The NFL 2012 Season

mirandashell · Sep 25, 2012

Ah, I thought so.

See, that's why more than one league is a good idea. We've got loads of footballers that aren't good enough to play in the Premiership but can make a damn good living in the lower leagues providing football for supporters. At a cheaper cost too.

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

They've tried it a few times. I had another teammate who played for The World Football League, for the Philadelphia team, The Stars, I think. Not sure why it never seems to catch on.

mirandashell · Sep 25, 2012

TPTB not taking it seriously, maybe?

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

Yeah, I mean, it's seen as not as good. And of course, it's not. Like to know actually, what the ratio is- college players to pros. Wait ... and here's the answer, or one answer- 2.5%. I'd have thought it would be even lower.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_college_football_players_play_in_the_NFL

mirandashell · Sep 25, 2012

2.5%? Wow, that is low. I guess it's all down to how things start. The Football League started as a lot of clubs sorted into a heirarchy

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

Yeah, it is low. Took the NFL quite a few years to gain legitimacy. College football, back then, out drew the pros by quite a bit.

Jcomp · Sep 25, 2012

If I was a billionaire with billionaire friends interested in creating a new league, here's how I'd go about it:

A) Do not compete directly with the NFL. You just can't win.
B) Make it an 18 - 24 league and pursue the hell out of high school grads and NCAA players who want to get paid early before heading to the NFL. This will help you bring in some players with some name recognition (recruit guys playing in the televised All-American games and have them hold press conferences when they select a team in your league, just like they do when choosing a college now), and also make your league seem less like it's full of wash-outs who "aren't good enough" and more like it's full of up-and-comers with NFL ambitions.
C) Start small. 8 teams max to begin with. Keep contracts reasonable (upper five-figures to low-six figures).

I think that could potentially work, perhaps even thrive eventually.

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

Jcomp said:
If I was a billionaire with billionaire friends interested in creating a new league, here's how I'd go about it:

A) Do not compete directly with the NFL. You just can't win.
B) Make it an 18 - 24 league and pursue the hell out of high school grads and NCAA players who want to get paid early before heading to the NFL. This will help you bring in some players with some name recognition (recruit guys playing in the televised All-American games and have them hold press conferences when they select a team in your league, just like they do when choosing a college now), and also make your league seem less like it's full of wash-outs who "aren't good enough" and more like it's full of up-and-comers with NFL ambitions.
C) Start small. 8 teams max to begin with. Keep contracts reasonable (upper five-figures to low-six figures).

I think that could potentially work, perhaps even thrive eventually.

I like that. I think you'd have to cut it off at 24, otherwise 18 year olds would be over-matched physically. It would bring some sanity into the game, the income limits, I mean. As it is now, NFL players feel like they gotta get it while they can. Our league would pay a good living while they're on their way to bigger and better things. A counter argument might be that we'd be robbing these kids of higher education and a brighter future, if they don't make it into the "big leagues".

How 'bout the season? Do they play in autumn/winter, or off season?

mirandashell · Sep 25, 2012

Interesting idea!

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

mirandashell said:
Interesting idea!

It is. Let's start a fund. Be about the only way to get a pro team in LA.

mirandashell · Sep 25, 2012

I can spare a tenner!

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

I'm in. We'll both end up with about .000000000000000000000001%.

Jcomp · Sep 25, 2012

Bebop said:
A counter argument might be that we'd be robbing these kids of higher education and a brighter future, if they don't make it into the "big leagues".

I've had this idea circling in my head for a while now (not that I could do anything with it), and I'm still not sure what exactly to do about that counter argument. I think from a PR perspective, the league owners would have to agree to set up some kind of program to get their players all the available information for local colleges, and encourage them to do what they can to attend. Maybe have some on staff tutors, some people who can help them apply for scholarships, loans and grants, or look at vocational school options (America needs more skilled trade workers anyway). Basically just something to prepare them for life after football, (since most still won't make it to the NFL).

Like you mentioned, the lower salaries can help bring some sanity to the whole business. Teams can have financial advisors on staff to help guys manage their money, but if the salaries aren't exorbitant, I'm wagering a lot of these guys would be more careful about their money. In a strange way, it's probably easier to blow $5-million than (random figure) $70,000, because the former gives some guys the illusion that it will last forever, no matter how much they spend. $70,000 is still really good money just to be playing football, but it's also enough to force you to be responsible, or at least reasonable.

How 'bout the season? Do they play in autumn/winter, or off season?

Ya know, that's the one area where I'm really not sure what would work best. But since we're all pitching in, I'm open to ideas! (Places $20 in the League Fund Jar).

Maze Runner · Sep 25, 2012

I mean, to me, football is decidedly a cold weather sport. And I think our league could play right alongside college and the pros- just not on the weekends or on Monday night, and I guess not on Thursday night either. Or it could start in November/December and run into what? Late Feb or early March?

As far as the college thing, well you know, most of us on here are college graduates and many of us might agree that a college education has been good for us, but not a panacea. You might be doing some of these kids a favor to just get them into a good paying job doing something they love, something that few of us, college educated or not will ever do.

Silver King · Sep 25, 2012

dogfacedboy said:
Okay, sure. You got me. He stole my girlfriend in high school and I never forgave him. Let's move on. Because nothing I say will make you go, "Hmm, maybe he's not as great as I think," regardless of how truthful it is.

You think he's wonderful. I disagree. So it goes.

And please let's end it there, okay? This thread, and this entire room, is not the place to argue about conjectures regarding which player would have done what in hypothetical situations.

Feel free to argue facts (respectfully, of course), but please try to refrain from trash talk that is best suited for sports bars or other venues where adult discourse is not taken seriously.

Thank you.

Maze Runner · Sep 27, 2012

Good news. http://www.examiner.com/article/nfl...rees-to-end-strike-refs-get-raise-and-pension

Maze Runner · Sep 27, 2012

Interesting rankings after three weeks of play. (1) Houston (2) Atlanta (3) Baltimore (4) San Francisco (5) Arizona

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings

dogfacedboy · Sep 27, 2012

Excited to see the real refs back. Obviously there will still be missed calls and angry fans, but never to the degree we had with the replacement guys who were simply in over their heads.

The problem is, I don't really care whether the refs got their pensions or whether the owners busted the union or any of the other sticking points of the negotiations. I care that the quality of their product suffered. If the quality of the games wasn't affected I never would have cared which refs were out there.

Back to normal football tonight. I hope the refs get a huge ovation at the beginning of the game.

Maze Runner · Sep 27, 2012

dogfacedboy said:
Excited to see the real refs back. Obviously there will still be missed calls and angry fans, but never to the degree we had with the replacement guys who were simply in over their heads.

The problem is, I don't really care whether the refs got their pensions or whether the owners busted the union or any of the other sticking points of the negotiations. I care that the quality of their product suffered. If the quality of the games wasn't affected I never would have cared which refs were out there.

Back to normal football tonight. I hope the refs get a huge ovation at the beginning of the game.

yeah, who is it? Baltimore and cleveland? Should be an easy game for the Ravens, 'course that's the thing about football- on any given Sunday (thursday). I'm sure most know that the Ravens were once the Browns, and the Browns, that were such a trailblazing team with Paul Brown's offensive innovations is actually an expansion team. Is your team the Pats?

dogfacedboy · Sep 27, 2012

Yep, the Pats are my team. Tough loss last week to the Ravens, but they're a damn good team so no shame in that.

The Ravens should win going away tonight. The only mitigating factor I can think of is that they're playing on a short week. But then, so is Cleveland. I'd guess Baltimore takes it by a score of 31-14.

Yeah, the Ravens are pretty unpopular in Cleveland for ditching the city. I think technically the Ravens are considered the expansion team, with the current Browns team claiming all the history and records of the old Browns team. Someone on this board could probably speak to this with more authority than myself, though.

Jcomp · Sep 27, 2012

You are correct. The Ravens are considered the new franchise. Cleveland retained all of its previous records when the franchise was reborn.

Ed Panther · Sep 27, 2012

That was a strange game. The linebacker who made the interception just did an absolutely incredible job on that play. That's a Baltimore touchdown if he doesn't make such a great play.

Wonderful to see Torrey Smith get another touchdown.

Boldin went berserk.

The game would have been a blowout if the offensive line didn't keep having hiccups after a few first downs and spoiling drives. It's weird, it seems like the Ravens can score anytime they want (have) to, but go long stretches where it seems like they are just.. Lolligagging haha.

I think the Ravens have the most explosive offense and by seasons end will be number 1 with a bit of a margin. They need to be more consistent, which starts with the offense line.

Priene · Sep 28, 2012

The Ravens were never the Browns. They stole the team, but they didn't get to take the history. People in Cleveland are extremely sensitive about that one.

Maze Runner · Sep 28, 2012

Looks like it's still a sensitive subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Browns_relocation_controversy

On the game last night, I only caught the fourth quarter. That Ravens defense is always tough, and the offense looks good too. As far as the Browns, I was impressed with Brandon Weeden. He throws an accurate pass. But he does need to get some more steam on the ball. Otherwise he's going to get regularly picked off, even with that accuracy he has.

Shadow Dragon · Sep 28, 2012

The Ravens did come out a bit flat in the first half. But considering how busy they've been, four games in seventeen days, including two primetime games in five days and with two of those four teams being playoff teams last year. All in all, going 3-1 is pretty impressive. Plus, the Browns usually play well against division opponents.

The NFL 2012 Season

mirandashell

Maze Runner

mirandashell

Maze Runner

mirandashell

Maze Runner

Jcomp

Maze Runner

mirandashell

Maze Runner

mirandashell

Maze Runner

Jcomp

Maze Runner

Silver King

Megalops Erectus

Maze Runner

Maze Runner

dogfacedboy

Maze Runner

dogfacedboy

Jcomp

Ed Panther

Priene

Out to lunch

Maze Runner

Shadow Dragon