Here is a short list of things that can be changed to give defenses a better chance at impacting a game without compromising safety to the players and also encourages offenses to pass the ball more (which seems to be the direction of the modern version of the NFL). 1. Make the field more narrow. Go from the current 53 1/3 yrds down to an even 50 yrds. That gives the defense less ground to cover. 2. Leave the overall length of the field alone which is 120 yrds but make each endzone 5 yrds shorter and the length between goal lines 110 yrds. This forces offenses to drive the ball further and gives them a tighter window to hit in the endzone improving a defenses ability to prevent a TD. 3. Change the goal posts so the bar is higher up and more narrow making it more difficult to kick field goals. 4. Force offenses to drive the ball 15 yrds instead of 10 yrds for a 1st down. Do you all think you would still enjoy watching football if they made or all of those changes? IMO the NFL has not done enough for the defenses to keep balance between offense and defense on the field and they should find ways to slow down the crazy amount of scoring going on. Thoughts? And if you I'm nuts you ought to hear my oppinions on the salary cap, the 53 man roster, and the draft
No offense I really don't care for any of them at all, maybe making the field more narrow by three yards but barely.
No offens taken. I was just spittballing some ideas. I understand they are pretty radical but I think its really lopsided how many advantages offenses are given and they should compensate the defense in some way shape or form. My oppinion is make the area for a defense to cover more narrow. Force teams to drive further. Make field goals and TDs more difficult. Thats the basic concept at play, which I think is a reasonable one. Other then taking away receptions that were force outs they really have not given defenses anything and they have taken away a lot from them. There was a time that being sent across the middle of the field was a death sentence and recievers would drop the ball just from the fear of the expectation of the hit that was about to come. Recievers use to get mugged coming off the line, disrupting timing plays and breaking up routes. Im not saying my ideas are stellar but something should be done to bring back some resemblence of the balance they use to have in the game. JMO I would ask you if you could change things, would you and what would you do?
I don't think the NFL wants to help defenses. In general it seems most fans prefer offense in pretty much every sport - football included.
I agree that the NFL does not want good defensive games but not so sure I agree that fans agree with them. Growing up I had the benefit of seeing some pretty awesome defenses take the field and part of being a fan of football was being a fan of a hard fought battle to move the ball. Big hits and tough runs add to the excitement of the game and it made TDs all that more special because they were difficult to earn. JMO, of course.
Make the end zone the size of a hockey net goal,that would cut down scoreing and make a TD really fun to watch.
I think one thing that would help the defenses is giving quarterbacks a red covered jersey and telling them they can only hit quarterbacks in the jersey area. Taking away the ambiguitity of how to hit a quarterback. Also changing the rule to a hit in the head only when it is a hit in the head and not the hand coming down when trying to deflect a pass. I would also relax the illegal contact rule so that it is not called when the cornerback or linebacker isn't moving, they should be able to smack the ***** out of them. I would also allow rules to make substituting easier on the defense. Maybe eliminating 12 men on the field when on person is just running off of the field.
Make the suppliers to the NFL actually make a product that prevents concussions. There is zero reason to amend the rules of the game due to subpar equipment. As to field dimension changes, I could agree with field goal post changes. They seem too automatic when the lowest FG percentage is 67%. Make these guys earn it. Rule changes: the hand fighting and check rules need to go back to where they were. also, referees need to call it both ways. Too many WRs get away with a shove at the end of their routes but if a defender even has a hand on the back that doesn't affect the play, then it's a flag most times?
There are absolutely fans that enjoy or even prefer a defensive game. However I think the general trend is in the opposite direction. People like seeing scores, the action, the speed - especially the younger or more casual fans. You see it in all the sports really. Baseball wants more homers, basketball they want fast breaks and high flying dunks, hockey they want more scoring and faster gameplay instead of the bruising/checking style.
I think the NFL likes it the way it is with the higher scores and all but there is something to be said about a good defense.I also would like to see a defender have a little more leway to play their game like they used to.
If equipment were that easy, it probably already would have been done. The modern helmet is designed primarily to ward off skull fractures. Concussions are an internal injury - when the body stops but the brain does not, and ends up slamming into the skull. That is not something that is easily protected against. Certainly there are helmets that do a better job and they should be mandated, but saying just improve the equipment is not realistic. I do not disagree that there are ticky tacky rules - some of the anti QB legislation and PI stuff is over the top - but eliminating helmet/helmet and crushing blows is necessary. I do like anything that discourages field goals and encourages aggression.
So we are innovative in almost every area but more fuel efficient cars and football helmets? The innovation isn't there simply because there has been no push for it to be there IMO. Only since Va Tech took a giant steaming dump on the helmet standards and are working on assigning a star system much like car crash ratings has there been ANY attention given to this issue. http://healthland.time.com/2011/05/10/study-ranks-10-football-helmets-for-concussion-safety/ http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page...10719_virginia_tech_helmet_study&sportCat=nfl
Because offense is more fun to watch, which leads to more fans (more money) and the NFL is a business.
You missed the point entirely. There are better helmets and they will help and innovation will take place. But they will not eliminate concussions from violent helmet/helmet style hits. Those absolutely should be legislated out of the game.
I agree, but the thread is how do you make the defense more important. I just thought instead of convoluted scenarios that require new fields etc., why not just fix the rules that made the offense more important.
I would rather the rules were tweaked than the field dimensions altered. I find the OP compelling, though. As was mentioned, illegal contact is a big problem. Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
Illegal contact needs to be better defined. All we really know is that launching is a no-no. Beyond that it's more or less a mystery.
Redefining pass interference yardage I think is something that should be looked at as well. Launching prayers hoping for a dubious PI call should not be encouraged. I could imagine a system where PI less than 10 yards from scrimage is a 5 yard penalty, no auto first down. Beyond 10 yards it can be a 15 yard penalty with a first down. Still plenty of incentive to not get called, but not overly harsh, and minimizes the impact a bad PI call can have.
But it also incentivizes defensive players to cheat and destroy plays that are essentially guaranteed big gainers/TDs. Remember the PI on the TD that BMarsh caught in Dallas? If he didn't make a circus catch, instead of being a TD (because he beat the guy so bad), it would've been 15 yards and we'd have the ball at the 30 instead of having 6 points.
I think that the spot foul for PI is a pretty big disincentive to commit PI. But I do have to agree, chucking it up in hopes of PI is pretty weak, but I don't really see a way to discourage it as the rules are now
Fin D my response is to your post as well as Maynard's because I think we are sort of beating around the same thing. I'm not saying I agree with this argument but I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment: The argument is that because of progress players have become better athletes and they can run faster and hit harder, etc..... For whatever reason this argument seems to be only applied to defensive players and the general mantra is that the offense needs to be protected from the damage that defenses can distribute. Believe what you want but they are calling it a safety issue. I do not see them reverting back to old school rules for that reason, JMO. This is why I decided to look at alternative ways to make defenses more of a factor. Whether you agree with the ideas I presented or not, I only presented 3 basic concepts. 1. Give the defenses a smaller area to cover in terms of width of the field 2. Make offenses drive the ball further before resetting the downs 3. Make it more difficult to score by narrowing goal posts for field goals and a smaller end-zone to work within to score a passing TD. The alterations I chose enable stadiums to make these changes without making major alterations in order to accommodate. I tried to be practical about the expense of changing the field dimensions. Agree or disagree that was the logic behind it. The changes I suggested would benefit defenses and in no way conflict with the whole safety argument that is being used to justify the rule changes that have occurred over the past decade or so. If this is really about safety (we all know its not) make these guys play flag football on a field that is made of some sort of impact cushion like they use in wrestling. Then they all go home without injury. I think its pretty pathetic that the rules have become so skewed that Brandon Jacobs is receiving scrutiny for scoring a TD and leaving under a minute left on the clock because thats enough time for the opposing team to drive the field and get a TD to win the game. IMO if a team lets you walk into the end-zone on purpose with less then a minute left in the game, they should lose. These offenses need to be reigned in to a certain extent and the games integrity needs to be better preserved by the people who are making these ridiculous rules. If these rule changes are really about player safety, when are we going to see fouls called and fines handed out to offensive players who use their helmets as weapons and do things that are dangerous to defensive players in the name of gaining a few inches or yards on the field. We see it every week and its legal contact according to the league. The answer is that they are not going to do much to stop it at all because the general mindset is that big scoring games excite fans and generate revenue. I think it's a bunch of crap and that was what inspired me to create this thread. I am curious if anyone feels the same about it and if so what ideas they had to bring balance back to the game. I like the idea of reverting back to the original rules but IMO it's too late for that. The Genie has already been released from the bottle, sort of to speak.
