Philly McButterpants Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 With nothing better to do, I was thinking: if I was King, what would I do to make the NFL better? Well, as I have stated before, the first thing I would do is reduce the amount of commercials. That doesn't really change the game (or maybe it does, since it reduces the time-outs), but it would certainly make watching it easier. What change would you make? Eliminate cheating . . .
Ramius Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Hard rookie cap, with a max of 3 year contracts. The rookies then are RFAs before year 4 and year 5. If a rook busts, it doesnt kill the team from a salary cap standpoint. If a rook is decent, you can keep him for 2 more years as an RFA to fully see what you've got. If a rook turns out really good, then can make up for their low rookie contract by cashing in after year 3. You'd either basically have the choice of re-signing your rook then to a big money deal, or risk losing him as an RFA to another team. One caveat - NO poison pill contracts.
Quester74 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 1. Totally agree with the rookie salary cap.. these guys make way too much. 2. I'd change the current scheduling format: play each divisional opponet 3 times a year (for instance, the Bills would be AT the Jets twice this year, but the Jets would have to come to Buffalo twice the following year, and so on..) and the other 7 games would be played against the team from each other division that came in the place you finished in YOUR division from the previous season. I know it seems a little radical, but I didn't wanna throw up the same ole cookie-cutter responses. So, a new schedule might look like this for Buffalo in 2008: 1. AT Jets 2. vs. Miami 3. vs. NYG -- 2nd place NFCE 4. AT Cleveland -- 2nd place AFCN 5. vs. Jets 6. AT Pats* 7. vs. Minnesota -- 2nd place NFCN 8. vs. Arizona -- 2nd place NFCW 9. BYE 10. AT Jets 11. AT Miami 12. vs. Carolina -- 2nd place NFCS 13. vs. Pats* 14. vs. Miami 15. AT Denver -- 2nd place AFCW 16. AT Jacksonville -- 2nd place AFCW 17. AT Pats* Obviously, this is gonna give certain teams an advantage in some years, having more home divisional games than others.. I haven't exactly worked all the kinks out of this.. it just sorta popped into my head as I was reading the thread.
Captain Hindsight Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 1. Totally agree with the rookie salary cap.. these guys make way too much. 2. I'd change the current scheduling format: play each divisional opponet 3 times a year (for instance, the Bills would be AT the Jets twice this year, but the Jets would have to come to Buffalo twice the following year, and so on..) and the other 7 games would be played against the team from each other division that came in the place you finished in YOUR division from the previous season. I know it seems a little radical, but I didn't wanna throw up the same ole cookie-cutter responses. So, a new schedule might look like this for Buffalo in 2008: 1. AT Jets 2. vs. Miami 3. vs. NYG -- 2nd place NFCE 4. AT Cleveland -- 2nd place AFCN 5. vs. Jets 6. AT Pats* 7. vs. Minnesota -- 2nd place NFCN 8. vs. Arizona -- 2nd place NFCW 9. BYE 10. AT Jets 11. AT Miami 12. vs. Carolina -- 2nd place NFCS 13. vs. Pats* 14. vs. Miami 15. AT Denver -- 2nd place AFCW 16. AT Jacksonville -- 2nd place AFCW 17. AT Pats* Obviously, this is gonna give certain teams an advantage in some years, having more home divisional games than others.. I haven't exactly worked all the kinks out of this.. it just sorta popped into my head as I was reading the thread. That could be kinda cool actaully. Really puts more emphesis on the divisions
Quester74 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 That could be kinda cool actaully. Really puts more emphesis on the divisions Thanks, HR.. now at least I won't take an "0'fer" on Flames vs. 's Of course, if it were to ACTUALLY come up, I would hate it. I'm a pretty big fan of the games you don't see too often.. the out-of-conference matchups.. I hate seeing the MNF game being another friggin' Bears/Packers matchup.. /yawn Would much rather see a game that only happens once in a bluemoon.. i.e. Seahawks/Browns.. Saints/Chargers.. etc. etc. but, it WOULD give alot more emphesis on your divisional games.
MikeSpeed Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Have an entire division take the bye week at the same time. Or better yet get rid of the bye week all together!!!!!!!
drg2021 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Allow each NFL city to host a Superbowl,because as we know the weather is a part of the game.The few select warm weather climates,or dome city teams should not have exclusive rights to the big game.Do they think the Superbowl wont sell out in Buffalo,Green Bay,Pittsburg,or New York?That policy is unfair to the fans of the teams in those climates and should be changed.
bills4bowl21 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 3. Put a laser beam outlining the field, line of scrimage, first-down marker and endone at grass level that can be triggered if stepped on or if the ball crosses its plain. this would only work if the ball was made compatible with the laser because there are 22 guys on the field and sum1 is bound to step on the laser for a first down...
drg2021 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 this would only work if the ball was made compatible with the laser because there are 22 guys on the field and sum1 is bound to step on the laser for a first down... "Dont Taze me dude,Dont Taze me"
SouthernMan Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Allow each NFL city to host a Superbowl,because as we know the weather is a part of the game.The few select warm weather climates,or dome city teams should not have exclusive rights to the big game.Do they think the Superbowl wont sell out in Buffalo,Green Bay,Pittsburg,or New York?That policy is unfair to the fans of the teams in those climates and should be changed. Forget host cities altogether for Superbowls. Let the team/city that's earned it, host it - just as they would for a ccnference championship game. Like the idea of reduced commercials - never happen. The NFL is all about making lots of money, even at the expense of a compromised product. And the other idea: good god, change that gay hand signal following an endzone saftey. Can't they come up with something more fitting. One of the most macho plays in the sport - an offensive player (usually a QB) getting blind-sided or pummeled in the endzone by a swarming defense, and the best they can come up with is that gay, prayer-hands over the head hand signal? The signal should have the official motioning a fisted uppercut or grabbing his nuts - anything but the current one. C'mon NFL. Get it together. The safety sign looks like something that baseball should use.
Guest dog14787 Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Institute league wide profit sharing formated so any given team would not go below breaking even for the year. The good teams who do well, need the bad teams that don't do so well. This is an entertainment business and all participants deserve to be awarded properly just like you would an actor in a movie. If you play less a role, you get payed less but you do get payed. Fans of this sport in every city do not deserve to lose a team they love, PERIOD Making the Playoffs normaly equals profits for the owners, find a way to get at least one more team from each confrence into the playoffs. I'll say this again, this is entertainment, it doesn't hurt to have more playoff games. People are going to watch and enjoy them because our nation loves football. Make holding on the offense a 5 yarder so its not a drive killer. Eliminate calling a time out before a field goal, its gotten old and wastes time. Lets not get to carried away with this parity thing. Would we have ever had a Superbowl as good as the last one if all teams were equal? The answer is no, the Giants played David against a team that was unstoppable, unbeatable and it gave us the best Superbowl ever so I like the way things are now. I don't know about you guys ,but I'm very excited about this coming up year. I'm almost giddy about all the improvements on our team and with an easier schedule, I'm feeling real good, real good
stuckincincy Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 EASE up on the pass interference penalties...Max penalty 10 yds and auto 1st. IIRC, the argument against that, is that a defender knowing he's going to get beat and is close enough to whack the receiver will do so...the idea being that its' better to give up 10 yards and a 1st down than a potential long, possibly td scoring play.
Just Jack Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Forget host cities altogether for Superbowls. Let the team/city that's earned it, host it - just as they would for a ccnference championship game. Won't happen. Years of planning go into the Super Bowl, it's not something they can whip together in two weeks. Granted yes, the teams that make the playoffs could start planning as soon as they know they are in, but what if the stadium is already scheduled for something that week, like what happened in New Orleans in 2002, when they moved it back a week because of 9/11?
SouthernMan Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 I've got lots of ideas. The one I've shared with you previously involves permanently hooking up Ralph Wilson to life support before he naturally expires. This would eliminate all the hand-wringing about his inevitable demise and the future of the team. I proposed to have him live on indefinitely to avoid estate taxes and to give Jim Kelly enough time to save up so he can buy the team. Of course, we'll probably have to hook-up Kelly to some life support equipment also. Just not enough time. Maybe we could convince Ralph to adopt Jim and Thurman so they could inherit and run the team.
Beerball Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 What change would you make? Revoke the phats* championships and give them the death penalty.
Beerball Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Revoke the phats* championships and give them the death penalty. Did anyone mention free beer?
stuckincincy Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 Did anyone mention free beer? Here is an upcoming $1 beer sports event. There might be a story pending... http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...090393/1062/SPT
KnightRider Posted May 10, 2008 Posted May 10, 2008 If you reduce the amount commercials, which quarter during the game would you choose not to have broadcast? Or maybe they could just broadcast every other play. Commercials pay for the games to be on tv. Pay for salaries. Reduce the prices of tickets for fans attending the game. etc. Sorry I had to point out the obvious like that. Or salaries could be reduced. The number of commercials have made the game harder to watch, IMHO, whether it be the traditional timeout or the graphics in between plays...
Marshmallow Posted May 10, 2008 Posted May 10, 2008 Well, obviously, the money would be different. The networks would initially bid less because of reduced time, so the NFL would get less, and then the players would get less. OTOH, maybe more people could bare to watch a game w/o TiVo then...? Maybe viewership would increase and the remaining commercials would be more valuable and thus demand more money? TIVO/DVR is the best thing that happened to the wallets of the NFL - people want to see games live. Especially the NFL. And with the internet stealing away so many men from TV viewership, businesses trying to reach men 18-118 years old will pay top dollar for this captive audience - significantly increasing the value of media purchased during games. It also gave the NFL the negotiating power to get more commercial time per game as well. They struck this new deal just as DVR/TIVO took off, the steroid scandal soured baseball fans, and the Pats/Tom Brady dynasty was front and center. Which is why the NFL will never let Spygate become what it really is - the biggest scandal in NFL history. It would cost them too much $$$$.
Recommended Posts