"The integrity of the game"

[BD Sullivan]

While it's a few years from having an impact, I think when teams start using Virtual Reality aspects in place of practice, things can improve. They can get reps in without having to endure taking hit after hit.

[bachslunch]

Imagine if players were still allowed to link arms in front of a kick returner as he headed downfield, or there was no rule about poking fingers into the eyes of those across the line. Well, every one of those rule changes brought about similar critiques....

Moe Howard would never be able to play the game in this day and age.....

But yes, you're right about the complaining. Fact is, there are (for example) serious, legitimate pressures from without to make the game at least somewhat safer (i.e. as concussion-free as possible, not diving at the QBs knees, and such). It's a change, leads to more penalties, etc. etc. etc. -- and there's bound to be gripes since people tend not to like change. But it's necessary, unless one wants to see continued lawsuits against the NFL or have marquee players going out even more routinely than they do.

People used to complain all the time about instant replay, but it has proven worthwhile despite slowing the game down. Not every call is gotten right, but a lot more are, and that's to the better.

[mwald]

Fact is, there are (for example) serious, legitimate pressures...

Very true. People criticize Roger Goodell, and even though he's not perfect much of the criticism is unwarranted. The climate today is litigious. The beloved Pete Rozell wouldn't have fared any better in this litigious, politically correct climate. Goodell deserves props for being proactive instead of reactive, knowing that if he wasn't the NFL could be sacked one day like big tobacco, which it still could.

The downside is some changes aren't exactly what we like, but it's better than not being around at all. I'd hate to see that happen. It's hip to cut down the NFL these days, but I love it and would miss it greatly.

[John Grasso]

People used to complain all the time about instant replay, but it has proven worthwhile despite slowing the game down. Not every call is gotten right, but a lot more are, and that's to the better.

I disagree. We don't need instant replay. The game was pretty good for nearly 100 years without it.
Why does every call (or most of them) have to be gotten right?
Officials are human - they should be allowed to make mistakes.
They're graded on their abilities and won't remain in the league if they make too many mistakes.

We accept the fact that players make mistakes and they, too, won't last long if
they make too many.

If we want perfection then players should be allowed to ask for do-overs when they mess up.

[BD Sullivan]

Imagine if players were still allowed to link arms in front of a kick returner as he headed downfield, or there was no rule about poking fingers into the eyes of those across the line. Well, every one of those rule changes brought about similar critiques....

Moe Howard would never be able to play the game in this day and age.....

Worked like a charm on the snap count of two.

[JWL]

Was he wrong about what he said on the Kam Chancellor interception?

He said incomplete, it was ruled an interception. So, yes.

Okay, I get what you mean now. Yes, Carey was wrong in the sense that what he thought should have been called was not called. But was Carey really right in terms of what the ruling should have been?

[BD Sullivan]

People used to complain all the time about instant replay, but it has proven worthwhile despite slowing the game down. Not every call is gotten right, but a lot more are, and that's to the better.

Why does every call (or most of them) have to be gotten right?

Officials are human - they should be allowed to make mistakes.

$$$$$

Tell that to a coach who just got screwed out of a win.

[oldecapecod11]

If you access web sites using fraudulent means; or,
if you constantly accuse an innocent person of cheating; or,
if you plagiarize by posting or printing copyrighted data and never even credit the source,
then you probably will not understand the following.

The Patriots win with efficiency and style and, when they lose, it is with professionalism and grace and integrity.

There are no acts similar to "teardrops tomlin" or any other whiner.

“I was really proud of the way our team fought tonight,” Belichick said after New England’s 30-24 overtime loss in Denver. “I thought we gave tremendous effort and played really hard. Obviously there were some things that we could have done better, could have coached better, could have played better, but guys really played hard and I have all the respect in the world for this football team, the way they competed so proud of what — the way they went at battle tonight, disappointed in the end result, but have to get back to work this week for Philadelphia.”
Posted by Mike Florio on November 30, 2015, 6:42 AM EST

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ch-to-say/

[MIKEBENNIDICT]

What the powers that be don't seem to realize in their silly attempts to increase offense and player safety is that the more rules they add, the more rules there are to break. This leads to more penalty calls, many of which are debatable or downright silly. I am so sick of illegal contact and hands to the face penalties...

Now why would you have a problem with hands to the face?

Wanna a player to lose his helmet during a play?

[bachslunch]

I disagree. We don't need instant replay. The game was pretty good for nearly 100 years without it.

(George Harrison voice) Sorry we hurt your field, mister.

Couldn't resist an open door like that.

Why does every call (or most of them) have to be gotten right?
Officials are human - they should be allowed to make mistakes.
They're graded on their abilities and won't remain in the league if they make too many mistakes.

We accept the fact that players make mistakes and they, too, won't last long if
they make too many.

If we want perfection then players should be allowed to ask for do-overs when they mess up.

I'm not convinced the parallel works. It's the actions by the players on the field that are the whole point of the game and one can argue that what happens happens, individual successes or failures being an important part of that. But what the officials do is different -- they're there to oversee the action (enforcing the existing rules), not create it. Letting a bad call stand, especially when it isn't necessary, changes the official's role in the game. They say that umpires and officials are doing their job best when you don't notice them, and I agree.