Jump to content

MAROTH4MVP

Lions @ Bears (1pm est)

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Jason_R said:

Thanks. I just scratch my head that the NFL wants fans to pay hundreds of dollars for a ticket to go to the stadium (typically paid for with substantial tax subsidies), then kick them in the gut by looking for metaphysical certitude when their team appears to cross the plane of the goal line.

Geez, Goodell... have you ever heard of giving the people what they want? Let the people sitting in a freezing rain at Soldier Field celebrate the home team. Let the Lions walk off with a thrilling home win, and show a stadium full of jubilant fans. Does this idiot know anything about marketing or his audience?

He is going to drive the NFL right into the ground, and Jerry Jones is the only one who sees it.

Isn't instant reply what the people want though?  Don't we WANT to be able to review really close things and correct mistakes?

I do agree that there can be a level of "over legalization" and this is shown I think most clearly in the whole "what is a catch" debate for the last x-number of years.

But, this one seems to be more of a quirky situation... unlike the 10-second run off rule, I don't think this is a terrible rule.  I think there is a reason for it (see my previous post about how a team could abuse the rule if it was different).  And I think reply is generally a good thing.  It's just that this is a really weird situation.  The right rule (in my opinion) is in place and there correct call was made on the field.  Just a really, really unlucky turn of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Buddha said:

what makes the nfl horrible to watch is the commercial breaks.  it takes a 2 hour game and makes it a 4 hour game.

DVR is your friend!  I so rarely watch games from the kick off anymore.  I start about 1 hr after kickoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay, here's a "For instance..."
I'm running with the ball at about the 10 yard line but you, the defender, are easily going to tackle me.  So I "fumble" the ball forward pretty hard.  The ball rolls out of the endzone.  Now instead of being down at the 10, my team gets the ball at the 1.
Further, a dash to the end zone is always dangerous and there's always the potential for a fumble that is recovered by the defense.  There has to be a rule for fumbles that go out of bounds before recovery... the rule makes simple decided to say: between the EZs: Return it to the offense.  Inside the EZs, it goes to the defense to avoid offenses intentionally trying to gain and advantage.


If I were crafting the rule, I would not allow the offensive team to advance the ball on a fumble like you describe. Assume a player loses the ball into the end zone from the ten yard line, and it rolls right through the hands of both teams and out the back of the end zone. Offensive team retains ball at the spot where the player lost possession.

But if we are talking about a player losing possession at the pylon, the team keeps possession at the one yard line. Or the two yard conversion spot, or whatever. That would actually lose them yardage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

DVR is your friend!  I so rarely watch games from the kick off anymore.  I start about 1 hr after kickoff.

i always watch games on dvr when i can, but i have to go to a bar to watch the lions.  no dvr there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Okay, here's a "For instance..."

I'm running with the ball at about the 10 yard line but you, the defender, are easily going to tackle me.  So I "fumble" the ball forward pretty hard.  The ball rolls out of the endzone.  Now instead of being down at the 10, my team gets the ball at the 1.

Further, a dash to the end zone is always dangerous and there's always the potential for a fumble that is recovered by the defense.  There has to be a rule for fumbles that go out of bounds before recovery... the rule makes simple decided to say: between the EZs: Return it to the offense.  Inside the EZs, it goes to the defense to avoid offenses intentionally trying to gain and advantage.

easy fix...

Place the ball where the fumble occurred....at the 1 inch line?  Then place it at the 1 inch line...at the 10 yard line then the 10 yard line....and I will reassert what I said earlier about a guy 'accidentally' fumbling the ball hoping to **** it goes out of bounds before the other team can retrieve it as being a moron I do not want playing for my team.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Buddha said:

goodell has made a lot of mistakes.  the initial failure to respond to the domestic violence situations, the failure to deal with the kapernick situation, and now the overreaction to the "domestic violence situation".

but the real problem for me is his failure to stop the protesting in the beginning.  im not saying that as a "nfl players shouldnt protest" nor am i saying that their protests have no merit; rather, from a business and pr standpoint, they have damaged the league and goodell did nothing to stop it when he could have.

what makes the nfl horrible to watch is the commercial breaks.  it takes a 2 hour game and makes it a 4 hour game.

What the general public at large saw was a bunch of multi millionaires complaining about equality....the fans make 30k a year and these multi millionaires are protesting and taking a knee during the national anthem?  I know it is not about that, but I also know what the general public thought it was about.

Like it or not that is how it is perceived and how the general public sees it.  Honestly I am surprised it has not hit them harder than it has.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Isn't instant reply what the people want though?  Don't we WANT to be able to review really close things and correct mistakes?

I do agree that there can be a level of "over legalization" and this is shown I think most clearly in the whole "what is a catch" debate for the last x-number of years.

But, this one seems to be more of a quirky situation... unlike the 10-second run off rule, I don't think this is a terrible rule.  I think there is a reason for it (see my previous post about how a team could abuse the rule if it was different).  And I think reply is generally a good thing.  It's just that this is a really weird situation.  The right rule (in my opinion) is in place and there correct call was made on the field.  Just a really, really unlucky turn of events.

I thought it was what I wanted because I thought it would help my team from not getting screwed...it is worse than it was before.  Now the replay should save us and it still screws us.  Or we just get more reviewed that go against us.  And for me it is all about the excitement factor.  

The timing may just line up with my new philosophy about not caring, but how do you get excited about a TD when you do not know it is a TD?  The Tate play....my brother was jumping up and down...I just sat there and said no TD....before I even saw the replay because I just expected that, but even if it would have been ruled a TD I would have had to wait like 5 minutes after it happened to....what?  Celebrate that?  I could have mustered a fist pump or something, but that would have been it.  The excitement of the moment was sucked out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

What the general public at large saw was a bunch of multi millionaires complaining about equality....the fans make 30k a year and these multi millionaires are protesting and taking a knee during the national anthem?  I know it is not about that, but I also know what the general public thought it was about.

Like it or not that is how it is perceived and how the general public sees it.  Honestly I am surprised it has not hit them harder than it has.

 

I my humble opinion, the real problem with the whole protest crap came when Trump called 'em out on it.  I'm not trying to inject politics into this, but once he said that it became a much bigger political issue.  I think it would have mostly died out on it own had he not commended on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RedRamage said:

I my humble opinion, the real problem with the whole protest crap came when Trump called 'em out on it.  I'm not trying to inject politics into this, but once he said that it became a much bigger political issue.  I think it would have mostly died out on it own had he not commended on it.

I am no supporter of his, but that could be said of everything any president has said or done ever.  It comes with the office...the attention.

In my opinion it was a pretty big problem before he said a word about it, but I would expect the president of the USA to say something about the issue when it gets to that point.  What they say or do is a matter of preference to the person hearing it of course.

It was not the PC version of what a POTUS should have said, but it was the unfiltered version that most people were thinking already anyway IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for business purposes, goodell should have said there will be no protesting during the national anthem

  everyone stands.  if you don't, youre suspended.

but he let it fester and did nothing and then it became a huge story.  jerry jones has a right to be angry with how he handled it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

goodell's biggest success is completely ******* over the players union at the bargaining table.  but that may be more due to the weakness of the union than the strength of goodell.

i think they can do better than goodell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RedRamage said:

Isn't instant reply what the people want though?  Don't we WANT to be able to review really close things and correct mistakes?

I do agree that there can be a level of "over legalization" and this is shown I think most clearly in the whole "what is a catch" debate for the last x-number of years.

This is why they pay Roger Goodell $40 million a year. To make the hard decisions necessary to keep the game entertaining, growing, and prospering. 

People clamored for instant replay, which is fine, but now they have a command center in NYC that authorizes all of the calls. Well, there are a lot of ways a league could use instant replay, and the NFL has picked just about the most bureaucratic and stifling. 

People clamored for more stringent player discipline, and he has been all over the board. He doesn't have the support of his ownership, he doesn't have the support of the NFLPA, he doesn't have the support of public opinion. He's just a dude with a robe and a gavel, walking around decreeing stuff.

And he has completely lost control on the anthem stuff. I agree with Buddha - regardless of the content of the protest, the football field is a workplace, and the football game is an entertainment product where you just can't insult half (or more) of your audience. Had he sat Kaepernick down immediately after the first protest, and worked out a way for the league to address Kaepernick's concerns while also making clear that NFL players are not permitted to protest the anthem, that would have "protected the shield". Not only that, it would have saved the country a whole lot of angry rhetoric, and it would have saved Kaepernick's NFL career.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buddha said:

for business purposes, goodell should have said there will be no protesting during the national anthem

  everyone stands.  if you don't, youre suspended.

but he let it fester and did nothing and then it became a huge story.  jerry jones has a right to be angry with how he handled it.

Wow. I so disagree. If Goodell would have demanded his players to stand, they would force the suspension and then it would end up in the courts. It would have been a zoo. 

Maybe he could have stopped the protest by not having the national anthem? That would have still taken a PR hit.

Or maybe, just maybe....he could have taken the players side and demanded a Federal investigation into police brutality? That may have been a PR coup. But money becomes involved, and the owners have to be happy. All except Jerry Jones. 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

Wow. I so disagree. If Goodell would have demanded his players to stand, they would force the suspension and then it would end up in the courts. It would have been a zoo. 

Yup - The worst thing the league could do was overplay their hand. The reality is that the players ultimately have the leverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, John_Brian_K said:

I am no supporter of his, but that could be said of everything any president has said or done ever.

Not to make it political, but I can't feature any president in my lifetime even commenting on the issue, but supposing one had, I will state unequivocally none would have used the language or tenor he used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow. I so disagree. If Goodell would have demanded his players to stand, they would force the suspension and then it would end up in the courts. It would have been a zoo. 
Maybe he could have stopped the protest by not having the national anthem? That would have still taken a PR hit.
Or maybe, just maybe....he could have taken the players side and demanded a Federal investigation into police brutality? That may have been a PR coup. But money becomes involved, and the owners have to be happy. All except Jerry Jones.

Not that I believe there would have been players testing Goodell’s power to suspend them, but it’s way easier to replace a player (with average career of 3 years) than it is to replace a million fans (who will buy your product for decades).

Anyway, for $40 million a year, you are buying leadership. You expect someone for that amount of money to earn the trust of your core constituencies. He doesn’t have it.

And what business is it of Goodell’s to call for federal investigations of incidents that have already been federally investigated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Buddha said:

for business purposes, goodell should have said there will be no protesting during the national anthem

  everyone stands.  if you don't, youre suspended.

but he let it fester and did nothing and then it became a huge story.  jerry jones has a right to be angry with how he handled it.

I think he incorrectly thought 'any news is good news' when it came to the protests and it would bring more viewers than lose them....he lost that gamble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

Wow. I so disagree. If Goodell would have demanded his players to stand, they would force the suspension and then it would end up in the courts. It would have been a zoo. 

Maybe he could have stopped the protest by not having the national anthem? That would have still taken a PR hit.

Or maybe, just maybe....he could have taken the players side and demanded a Federal investigation into police brutality? That may have been a PR coup. But money becomes involved, and the owners have to be happy. All except Jerry Jones. 😂

I cannot state strongly enough how much none of this makes sense or would have been better.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

Yup - The worst thing the league could do was overplay their hand. The reality is that the players ultimately have the leverage.

The millionaires have the leverage on the billionaires?  Since when?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no knowledge of the thing, but I suspect Goodell thought the thing would go away if it was ignored.  And it probably would have, for better or worse, under another presidency.

Setting that aside, in retrospect, had he created some sort of volunteer player advocacy group and had teams fund it nominally, I don't think this would have blown up the way it did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

Wow. I so disagree. If Goodell would have demanded his players to stand, they would force the suspension and then it would end up in the courts. It would have been a zoo. 

Maybe he could have stopped the protest by not having the national anthem? That would have still taken a PR hit.

Or maybe, just maybe....he could have taken the players side and demanded a Federal investigation into police brutality? That may have been a PR coup. But money becomes involved, and the owners have to be happy. All except Jerry Jones. 😂

But instead he let the inmates run the prison or is that not ok to say anymore.  Don't want to "offend" anybody.

In all seriousness, I think Goodell probably thought this was a temporary thing and that it would eventually pass and the attention would focus more on football in time so he just let them do whatever they had to do.  It seems like that's becoming the case as this talk about NFL protests is lessening by the week.

I also think he's a little afraid of bad PR and the whole master/slave thing coming to the forefront if he put down a mandate stating that the players have to stand for the anthem or there will be punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John_Brian_K said:

I cannot state strongly enough how much none of this makes sense or would have been better.

Common sense eludes you? Too big of words? Just which part confused you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sports_Freak said:

Common sense eludes you? Too big of words? Just which part confused you?

No need to trade barbs back and forth.  I do not agree at all with what you were saying.  We can move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, John_Brian_K said:

No need to trade barbs back and forth.  I do not agree at all with what you were saying.  We can move on.

That makes no sense and I strongly disagree. The league, any league, should have their players back. The people pay to see the best football players playing a game. They aren't going to see some suit telling players they are suspended for not honoring some song. These players have family and friends who go fight wars for their country and come home to be 2nd class citizens. And the president calls them son of beeches? That commissioner, if he had any balls, would have stood up for what's right and backed up his players. Now on the our regularly scheduled game....😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      95,488
    • Total Posts
      2,719,647
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×