NFL Would Consider Wider Field

[RJTurneR]

But they did consider it though.. And that's enough to get us ranting on.

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

I see this the same way I saw the MLB changing the leagues this year; stop it. This isn't what the sport needs. The sport does not need more handicaps against defensive players. What it needs are good coaches who actually teach proper tackling techniques.

You have an incredibly popular sport and are overreacting to recent developments. If the players want to protect themselves long-term, they should retire earlier.

[RJTurneR]

Quote:

If the players want to protect themselves long-term, they should retire earlier.

Say that to an NFL players/s and you most likely will not get a positive reaction. Remember, it might be our entertainment but it's their life and career. They know the risks of the sport they love and they are fortunate to be playing at the highest level.

You try taking that from these guys. You try taking that from any sportsman.

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaiser Wilhelm

You have an incredibly popular sport and are overreacting to recent developments.

What you call overreaction, the NFL and NFLPA call progressive adaptation and active acknowledgement and addressing of issues facing the current state of the league for the betterment and growth of the sport. Compare this attitude, for example, to Major League Baseball.

The MLB stubbornly refuses to make changes to their rule set and has seen the popularity of their league decline over time at least in part due to a refusal to adapt to changing circumstance and emergent issues. Granted, the health risk in the MLB is inherently lower, so my criticism is going to divert a bit off-topic, but if the MLB was as progressive as the NFL, by now they'd have a pitch clock, standardized playing field dimensions (particularly in the outfield), instant replay review in a wide variety of situations (beyond just fair / foul ball on home runs), and computers calling strikes and balls. All of these changes would improve the legitimacy of the game and its presentation on television; games would be faster and more watchable as pitchers such as Jonathan Papelbon and Josh Beckett would not be allowed to stall unnecessarily on the mound, and there'd be far fewer instances of SportsCenter specials on late-game obviously-blown umpire calls that cost teams games, which in turn would improve the legitimacy of the sport; nevermind inconsistent strike zones between umpires. Instead, however, the purist argument continues to rule professional baseball, as human error in officiating is accepted and justified as "part of the game" in the face of so many high-profile bad umpire calls over the years. This is not to say that NFL officials get every call right - they don't - but at least in the NFL there is opportunity provided to correct for human error.

Back on-topic, I do agree that there ought to be some concessions made for the defense in the rules to the end of player safety as well, however; I won't be surprised to see the cut block outlawed entirely soon.

[C the Lyte]

Am I correct in saying that they are doing this b/c players are "bigger, faster, stronger?"

[Cardot]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

What you call overreaction, the NFL and NFLPA call progressive adaptation and active acknowledgement and addressing of issues facing the current state of the league for the betterment and growth of the sport. Compare this attitude, for example, to Major League Baseball. The MLB stubbornly refuses to make changes to their rule set and has seen the popularity of their league decline over time at least in part due to a refusal to adapt to changing circumstance and emergent issues.

I totally agree. I think that one reason the NFL has risen to such popularity is that they are constantly tweaking the rules as the game evolves. This doesn't mean that I like every change they make, but I like that fact they they look at these things. Another good fairly recent change was the two point conversion they added (15 years ago...ish???). I think most would agree it makes the game better, but had OS been around back then, I would imagine that several folks would flip out suggesting that the NFL is resorting to gimmicks.

Ironically with baseball and the amount of time taken between pitches, while the purists may complain, catch a game on ESPN classic from 50 years ago. Games had a much faster pace. Any rule that would attempt to speed things up really isn't trying to alter the game as much as it is trying to get it back to where it was before.

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

The MLB stubbornly refuses to make changes to their rule set and has seen the popularity of their league decline over time at least in part due to a refusal to adapt to changing circumstance and emergent issues. Granted, the health risk in the MLB is inherently lower, so my criticism is going to divert a bit off-topic, but if the MLB was as progressive as the NFL, by now they'd have a pitch clock, standardized playing field dimensions (particularly in the outfield), instant replay review in a wide variety of situations (beyond just fair / foul ball on home runs), and computers calling strikes and balls. All of these changes would improve the legitimacy of the game and its presentation on television; games would be faster and more watchable as pitchers such as Jonathan Papelbon and Josh Beckett would not be allowed to stall unnecessarily on the mound, and there'd be far fewer instances of SportsCenter specials on late-game obviously-blown umpire calls that cost teams games, which in turn would improve the legitimacy of the sport; nevermind inconsistent strike zones between umpires. Instead, however, the purist argument continues to rule professional baseball, as human error in officiating is accepted and justified as "part of the game" in the face of so many high-profile bad umpire calls over the years.

Most of these ideas sound terrible. I agree with the pitcher having to deliver in a timely manner but replay, removing the umpire, regulating the dimensions would destroy baseball. Hell, I don't like that they made interleague play all season. Honestly, if the MLB made any of those changes, baseball would probably lose popularity.

Most people don't like baseball because it is not nearly as much happening. Half the time, nothing is happening at all. Compare that to football, basketball, and even soccer and hockey where something happens all the time. Also, if we look at the NBA and NFL the one thing they have in common is games that favor offense and "exciting plays."

The NFL makes changes to protect its business. The MLB is protecting their game, or well, they were. It seems it will slowly be eroded.

[bigbob]

So you mean the field in Madden would finally be normal size, but it would be outdated?