Log in:  

Register

National Football League

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

17 May 2012 03:29

Merckx index wrote:The NFL is an extremely popular institution, and it's hard to see how it could be put out of business. But the numbers are scary. As I quoted in that article, one could estimate $2 billion in legal settlements if all these current lawsuits were successful. That's about $60 million per team, if one wants to look at it that way. Could teams really afford that kind of money? It would not be a one-shot deal, either, but keep accumulating, year after year, until and unless either breakthroughs in protection and/or treatment were forthcoming, or a deal satisfactory to players was agreed upon.

And it's not just money. The NFL's image stands to take a huge hit if it continues to practice business as usual, knowing full well that a certain proportion of players are going to suffer brain injuries. Would you go into a profession where you had, say, a 5% chance of having a serious brain injury, no matter how good your medical coverage was? All the money in the world isn't going to reverse that brain damage, basically all it does is pay for therapy, so you can continue to function at some level despite it.

And how would you feel about an employer who continued to operate under those terms? As that linked article notes, the tobacco industry has survived only by jacking up the price of cigarettes, and it gets away with this because if you are addicted to nicotine, you will pay basically whatever you have to pay. But how much more will fans pay? And how will they feel about paying more, when they know the extra money is going to take care of players debilitated by the game?

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/65343/guest-column-surviving-life-after-the-nfl

Here’s a former NFL player who thinks there is another problem:

The day Junior Seau committed suicide was also the day I submitted to Marquette University my doctoral dissertation on the difficulties NFL players face in transitioning away from the game. While it's fashionable to blame concussions for Junior's early demise, and it's certainly possible brain trauma played a role, the adjustment to life after football came to my mind immediately.

Eight years as a linebacker with the Green Bay Packers and one with the Seattle Seahawks should have set me up for life. Instead, the tunnel vision and unwavering devotion a football career demanded left me utterly unprepared for anything else.

I played nine years in the NFL and one in NFL Europe and didn't have any concussions on record. But I did have suicidal thoughts in my first year away from the game. Not all of us suffered concussions, but all of us are going to go through the transition. And if you're like most players, you've spent most of your life focusing on the next play, the next quarter, the next half, the next game, the next offseason.


Great post. First, I have to say there was quite a bit of catching up for me to do here. Great stuff.

The latest Sports Illustrated issue is out with Seau the cover story. It is a great read. Part of the article talked about CTE (chronic traumatic encephalopathy) going to court. CTE is a brain condition associated with repeated head trauma. And who is taking it to court? About 1,800 retired players in 68 lawsuits against the NFL, and in some cases the helmet manufacturers, for failure to treat conditions and/or failing to adequately inform players of the potential long term effects of repeated head trauma. Using Merckx's estimated settlements of $2 billion, that translates to about $29 million per lawsuit and about $1.11 million per player, if distributed equally. That's a fair sum of change for a 1970's player who probably only made $100,000 to $300,000 a year.

Adjustment to life after football is definately a factor. Many players adjust fine after hanging up the cleats. But teammates form such tight bonds that are reinforced by "going to war" together that this cannot be discounted.

Speaking of helmet manufacturers, there are some helmet innovations being considered that should help sideline staff and players determine the forces involved in helmet-to-helmet collisions, and more importantly, to determine possibly whether a player should return to action or not. For example, tiny air or fluid bags inside the helmet area placed in strategic locations (such as the temple area) that pop or break open under a certain force, which could indicate if a player may have received a head traumatizing blow.

OFC, they could always go back to leather helmets without face masks, as ChrisE kind of suggested, and just relearn tackling technique. But helmet manufacturers will likely find some way to innovate new helmets.

On Russell Wilson competing for the starting QB job in Seattle... not surprised from what I saw on Gruden's Camp. And won't be surprised if TJax is done there. It's a tough business. Thanks for the links to the articles on that topic Alpe.
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,956
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

17 May 2012 18:32

FoxxyBrown1111 wrote:1st of all, congrats to everybody to keep NFL front page in may. Baseball has 7 posts, and the season is in full swing...

The NBA is in the middle of the playoffs, and that thread is about six pages back!

Right now the NFL is doing it's Top 100 player countdown, as voted by other players. They've only voted 61-100 so far, but you can watch it on their website. I'm surprised that some QB's are so low on the list. Philip Rivers is #61 for example. Tony Romo is #91. Where will Tom Brady be? #27? Chris Johnson, after holding out for that monster contract and playing average last year, dropped to #100.

From the "too many concussions" list comes Ahman Green, who at 35 wants to make a comeback, and says he could play five more years.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

17 May 2012 19:45

Alpe d'Huez wrote:The NBA is in the middle of the playoffs, and that thread is about six pages back!

...

From the "too many concussions" list comes Ahman Green, who at 35 wants to make a comeback, and says he could play five more years.


Yeah, the NBA got what they "wanted". NFL just needs to take care not going the same path...

LOL. Green tries a Alzado move... :rolleyes:
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

18 May 2012 01:18

Now that the Vikings are staying in Minnesota (right?!) I'm really hoping they make an open air stadium. I know owner Zygi Wilf wants one. So that would bring us back to the good old days when the Vikings played real football.

Image

Image

So if they don't move, what team moves to LA? I say San Diego at the rate things are going. They still are stuck in a giant bureaucratic mess nowhere near a deal. If not them, St. Louis would be next, as the team is seeking a grand stadium while facing huge backlash from the city and residents. The third team is the Raiders. But I still think there's so much money in the Bay Area, that between SF, Oakland, San Jose and Santa Clara, a new super posh stadium will be built where both the 49ers and Raiders will play (like the NY teams do). The interesting part is that the Chargers, Rams and Raiders have all been based in LA before.

Props to NFL.com for taking advantage of an active off season. The NFL Network is also still going strong. It shows just how popular the NFL continues to be, even in the dead part of the year. Some interesting lists on NFL.com.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

18 May 2012 02:04

Alpe d'Huez wrote:
Image



Great pic. It makes me want to play right now, even with my bad back and all...
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

18 May 2012 05:20

Kids today don't realize just how much of a winter advantage the Vikings had playing there, especially in the playoffs. It was actually colder than the "frozen tundra" of Lanbeau Field. Nicknamed the Ice Palace, The Met was much more open so the wind was worse. It was the coldest of the cold.

Great 3 minute look at the old Metropolitan Stadium!
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

18 May 2012 20:42

Pure luck hits again: The more-loses-than-wins-Kings are now one victory away from the finals. :eek:

And let me tell you guys: It´s pure luck respectively chance (whatever you like to call it). Brian Burke (and others) did endless studies on outliers. "Hot hands" in basketball are chance, "clutch" plays are, coin flips are, dices are... and so are the Kings (& usually all the NHL games over decades).

If the Kings were the most talented/superior team, then why o why didn´t they perform well in the last few regular seasons, when regression to the mean show us really which teams have the talent?

Conclusion: As great skilled as hockey players are, the game itself is highly incomplete. As long as they don´t change the rules (for example bigger goals, wider playing surfaces favour the talent; see Russias domination in the 60-80s), it´s useless to watch hockey.

Posted it here to not hurt the hockey fans.
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

19 May 2012 01:21

The Kings didn't have more losses than wins, but they did win less than half their games. Agree that hockey is a sport with a high amount of luck determining outcomes. Almost as much as soccer. From what I've been watching, I'll still take the Rangers over the Kings. They just seem more physical across the entire ice.

Back to the NFL:

Ryan Tannehilll came to camp with the playbook memorized. But says he's unsure if he'll start this year. If he does, I think he's doomed.

Jim Harbaugh says Michael Crabtree has so improved, that he has the best hands he's ever seen. But with Harbaugh talking so much about receivers, is Alex Smith really up for passing that much??

Dallas Clark worked out for the Pats. But I just don't see him going there. NE is so deep at TE they don't need him at all, plus he's at the end of his career.

Finally, Pete Prisco listed his top 100 players, with a couple surprises. Here's a link to his list. And his top 10:


1. Aaron Rodgers (6)
2. Tom Brady (1)
3. DeMarcus Ware (3)
4. Calfin Johnson (29)
5. Darrell Revis (13)
6. Drew Brees (10)
7. Jason Pierre Pauli (NR)
8. Julius Peppers (11)
9. Larry Fitzgerald (18)
10. Rob Gronkowski (NR)

Biggest drops: Nnamdi Asomgua. 4 last year, 81 this year. Chris Johnson from 7 to 88
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

19 May 2012 02:05

Seldom i don´t agree with you, but here you fall into the misleading NHL-Standings trap crap:

Indeed the Kings had more losses (42) than wins (40).

While the NHL does count OT/SO-Wins in the win column, they don´t add the OT/SO-Losses in the lost column, since they invented the "OL" column to the standings (there the OT/SO losses are nowadays hidden) some years ago.

If they fool you :D, they can do to everybody. Exactly what they wanted.

Isn´t it looking prettier that the Kings went 40-27-15, instead of in reality 40-42?

Now the average NHL team has more wins than losses (41-31). :eek: Absurd.

NHL....? More and more i come to think it´s a bigger joke than NBA nowadays.

Alpe d'Huez wrote:The Kings didn't have more losses than wins, but they did win less than half their games. Agree that hockey is a sport with a high amount of luck determining outcomes. Almost as much as soccer. From what I've been watching, I'll still take the Rangers over the Kings. They just seem more physical across the entire ice.

Back to the NFL:

Finally, Pete Prisco...



This guy is annoying me as much as those who have to suffer trou Phil Liggett in cycling. Stopped reading his... But let me guess: no OG, no C, max. five OT, all RB´s that went over 1.000 yds. This guy is ridiculous. Only in america it´s possible to get a job by only pretenting. Am i right? ;)

Alpe and all you guys posting here (except ChrisE) know more football and are more informative than this "journalist".

But the worst part of him is his agressive, arrogant i-know-it-all writing style. What a fool...
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

21 May 2012 01:14

Excellent point on the NHL scoring. And another thing, I hate the way some hockey games end in shootouts. It's almost as bad as soccer ending in penalty kicks. You would think with all the freedom they have to try something new, they choose this? Imagine if the NFL game finished in a tie, and they decided to determine the winner with a punt, pass and kick competition.

The most simple solution in hockey with OT is to start alternating power plays, 2 minutes one team, two minutes the other with 5 on 4. Then if no one scores, 5 on 3. Then 5 on 2, until someone scores. Soccer could do the same. And if that fails, remove the keeper. But to end in penalty kicks is just awful. What makes it worse is that teams will often stall in order to get to a shoot out. Back when I was running camera, and IR and switcher for Turner covering USL and inter-league soccer I talked once to the regional league official about it. He said it was a very hot topic, and he didn't like shootouts either. There had been talk about removing the keeper in 2nd OT, but there were stalwarts in MLS and USL there were ardently against it, and wanted to follow FIFA and traditional rules as much as possible "for the fans". The fans? The fans want this kind of ending to matches? Good God!
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

21 May 2012 16:14

It would be ridiculous to end NFL games like this. I can´t even imagine such BS... Just look at the CL-Final in soccer: decided by luck, shootout and defense. The comical; europeans like it.:eek:
I am often very critical of show biz sports USA-Style, but as you know when we discussed it many times, soccer is the worst...

Anyway, don´t make it to difficult. Just widen the hockey surface and enlarge the goals. All problems of too many ties after reagulation/overtime, lucky outcomes, shootouts etc. are reduced to a minimum.

Sometimes i have the feeling the NHL behaves like the FIFA: Some neanderthals running the company refuse to change the game to the better. If players get faster and taller, just change the rules. The NFL is a big postive here. They always changed the rules when necessary. That´s a big reason for their success. The Giants-2011 and 2007 are still exceptions of the rule: normally the better teams win the championships...
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

21 May 2012 16:30

Soccer penalties aren't all luck :eek:. There's a big difference between poor penalties (like Robben's on saturday) and good ones (like Luiz's). You need to have calm nerves and sound technique. If you can feint the goalie or bury it in the top corner, you make your own luck.

As for hockey on small rinks, yeah it's a pinball luck-fest if both teams have tight defenses. What it can produce is big, engaging drama and narrative, rather than a competition of skills and conditioning. The latter is what individual sports like cycling are for.

Of course it's showbiz. That's one of the main reasons for watching these sports. Same as the gladiatorial arena in old Rome. Luck is part of life; isn't it alright for some sports to reflect this?
Nielsa
Junior Member
 
Posts: 441
Joined: 26 Jul 2011 13:15

21 May 2012 19:09

I don't think the entertainment factor is a problem, I think it's rules in some of these sports. As both Foxxy and I noted many times, soccer does have great athletes, and dedicated fans, but the sport could be so much more dynamic, and matches so much more exciting. But there are such old curmudgeon stalwarts at the executive level who are mentally paralyzed by the thought of changing any rules. Even ones such as those I listed above to help make ends of matches more exciting. They just won't do it. Even when MLS came to the US, they had a great chance to change some rules and make the sport more open, but they didn't, for the reasons the league official I spoke to mentioned. It gets discussed at the executive level, but because the powers that be are so entrenched, hey still won't change them. The league will lose money and fold before they do it.

While this is an NFL thread, here is what I'm talking about:

• Change OT rules to where there are no penalty kicks. OT starts with power plays, and double OT is played with no keeper. Or just eliminate the keeper in OT.

• Do not allow the keeper to come out of the goal area box. Or, if that's too strict, allow the keeper to only come out of the box for a few seconds, like the NBA's 3 in the key rule.

• Eliminate stoppage time, and make the clock tick down, like in all other sports. Penalize teams that stall with power plays and corner kicks. This includes the keeper holding onto the ball. He should be forced to kick/throw the ball within 5-10 seconds of trapping/receiving it. Throw-in's from the sideline, and corner kicks should be the same.

• Open the goal by at 1-3m. Not larger, which would reward sloppy shooting. We don't need matches that are 25-22 scores, but more 7-6 matches would be good. Having so many 1-0 matches stinks, and is too based on luck.

•*Eliminate the offsides rule.

• Add one more official on the pitch.

• Make it harder to hand out red cards. Again, like in hockey, a penalty box or power play is better.

This is just for starters, and only suggestions. But if MLS (or FIFA) adopted all of them, the sport would move quicker, and the outcomes of matches would be much more exciting, and much less luck based than they are now.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

21 May 2012 23:03

:D

It's two thirds through May as I pop in for my occasional peek, and what do I find?? A buoyant, thriving NFL topic at the top of the page, that has apparently temporarily mutated into Alpe's suggestions for making other sports more exciting!

I can't sensibly comment about hockey, because I don't know enough about the game. But, when it comes to what I and most of the world calls football, I certainly feel like adding my two euro cents.

Normally, I have great respect for your opinions Alpe, because you clearly know what you're talking about. I'm afraid that is not the case when it comes to football.;)

Your suggestions for making the game 'more open' are complete non-starters, as they are based on Americans' desires for 'more' of everything, including goals and excitement - desires that are on the whole not shared by the rest of the world. Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would prefer to see games end 5-3 instead of 1-0, but it is in the fundamental nature of the game that sometimes you'll get the former kind of result, but more often the latter. No one in the rest of the world (to my knowledge) has ever called for such a fundamental revision of the rules of the game as you are suggesting, Alpe.

Different ways of deciding deadlocked games in international competitions have been tried. The golden goal rule was eventually dispensed with because it was considered to be unfair. Very few games are ever decided by a penalty shoot-out, but the ones that are, are invariably big games that attract much international publicity. Penalties are also a flawed way of deciding a game, but without a fundamental re-write of the laws of the game - which is simply not an option open to discussion outside the US, we're stuck with it for the foreseeable future.

The suggestion to scrap the offside rule is an absolute non-starter. You would wind up with one guy hanging around somewhere near the opposing goalie, hoping that a long kick up the pitch would land near him and allow him to sneak one in. The offside rule is an integral part of the modern game and is here to stay. Where it falls down is in the human interpretation of it. (Just like the MLB ump will call a strike while the machine shows that it was a ball - human error.)

The offside rule (and the game as a whole) would work much better if only FIFA/UEFA would pull their heads out of the sand and finally implement the electronic aids that are readily available for big games. Until not so long ago, Blatter was so dead set against any change whatsoever, that most people thought that nothing would change till he finally left the scene. Now we're no longer so sure. There have been noises from FIFA to suggest that they are at last seriously looking into the options and possibilities, although they may just be blowing smoke up all our arses with no intention of actually following up -who can say?

Football would benefit enormously from the kind of electronic aids and instant replays used in US sports and become a fairer, more honest game. Players know it, fans know it, managers know it, we just have to wait for the bobos who 'run' the global game to also realize it.

Goal-line and sideline technology available now would eliminate the question, 'did it cross the line', and allow the offside rule to be applied more fairly. Linesmen would be instructed not to flag if the decision was at all 'close', play would continue, and if a goal ensued from that attack, only then would electronic aids come into play. If electronics (and or replays) show that the attacker was offside, the goal is not given. Simple, and much fairer.

Fouls, and diving are other aspects that would benefit enormously from instant replays. A player who just went down like he was shot, or one who claims to have been hit in the face, can instantly be proven to be either rightly injured parties, or con artists. The ref has blown for a foul anyway, there is often someone writhing on the ground, ample time for the fourth official to watch the replay and see what really happened. He in turn informs the ref through the earpiece, and he acts accordingly. Again, so simple and so blindingly obvious to so many, except, for now still, to the powers that be.

In short, what the game needs imho, is not fiddling with the rules, but implementation of modern electronic aids.

Phew. I didn't mean for that to go on like that, and profuse apologies for being totally off NFL topic.....:o

I did see some film of Skins fans practicing their "RG3" chant. We're gonna be hearing that one loud and clear when they play at Fedex.
The LOTE has won, all hail the LOTE!
User avatar Amsterhammer
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,650
Joined: 22 Jun 2009 08:29
Location: Amsterdam

21 May 2012 23:18

There’s a very simple solution to settling ties in soccer that would have the additional advantage of cutting down on the number of games that are tied in the first place. Have the OT, but if the game is still tied at that point, the winner is the team that had the ball the majority of time in its opponent’s half of the field. A great many ties in soccer result because one team, considered the underdog, drops back and plays defense. It’s very hard to score if a team is willing basically to give up on offense and guard it’s goal. So underdog teams do that with the aim of getting a 0-0 tie, then figuring they have at least a 50-50 shot of winning on penalty kicks. IIRC, Italy basically did that against Brazil in the WC final in 1994, though Brazil, the more aggressive team, won the shootout.

The possession rule would discourage teams from concentrating on defense, as they would know that they would lose a tie game. And even in cases where teams were fairly evenly matched, and neither concentrated particularly on defense, the more aggressive team would be rewarded. If that seems unfair to a team that just happens to be more defense-minded, tough luck, it’s no more unfair than a shootout. An alternative—in soccer, and also in hockey—would be to give the win to the team with the most shots on goal, with shots on goal defined in a way that a desperate team could not just kick the ball at the goal from midfield and call that a shot.

I could see making the goals bigger in both soccer and hockey. As hockey stands now, I’ve often wondered why some NHL team didn’t sign some 500 pound fat slob to park himself in front of the goal. If he could handle getting hit by the puck, he could block the entire goal, so it would be effectively impossible to score. There has to be a reason why no one has tried this, but I’m not sure what. Maybe a guy obese enough to do the job would not be able to stand on skates that long in one place.

Back on the NFL, more fallout on the growing awareness of brain injuries. Parents worried about their kids playing the game:

http://www.ajc.com/sports/parents-rethinking-the-game-1441556.html

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there are more than 55,000 cases of traumatic brain injury — concussions mostly — per year throughout all of high school football. More awareness has meant more reporting of concussions, and the growing numbers have prompted the CDC to declare sports-related traumatic brain injuries an epidemic.


Dr. Steve Kroll of Georgia Sports Medicine estimates that he has seen more than 1,000 concussion cases in the past two years. Maybe 20 percent of those involve football. Other sources may surprise you.
"One in particular is cheerleading," he said. "They don't have pads. They don't have helmets. And they actually suffer quite a few concussions."


Maybe this could explain the mental deficiencies in all those people who have been cheerleading for Lance? ☺

Saw a bit of 49er training on TV the other day. Boy, does LaMichael James look small, particularly without pads, seems tiny compared to those linemen. I guess he’s only 5’9”, not going to be an up the middle power runner. Still think he was a good draft choice. The team seems a little overstocked in RBs now, but Gore is sort of middle-aged as the position goes, won’t be around forever, and has had some injury problems. James could also add all-important speed to the receiver corps.

Anway, at least the team didn’t mortgsge their future on a franchise QB, then draft another QB who will never start and can’t even run the starter’s offense, the way the idiot Redskin management did. What in the world were they thinking? Don’t think Seattle was much better drafting Wilson. If you’re going to pay all that money to a QB like Flynn, why waste a precious draft pick on another QB when you need to build around your starter? But I’m OK with anything that weakens other teams in the 49ers division.
User avatar Merckx index
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,244
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 19:19

22 May 2012 01:06

Alpe d'Huez wrote:

• Eliminate stoppage time, and make the clock tick down, like in all other sports. Penalize teams that stall with power plays and corner kicks. This includes the keeper holding onto the ball. He should be forced to kick/throw the ball within 5-10 seconds of trapping/receiving it. Throw-in's from the sideline, and corner kicks should be the same.

• Open the goal by at 1-3m. Not larger, which would reward sloppy shooting. We don't need matches that are 25-22 scores, but more 7-6 matches would be good. Having so many 1-0 matches stinks, and is too based on luck.

•*Eliminate the offsides rule.

• Make it harder to hand out red cards. Again, like in hockey, a penalty box or power play is better.

This is just for starters, and only suggestions. But if MLS (or FIFA) adopted all of them, the sport would move quicker, and the outcomes of matches would be much more exciting, and much less luck based than they are now.


Great ideas. But as long FIFA rocks, the game will never change to the better. Too stubborn those guys. My reason to gave up soccer are the unfair rules. Just b/c of my old favourite team went to the CL-Final, i watched my first soccer game since the WC-Final... and i am dissapointed. The exact thing happened i told before the game. It will be decided by luck and refs.

1.) Munich scores on a allegedly offside goal. AFIR, the shot was blocked by the GK, then the rebound went in. Now the refs called indirect offside by the rebounding shooter. :eek:
This indirect offside rule only exists since the mid 80s (as if the old offside rule wasn´t odd enough). Nowadays not even the hardcore fans understand the offside rules: I asked true die hard fans what they think. They couldn´t explain it one way or the other. They were just unsure. Ekk again.
2.) The ref called for a penalty shot in the overtime. A clear game decider by the ref if Robben hit the goal. BTW, it was no foul... uncorrect call by the ref.
3.) Penalty shootout. Clear luck, not skill. It was just inches that made Schweinsteigers shot a miss instead of a goal. Ok, those things happen in the NFL too (Welker for example). But: Studies showed that the GK must decide before the shot in which corner he jumps, b/c the ball hits the goaline earlier than the GK can react and decide which corner he defends = 50/50 chance. Pure luck decides outcomes of championships. Absurd.

Amsterhammer wrote:Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would prefer to see games end 5-3 instead of 1-0, but it is in the fundamental nature of the game that sometimes you'll get the former kind of result, but more often the latter. No one in the rest of the world (to my knowledge) has ever called for such a fundamental revision of the rules of the game as you are suggesting, Alpe.


As a long time soccer player, i think i can also say something about it.
I am more on Alpes side. Just remember, in the 50s games did end up 5-3 more often than 1-0. So it´s possible. Just let the rules keep up with evolution. If players get faster, stronger, taller and have more stamina, make the goals a bit bigger, get rid of the offside rule as it stands. And yes i called for such a revison. But i know the neanderthals would never do, so i gave up soccer (& hockey watching BTW). OTOH, the NFL does an outstanding job with rule adaptations to complement the evolution of mankind and the game itself. Not a single fan gave up watching real football :D while the pundists called it the end of true football when boring games are eliminated now and then.

Amsterhammer wrote:The suggestion to scrap the offside rule is an absolute non-starter. You would wind up with one guy hanging around somewhere near the opposing goalie, hoping that a long kick up the pitch would land near him and allow him to sneak one in. The offside rule is an integral part of the modern game and is here to stay. Where it falls down is in the human interpretation of it. (Just like the MLB ump will call a strike while the machine shows that it was a ball - human error.)


No, no, it´s a starter. Everything else is better than the existing offside rules. BTW, in league youth soccer we had no offside rules until age 14 or something. It worked. And; studies showed that a ref can not decide offsides correctly. It´s always guess work. The human eye can´t look at different angles (ball, offensive and defense players) at the same time. It´s just impossible. Unlike baseball, wrong offside calls are game deciders. Wrong given strikes and balls even out over the length of the game. Simply by regression to the mean in an event with the law of large numbers (ca. 300 piches in a typical game).

Amsterhammer wrote:The offside rule (and the game as a whole) would work much better if only FIFA/UEFA would pull their heads out of the sand and finally implement the electronic aids that are readily available for big games....Football would benefit enormously from the kind of electronic aids and instant replays used in US sports and become a fairer, more honest game. Players know it, fans know it, managers know it, we just have to wait for the bobos who 'run' the global game to also realize it.

Goal-line and sideline technology available now would eliminate the question, 'did it cross the line', and allow the offside rule to be applied more fairly...

Fouls, and diving are other aspects that would benefit enormously from instant replays...
In short, what the game needs imho, is not fiddling with the rules, but implementation of modern electronic aids.


Agree 100%, but the electronic help can only complement rule changes. Anyway, it will not happen in our lifetime. So i just stay off soccer, only watch if german teams make it to the final. But then, to be honest: even tough i am munich fan since the 70s, i didn´t care about the outcome. My heart just wasn´t in it. That much the existing rules spoiled my once love for the game.

Merckx index wrote:There’s a very simple solution to settling ties in soccer that would have the additional advantage of cutting down on the number of games that are tied in the first place. Have the OT, but if the game is still tied at that point, the winner is the team that had the ball the majority of time in its opponent’s half of the field. A great many ties in soccer result because one team, considered the underdog, drops back and plays defense....


Good idea. But it´s easier to just widen the goals and skip the offside rule as it stands. Attacking teams will be rewarded. I mean just look at the 3-Point-Rule. It didn´t change the defensive minds a bit. Same outcomes as before. But if more shots hit the goal area, the more goals will occur. It´s just a matter of time that a team shooting 20 times a game scores. The success rate of shots hitting the goal area was ca. 30% in the last WC. If it goes up to let´s say 45%, coaches would think twice if defending 90+ minutes or actually play.

Merckx index wrote:I could see making the goals bigger in both soccer and hockey. As hockey stands now, I’ve often wondered why some NHL team didn’t sign some 500 pound fat slob to park himself in front of the goal. If he could handle getting hit by the puck, he could block the entire goal, so it would be effectively impossible to score.


Awesome. Why i didn´t came to that idea? I wondered for long why teams don´t put two defense players left and right off the goalie. No puck will ever get trou. But your idea is wayy better. No injury chance for my "defense player theory". Are the hockey guys not smart enough? We should ask about this in the hockey forum. But i guess we´d get slaughtered. :D

Thanks for that hint. Man, hockey is even more incomplete than soccer. I just realized now. Look, the NBA signed Manute Bol and the chinese guy for the rebounds. So i see no reason for not signing an obese 500 lbs guy to make scoring impossible...

Merckx index wrote:There has to be a reason why no one has tried this, but I’m not sure what. Maybe a guy obese enough to do the job would not be able to stand on skates that long in one place.


So what? Then they sign as much fat goalies as possible. If one 500-guy gets tired, send the next one in. I guess there are enough underpaid sumo wrestlers around, waiting for a fat NHL-Contract. :D

Merckx index wrote:Maybe this could explain the mental deficiencies in all those people who have been cheerleading for Lance? ☺


That made my day. The best one liner since the famous Bolt-Thread.

Since i mentioned the NFL many times in this post, i think we are not off topic and can go on.
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

26 May 2012 22:28

Hey guys, where are you? We need to keep this one front page trou the off season. ;)

Another LOL at the National Luck League;
The 8th seed more-losses-than-wins-Kings meet the 6th seed of the eastern conference, the NJ Devils.

My guess: 4-3, game 7 going into double overtime.... just don´t know who the "champion" will be.
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

27 May 2012 15:31

You cats been busy.

What's all this NBA talk? I can't say much about NBA cos I only watch it if there's nothing else on and I have absolutely nothing else to do. Even then I'll only take in a quarter or so.

Plenty going on in the NFL OTA's. Alpe's right again. D-Clark not to Pats, but to Fins. And K2 to Seattle. I like that move. Also in Hawkville, Russel Wilson (#3 pick by SEA) is challenging for the starting QB spot, and likely will take over the backup role for whoever the starter ends up being. Heck, he might even end up starting. He has definately made the most of his opportunities. The other draft picks by Hawks are looking sharp at the moment too. Shows what the draft experts know.

Right now tho I'm just savoring Ryder H's Giro win. How bout that eh?
User avatar on3m@n@rmy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,956
Joined: 17 Jun 2010 12:25
Location: PNW

27 May 2012 23:09

on3m@n@rmy wrote:You cats been busy.

What's all this NBA talk?
...
Right now tho I'm just savoring Ryder H's Giro win. How bout that eh?


Actually it´s NHL and soccer, and further it´s about luck involvement there. To not get off topic, i spinned that around NFL comparisons (where a good dose of luck is involved too, but not as much to make the real football regular seasons meaningless :D).

Yeah, that Ryder win was good & deserved, b/c all the pre game favourites either went on strike (see stage 16; the biggest disapointment of them all), raced cowardly (Scarponi, and all those wheel suckers) or simply disappointed (Rujano). The only up note was De Gendt´s daring exploit, as mentioned Hesjedal handed the win, and me finishing first in the first round of the great grand tour game...
User avatar FoxxyBrown1111
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6,145
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 12:35
Location: Germany

28 May 2012 03:22

Let's talk about the NFL, not because it's on topic, but because the off season is when things happen only dolts like us can appreciate. :)

I have successfully moved from Oregon to Connecticut, so I'm out of NBA/MLS country, and right into NFL/MLB country. A little over two hours from seeing Patriots, Giants of Jets games. :)

Loved that Lance comment, btw. :D
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,258
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Back to top