premium is on offensive players that you can't afford to have both. To me, it would only right the ship a bit. It would balance out the numbers and teams would build across the board like they used to. Now, it's an offensive game and it will continue to be an offensive game so long as the defense is hog tied. I just think that the game was developed with both sides of the ball in mind. What you call evolution is changing the game to the extent that it may become so different that it's no longer football. I like having both sides of the ball deciders in who wins and who loses.

Yeah...well now I don't like you too.

I'm not suggesting doing anything but making the contact rules stay even with the size and speed of the players.

I think the new definition of holding is insane...way too much lattitude for the offense...I think the PI definitions are insane....all of that stuff has been put in the game to protect the offense and to create more points...for the casual fan...and those rules, I don't like.

But the contact rules are a different story, IMO.

 

[Clove]

I have no problem with the rules either. If the defense thinks it's getting and unfair shake, then play smarter. Back then the league didn't have all of these exotic blitzes and the league didn't have 6'6 270 pd guys running 4.58 40 yard dashes.

The league didn't have Nose Tackles that were 355 pds crashing down on Quarterbacks.

The leagues value is it's entertainment, and if your team is the best, but can never make it because we're always injured, it's not fun. It's no fun when your starting Quarterback is out, and you miss the playoffs because of it. This game is violent no matter what, and they are smart enough to keep just enough "hot doggin it" "hard hitting" action in the game to keep interest.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yeah...well now I don't like you too.

I'm not suggesting doing anything but making the contact rules stay even with the size and speed of the players.

I think the new definition of holding is insane...way too much lattitude for the offense...I think the PI definitions are insane....all of that stuff has been put in the game to protect the offense and to create more points...for the casual fan...and those rules, I don't like.

But the contact rules are a different story, IMO.

There's a fine line. I watch football now and I see it dominated more and more by players who are physically gifted but perhaps not as tough as players in the past. I guess it can be viewed as a somewhat masochistic stances on my part but I just think that something is lost when you minumise this part of the game. In the old days, mental toughness was a bigger part of the game, IMO. It wasn't enough to be big and fast. You also had to be tough. Mentally tough. There was a certain amount of fear in the game and it was present in all phases. QBs didn't stand in the pocket for ever because they new they were going to get hit. WRs didn't just run free all the time and they didnt' abuse DBs because they new that the Tatums of the world were out there and that if they got too nonechalant about it, they would end up on the shelf. Guys didn't get to overly cocky. They new that sooner or later, the check would come due and you didn't want to run up the price of admission. It balanced out and I think that's a good thing for the game. Too much of anything one way or another can not be good for you and I think the same is true for the NFL.

 

[trickblue]

On QBs and their ball-rubbing

Apparently, quarterbacks around the league are concerned that when they are on the visiting team, they use balls that are "rubbed down" by the opponent.​

ummm... I don't know... are they petitioning for the respective teams cheerleaders step in? What will their wives say? "Honey... it's just part of the game, it means nothing to me"...

 

[cowboys#1]

Their families should get payed what ours do then if there isn't going to be playful risk involved.

That's a dumb argument. Maybe they should just play flag football. They have families you know... this would prevent just about all injuries until virtual reality is created.

why dont you go and tryout for an nfl team? thats what i thought.... you have to have talent to play pro football, dont hate on the players because they get paid so much. unless you have been in a nfl game playing you will never know what taking a risk means. concussions, broken bones,ripped ligiments, lifetime pain and soreness from the constant contact. they deserve every penny. and they deserve whatever rules they need to play safe and have fun to entertain you.