National Football League

[Alpe d'Huez]

That study doesn't surprise me, for all the reasons listed. We hear sad stories, but I think that study shows the bigger picture. I do however think several players end up with near crippled bodies, and minds when old. Jim Otto being an example. I don't know how many players are in mental situations like Muhammad Ali, but I'll bet it's more than the average populace.

In the NFL can you bet on anything or is it just the result.

I'm not a gambler, but there is more to bet on than the result. Over/Under is very common for example. The US is a nation very heavily into gambling, and the NFL is the biggest sport of all. This is why I tend to agree with Foxxy, and wouldn't be surprised if that list I made above was all true. I just grow tired of focusing on it and try to enjoy the sport. Sort of like cycling and doping. I don't pretend it's not there, because it is, but I still try to enjoy the sport first and foremost.

 

[Merckx index]

end of the NFL?

Alarmist? I don't think so. Even if the NFL survives, this is a huge problem.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/...rt-piling-up-nfl-could-some-day-face-end-game

We're a few years away, but it's coming. It's happening, and there's nothing any of us can do about it. In a few years courts will start hearing class-action lawsuits filed by retired players against the NFL. And if that first wave of lawsuits ends badly for the league -- with precedent-setting rulings that the NFL owes millions of dollars in damages -- the jig's up. The game's over. The NFL is finished.

So this is a big "if," but it's an "if" that cannot be ignored: If one of these first few trials goes badly for the NFL, damaged football players everywhere will realize their suffering is worth money, and they'll lawyer up. And they'll win, just like smokers keep winning. A smoker in Los Angeles was awarded $100 million in 2001. Another in Florida won $39 million in 2009. It continues to this day as a class-action lawsuit winds through Canadian courts, with plaintiffs seeking up to $27 billion.

NFL players should have a better case than smokers. Smokers have known for decades the dangers of cigarettes, and a lot of of people have very little sympathy for those who take known health risks and then expect to be bailed out. But players who are retired today arguably did not know the risks of brain injury when they played. And of course, doing something as a livelihood is a stronger argument than doing something for pleasure. It's most like those who suffer from asbestos exposure in the workplace.

helmets are worn to protect the head of the player wearing it. As we all know, helmets haven't done it. Not well enough. Nothing against helmet makers -- I'm not sure it's possible to protect an NFL player's brain from all those nasty collisions -- but retired players have been diagnosed with dementia at rates five to 19 times higher than the general population. So the question for courts to decide is this: Should the makers of those helmets be held responsible? If that answer is "yes," then it's like I said:

Football is finished.

Because even if the NFL thinks it can survive the lawsuits by using the product on the field to stave off bankruptcy, you can't play football without a football helmet. And if helmet makers are going to be sued, they'll find something else to make, like lawn chairs.

IMO this is a very serious problem. Helmets, basically, can protect against skull fractures. That's what they're designed to do, and for a long time, it was thought that was all they had to do. What they can't protect against, and what is now appreciated to be the real problem, is the brain moving around inside the skull upon sudden jarring impact. That happens regardless of how well the helmet cushions the skull. I really don't think there's any kind of equipment that can protect against that. Certainly no form of external head gear.

All told, more than 2,000 players have filed almost 75 complaints against the NFL or Riddell. What's lifelong brain trauma worth to a middle-aged man? A million bucks? Multiply a million bucks times 2,000 players. OK, I'll do it for you: That's $2 billion.

Is it possible that the NFL in the future could require players to sign something releasing the NFL from any liability as a result of injuries--in return for a much better health insurance policy?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It's a big problem, but it won't kill the NFL. I expect a settlement with the NFL writing some large checks, and at the same time offering some sort of limited health care for life plan for all NFL players.

Speaking of concussions. Ohio State standout LB Andrew Sweat has declined playing for the NFL in favor of going to law school. One of his reasons was that he didn't want his head pounded in over the next several years. Article here.

According to Yahoo Sports, in Seattle rookie QB Russell Wilson has so impressed Pete Carroll that he's said Wilson actually has a chance to be the starting QB this year. Odds do seem to be Matt Flynn will get the job and he's apparently looking good in camp as well. I think what may be happening here is Carroll is pushing Flynn and TJax, and will either trade Tjax and have Russell 2nd on the depth chart with Josh Porter third, or they'll push Porter to the practice squad. I was not that impressed with Wilson in the Rose Bowl, and he's small. But he sure looked good in Gruden camp, and Gruden said he was a great pick for Seattle. Article here on Seahawk QBs. Jim Moore is so impressed with Wilson in minicamp he says TJax is done. He says the QB situation there is Flynn, backed up by Wilson, and that's it. Good article here.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I wouldn´t say either that the lawsuits kill the NFL. 1st of all, as i learned in the Armstrong-Case, you can buy "justice" in the USA as easy as in an obscure 3rd world country.
2nd, as Alpe said, they´ll settle out of court, may higher NFL-Pensions. They simply can afford it by raising ticket prices and find more ways to milk the fans.

Helmet-Use: I think the helmets are not the solution, but part of the problem. Just ask Rugby players if they ever would ram their heads into opposing players...

NFL players, over generations, "learned" to use the helmet as a weapon.
So even if helmet companies go bankrupt over lawsuits, the NFL would find a way to play without them.

Otherwise, great post.

Finally; seems Jackson is finally done...

 

[ChrisE]

WTF are you guys talking about with this "justice" and these "victims"?

Let me get this straight....they CHOOSE to play a sport where heads and other body parts get smashed, and then they sue because there are repurcussions? This is as bad as the cigarette "victims".

This is insane.

If they just did away with helmets, this problem would solve itself.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

LOL. ESPN-Niveau...

Those guys are 21/22 when they are signed to the NFL. Plus the players who are suing now absolutely did know NOTHING about brain trauma risks. They learned to play football, not medicine sience.

It´s as if to say those guys who worked with asbestos was their own fault.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I think all they really need to do is form some sort of medical savings fund both the NFL and players contribute to that purchases long-term care for each player who retires. It's not that complicated of an issue. And as Foxxy says, they'll just raise ticket prices $1, or advertising rates, and the fans and sponsors will still pay.

I also don't see some sort of super helmet making things safer. Then you'd end up with other injuries, maybe worse. But I don't know that eliminating helmets is the answer either. Getting rid of the kickoff isn't the answer either (though I do think they could make a rule where all the players (except kicker and two receivers) on both teams must line up within 10 yards of the kicked ball, which would cut way down on the high speed head on head collisions.

Let me get this straight....they CHOOSE to play a sport where heads and other body parts get smashed.

Not many were as wise as Andrew Sweat. Then again, RGIII and Luck both seem plenty intelligent, so there goes that theory. However, I do think this "problem" will take care of itself over time. I think we'll see mandatory rest and stricter evals for concussions, even mandatory retirement, which will be coupled to some sort of retirement payout. But you're simply not going to make it injury proof. That's not going to happen.

Football is not the same as tobacco, which is addicting. Sports isn't addicting like that.

More chatter today from Seahawk land that Tjax will never play another down in Seattle. The better Wilson looks, the closer Tjax is to leaving. At this point he's basically trade bait, or they'll just cut him to save $4m off the cap. The guy isn't really starting QB material anyway, but he's durable and some team will need him as a back-up (Oakland? Buffalo? Cincy?).

 

[MarkvW]

I think all they really need to do is form some sort of medical savings fund both the NFL and players contribute to that purchases long-term care for each player who retires. It's not that complicated of an issue. And as Foxxy says, they'll just raise ticket prices $1, or advertising rates, and the fans and sponsors will still pay.

I also don't see some sort of super helmet making things safer. Then you'd end up with other injuries, maybe worse. But I don't know that eliminating helmets is the answer either. Getting rid of the kickoff isn't the answer either (though I do think they could make a rule where all the players (except kicker and two receivers) on both teams must line up within 10 yards of the kicked ball, which would cut way down on the high speed head on head collisions.



Not many were as wise as Andrew Sweat. Then again, RGIII and Luck both seem plenty intelligent, so there goes that theory. However, I do think this "problem" will take care of itself over time. I think we'll see mandatory rest and stricter evals for concussions, even mandatory retirement, which will be coupled to some sort of retirement payout. But you're simply not going to make it injury proof. That's not going to happen.

Football is not the same as tobacco, which is addicting. Sports isn't addicting like that.

More chatter today from Seahawk land that Tjax will never play another down in Seattle. The better Wilson looks, the closer Tjax is to leaving. At this point he's basically trade bait, or they'll just cut him to save $4m off the cap. The guy isn't really starting QB material anyway, but he's durable and some team will need him as a back-up (Oakland? Buffalo? Cincy?).

I'd like to see the players told exactly, in graphic and more-than-complete detail, what they are signing up for in the way of concussions. Included video and in person presentations from middle aged players suffering the aftermath of debilitating brain injury. That might help a very small number of people who wouldn't otherwise be helped.

Your ideas about player care, and mandatory retirement are going to be made necessary by future lawsuits or legislation.

Then, I'd jack up the player pension and health insurance programs (like you suggest).

Everything I've read suggests that helmets are not a solution. A helmet does nothing to stop the brain from sloshing against the skull upon impact.

I don't see anything being done to address the doped-up speed and strength that make the risk of injury worse.

Jackson's proven himself to be a good solid journeyman quarterback, nothing more.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I also don't see some sort of super helmet making things safer. Then you'd end up with other injuries, maybe worse. But I don't know that eliminating helmets is the answer either. Getting rid of the kickoff isn't the answer either (though I do think they could make a rule where all the players (except kicker and two receivers) on both teams must line up within 10 yards of the kicked ball, which would cut way down on the high speed head on head collisions.

True. May sick players like Harrison, or sick coaches like Williams would teach players flying head on into opposing players if helmets get "safer".

Just call the fouls (spearing, etc.) the way Godell want. May the NFL loses some redneck fans to WWE. The NFL should take that risk. A good sideproduct would be: the idiots on message boards like ESPN will go.

Then again, RGIII and Luck both seem plenty intelligent, so there goes that theory.

Not really. The players suing now wasn´t educated in health risks like nowadays.

Football is not the same as tobacco, which is addicting. Sports isn't addicting like that.

For me it is. Otherwise i´d have given up after reading Moldea´s book...

More chatter today from Seahawk land that Tjax will never play another down in Seattle. The better Wilson looks, the closer Tjax is to leaving. At this point he's basically trade bait, or they'll just cut him to save $4m off the cap. The guy isn't really starting QB material anyway, but he's durable and some team will need him as a back-up (Oakland? Buffalo? Cincy?).

I guess Jackson is gone forever. Just too much talent joins the NFL every year. He had his chances...

 

[MarkvW]

LOL. ESPN-Niveau...

Those guys are 21/22 when they are signed to the NFL. Plus the players who are suing now absolutely did know NOTHING about brain trauma risks. They learned to play football, not medicine sience.

It´s as if to say those guys who worked with asbestos was their own fault.

They also trusted the team doctors. I've always wondered about team doctors. The conflict of interest has always seemed obvious. A doctor should serve his patient without any consideration to the welfare of the team. A team doctor will always factor team considerations somewhere into the treatment mix.

 

[MarkvW]

True. May sick players like Harrison, or sick coaches like Williams would teach players flying head on into opposing players if helmets get "safer".

Just call the fouls (spearing, etc.) the way Godell want. May the NFL loses some redneck fans to WWE. The NFL should take that risk. A good sideproduct would be: the idiots on message boards like ESPN will go.



Not really. The players suing now wasn´t educated in health risks like nowadays.



For me it is. Otherwise i´d have given up after reading Moldea´s book...




I guess Jackson is gone forever. Just too much talent joins the NFL every year. He had his chances...

Thanks for the Moldea reference. I'm getting it at the library tomorrow!

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

... here is the cover. At amazon from 0,01 $. So you can even buy it. It´s worth it...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I should pick that book up too. It will probably confirm a lot of my suspicions.

I haven't talked to Brock since Bountygate, but did in the past about the old days, which he described as pretty brutal. When he started in the NFL things like helmet to helmet hits, head slaps, horse collars, and chop blocks were all completely legal. Scary, huh? He doesn't walk that fast, but seems to have all his mental faculties, and is quite thankful about it.

49ers Harbaugh is pushing his receivers a lot in camp says they are way too talented to not perform. Is he really banking that Alex Smith is that good?? Also, Smith was sacked 4th mist in the NFL last year, and the OL has to be able to patch that up.

In Wash the Shanahans are throwing everything at RGIII, who seems to be impressing the heck out of them. Report says theyre setting up plays to frustrate and confuse him, he's so mentally strong. Is he that good already? Or is he just good, and they're selling hype?

 

[Merckx index]

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.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

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

I don't see anything being done to address the doped-up speed and strength that make the risk of injury worse.

That´s the core of the problem. In the 80´s, a handful OLers weighted more than 300, now it seems to be a job requirement for OLers to weight 300+...
Even QB´s look like LB´s now. Back in the days they looked more like pitchers & normal people.

And that´s not all. Even bigger problems are the numbing shots. That leaves players really crippled when the career is long over. It´s not "just" concussions...

I've always wondered about team doctors. The conflict of interest has always seemed obvious.

Ex-Raiders Dr. Huizenga wrote a great book about that problem. I also recommend it.

I should pick that book up too.

Or is he just good, and they're selling hype?

Good idea, then we can discuss it all summer long here, and skip the TdF.

The NFL is an extremely popular institution...

Great posts. As always.

Ex-Falcon Tim Green discussed the transition problem from football to normal life in his book:

I wouldn´t say it´s the NFL´s fault here. If players are not educated by the family, never learn to keep their money together (like i did , but i don´t blame my mother), make a dozen babies and lose everything... well that leads to suicide (toughts) in former (rich) players.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

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.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

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.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

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...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

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.

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.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Great pic. It makes me want to play right now, even with my bad back and all...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

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!

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

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

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.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

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

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

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 , 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). Absurd.

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

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...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

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!