Penalties

you cannot say, in 9 out of 10 circumstances, that a player lost out on yardage or was denied the stats of a big play, because it was "called back" from a penalty.

Most of the time, the big run or big pass is made possible by the penalty. I read today that Blount had 59 add'l yards that were taken away because of holds. Holds on running plays = not possible to get the yards without the hold.

BCS Rankings

I want every person who has ever managed any website to know this fact:

When your headline reads something along these lines, "Auburn Moves to #1 in BCS, Mike Bird State University #47", that means the person is clicking on it expecting to see a list of some sort.

We don't want to read about the list in text form, we just want to see a list. 1 through whatever. Thanks

NFL Cont'd

I also want to mention the insanity that is out there regarding these big hits and the legislation around them.

There are people who are saying, "how can the league be trying to stop big hits - AND - want to increase the schedule to 18 games! That's a contradiction!"

What!?

Isn't it the opposite?

It's saying, "18 games is hard, it's significantly harder, so what can we do to make the game less physically taxing on these players? Well, one thing we can do is make more big giant hits illegal."

You can argue the premise, you can hate the rule change, but don't act like this is a contradiction, its the opposite. Its rule harmony.

A contradiction would be, "Lets get mad about hits - AND - increase the schedule to 18 games - AND - make hard hits rewardable in tokens to Chucky Cheese arcade games!"

NFL's Big Hit Lies

When I say "we" in the rest of this post, I am referring to everyone. And I don't mean everyone individually, I mean a giant "we" that is comprised of all NFL viewers - and what I mean more specifically is an average of the viewers of the NFL. Don't be offended, if you feel like you don't fit into this "we", then you are an outlier, and good for you.

I have grown comfortable the last 3 or 4 seasons with the fact that big hits are killing the NFL. Someone, I'm not sure who, wrote an article this week talking about how someday we will be watching a MNF game, like the Giants/Redskins game where Theisman got ruined, and we'll see a player get hit so hard not only will paralysis result, but eventually we'll see death.

It's incredibly morbid, it's horrifying, and its not likely, but the speed and size of these men is increasing, as the sport grows more popular, the world's best athletes are preparing weekly to inflict pain on a level we cannot fathom. Death will be the end result.

The NFL is attempting to get in front of this, and I am sad that I feel like the only one applauding.

The thing I don't understand is that if a linebacker was chasing down a RB, and he decided, in order to stop that person, he'd trip him with his leg, then that is a penalty and everyone is fine with it. To get a bit more violent, we know a player cannot flat out punch another player in the stomach, that would be a penalty too. As Randy Moss comes off the line, especially during a run or blocking down, it'd be easy for a DB to wind up and sock him as hard as he could in his unprotected tummy. We're all fine with that being a penalty, as it should be.

My point is, we have accepted lines. They are blurry, at times, but we do have a sense that sometimes the boundaries have been crossed. But for some reason, when it comes to flat out giant hits on players, we're very apprehensive about making a new line.

Everyone agrees a helmet to helmet hit is something that needs to be punished more severely. An arm to helmet hit as well. I am not sure how to legislate change, but I do applaud the league for trying.

What do you do about a shoulder to the chest, it's legal, right? Well, what if they say this, "A defensive player (LB or DB) cannot hit a receiving player above the stomach leading with the head or shoulder." I know you'll say I'm crazy. I know you'll say its too hard to control yourself. I think I was of that opinion before too. Football is a violent game, I know, but lets try to make it less violent.

This is where the naysayers fall into 2 camps. Camp 1 is that football is loved by millions of americans, and changing the game fundamentally would lead to less viewership. I'll talk about them later. Camp 2 is that you'll see a lesser brand of football - that the game is perfect the way it is, and even if viewers don't notice, fans will.

I don't think you'll see a lesser brand of football, you'll see a new brand. Nobody would argue the game was MORE violent, more wild west, in the 50s, 60s and 70s...thats just how it was. They cleaned up the game was much as they could, they have made rules about hitting defenseless receivers, taking away blows to the head, protecting the QB. The talent isn't lesser, the game hasn't suffered. It's amazing the way it is.

Then you get back to Camp 1, which are the folks that are somehow using the threat that people will watch it less, that it's perfect now, and softening it up will harm it. Oh my God that's bullcrap.

First of all, people don't watch football. I know that sounds crazy, it gets huge ratings and it demolishes everything it touches on TV. People have football on, and people love TD's, and scores, and plays, and yes, hits...but on a Sunday, how many people watch every snap of football from 1-7, then 8-11? So few. So very few. People watch Football for 2 reasons.

1. Betting.

2. Fantasy Football.

Those 2 things will exist if tackling wasn't allowed at all. There are a lot of things that would have to change to make it so people wouldn't want to see if their RB got a TD.

I contend that people watch football more for the Gamebreaks, hence the immense viewership of RedZone TV on Sundays, which actually doesn't even show hits for the most part, just scores. Scores are what people want to see, not hits.

The other thing I'd say is that every single year we see an increase of player protection - the QB is practically wearing the "Dont hit me" red jersey in games, and viewership increases. We see fines for hitting increase, we see "defenseless receiver" calls increase - and viewers keep pouring in, in record numbers.

People want football to exist, people don't want football players to die. I know that for a fact. The damage that would be done to a few million fans who witness a superstar like Chris Johnson literally die on the field on a short pass because he was hit so hard, would far outweigh the temporary "wah wah" fans will blather on about if the rules change.