|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 10, 2019 17:56:12 GMT -6
Compared to the XFL, the quality of play is much better. With that being said, they are going to need to find a way to encourage more downfield passing. So far, the QB play has been pretty bad. Does anyone have a link for AAF box scores and stats? I couldn't find anything on the AAF website, ESPN, or CBS Sports. The xfl paid a whole lot less than this league. The AAF is making it clear they are absolutely trying to be a football league in "alliance" with the NFL. Not to compete with it. Also, they are definitely real football guys, not trying to be "football entertainment"
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 17:56:17 GMT -6
Compared to the XFL, the quality of play is much better. With that being said, they are going to need to find a way to encourage more downfield passing. So far, the QB play has been pretty bad. Does anyone have a link for AAF box scores and stats? I couldn't find anything on the AAF website, ESPN, or CBS Sports. Perez for Birmingham was 19-34 for 252. Good stats. Gilbert for Orlando was 15-25 for 227. Also very solid. Pretty efficient QB play by those guys. I don't think that is very "efficient" at all. What is that? About a 60% completion rate? That would be just average for a high school kid. Even if we can set that aside, "efficient" is not going to keep fans watching. How many TDs passes were thrown in the 3 games so far? And how many INTs? And how many of those TD passes were big plays?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 18:02:25 GMT -6
Compared to the XFL, the quality of play is much better. With that being said, they are going to need to find a way to encourage more downfield passing. So far, the QB play has been pretty bad. Does anyone have a link for AAF box scores and stats? I couldn't find anything on the AAF website, ESPN, or CBS Sports. The xfl paid a whole lot less than this league. The AAF is making it clear they are absolutely trying to be a football league in "alliance" with the NFL. Not to compete with it. Also, they are definitely real football guys, not trying to be "football entertainment" I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not saying that the AAF is trying to compete with the NFL. What I am saying is that the real football guys who run the AAF had better find a way to encourage more offense because people aren't going to watch games when the halftime score is 6-3. And for it to continue to be viable, it has to be entertaining. I don't think the average football fan would have found the first three games particularly entertaining.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 10, 2019 18:20:33 GMT -6
Perez for Birmingham was 19-34 for 252. Good stats. Gilbert for Orlando was 15-25 for 227. Also very solid. Pretty efficient QB play by those guys. I don't think that is very "efficient" at all. What is that? About a 60% completion rate? That would be just average for a high school kid. Even if we can set that aside, "efficient" is not going to keep fans watching. How many TDs passes were thrown in the 3 games so far? And how many INTs? And how many of those TD passes were big plays? Also though, they have had what..a month to practice (with NO OTAs or spring ball or any carryover from previous year etc) and only one "pre season" game. I don't disagree that they better get going in a hurry though. Seems like someone should be posting a "why don't they run the flexbone in the AAF" any minute now... REgarding the previous post, I wasn't trying to contradict you at all. I was pointing out a potential reason it is higher quality than the original XFL, and has a different goal than the XFL did. But you are right, they better get a bit better on offense in a hurry or it will flame out quickly.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 18:28:50 GMT -6
I don't think that is very "efficient" at all. What is that? About a 60% completion rate? That would be just average for a high school kid. Even if we can set that aside, "efficient" is not going to keep fans watching. How many TDs passes were thrown in the 3 games so far? And how many INTs? And how many of those TD passes were big plays? Also though, they have had what..a month to practice (with NO OTAs or spring ball or any carryover from previous year etc) and only one "pre season" game. I don't disagree that they better get going in a hurry though. Seems like someone should be posting a "why don't they run the flexbone in the AAF" any minute now... REgarding the previous post, I wasn't trying to contradict you at all. I was pointing out a potential reason it is higher quality than the original XFL, and has a different goal than the XFL did. But you are right, they better get a bit better on offense in a hurry or it will flame out quickly. I'm not an offensive guru. But I have to wonder if NFL offensive schemes are being implemented with players, especially QBs, who aren't capable of executing an NFL offense, the results probably aren't going to be pretty. Perhaps it would be better to use more of a college offensive scheme if those are going to be the type of players the AAF is going to get?
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 10, 2019 18:34:46 GMT -6
Also though, they have had what..a month to practice (with NO OTAs or spring ball or any carryover from previous year etc) and only one "pre season" game. I don't disagree that they better get going in a hurry though. Seems like someone should be posting a "why don't they run the flexbone in the AAF" any minute now... REgarding the previous post, I wasn't trying to contradict you at all. I was pointing out a potential reason it is higher quality than the original XFL, and has a different goal than the XFL did. But you are right, they better get a bit better on offense in a hurry or it will flame out quickly. I'm not an offensive guru. But I have to wonder if NFL offensive schemes are being implemented with players, especially QBs, who aren't capable of executing an NFL offense, the results probably aren't going to be pretty. Perhaps it would be better to use more of a college offensive scheme if those are going to be the type of players the AAF is going to get? It is a good question. However, as I mentioned they seem to be trying very hard to be a developmental league not a stand alone enterprise , so mirroring the standard NFL offense is probably how they will proceed.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 18:36:33 GMT -6
I'm not an offensive guru. But I have to wonder if NFL offensive schemes are being implemented with players, especially QBs, who aren't capable of executing an NFL offense, the results probably aren't going to be pretty. Perhaps it would be better to use more of a college offensive scheme if those are going to be the type of players the AAF is going to get? It is a good question. However, as I mentioned they seem to be trying very hard to be a developmental league not a stand alone enterprise , so mirroring the standard NFL offense is probably how they will proceed. Oof. Might be one and done if that is the case.
|
|
|
Post by mattharris75 on Feb 10, 2019 21:02:13 GMT -6
Perez for Birmingham was 19-34 for 252. Good stats. Gilbert for Orlando was 15-25 for 227. Also very solid. Pretty efficient QB play by those guys. I don't think that is very "efficient" at all. What is that? About a 60% completion rate? That would be just average for a high school kid. Even if we can set that aside, "efficient" is not going to keep fans watching. How many TDs passes were thrown in the 3 games so far? And how many INTs? And how many of those TD passes were big plays? Both of those guys most definitely played quality football. I think it was pretty clear if you watched the games. Some of the other quarterbacks have not, but the offenses in the ongoing Salt Lake vs Arizona game have been fairly productive so far. As to whether their play will 'keep fans watching', I haven't a clue. The initial ratings have been very good, but if the quality of play is bad that obviously will not last. But I'd say that through week 1 the biggest quality of play issue is the offensive lines being dominated.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 21:10:45 GMT -6
I don't think that is very "efficient" at all. What is that? About a 60% completion rate? That would be just average for a high school kid. Even if we can set that aside, "efficient" is not going to keep fans watching. How many TDs passes were thrown in the 3 games so far? And how many INTs? And how many of those TD passes were big plays? Both of those guys most definitely played quality football. I think it was pretty clear if you watched the games. Some of the other quarterbacks have not, but the offenses in the ongoing Salt Lake vs Arizona game have been fairly productive so far. As to whether their play will 'keep fans watching', I haven't a clue. The initial ratings have been very good, but if the quality of play is bad that obviously will not last. But I'd say that through week 1 the biggest quality of play issue is the offensive lines being dominated. "Quality football" is a subjective term. Football coaches would define "quality football" much differently than football fans. But I digress. I do agree that OL play has been bad. In the games I watched, there had to be well over double digits in sacks. Given the rules limiting the number of pass rushers and from where those pass rushers can come, that is definitely an area that needs to be addressed.
|
|
|
Post by mattharris75 on Feb 10, 2019 21:30:12 GMT -6
Both of those guys most definitely played quality football. I think it was pretty clear if you watched the games. Some of the other quarterbacks have not, but the offenses in the ongoing Salt Lake vs Arizona game have been fairly productive so far. As to whether their play will 'keep fans watching', I haven't a clue. The initial ratings have been very good, but if the quality of play is bad that obviously will not last. But I'd say that through week 1 the biggest quality of play issue is the offensive lines being dominated. "Quality football" is a subjective term. Football coaches would define "quality football" much differently than football fans. But I digress. I do agree that OL play has been bad. In the games I watched, there had to be well over double digits in sacks. Given the rules limiting the number of pass rushers and from where those pass rushers can come, that is definitely an area that needs to be addressed. Maybe you define 'quality football' differently than I do, but I've been coaching for 14 years, so I don't see your point... Arizona's QB has 275 passing and 4TDs halfway through the 4th.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 10, 2019 21:35:49 GMT -6
"Quality football" is a subjective term. Football coaches would define "quality football" much differently than football fans. But I digress. I do agree that OL play has been bad. In the games I watched, there had to be well over double digits in sacks. Given the rules limiting the number of pass rushers and from where those pass rushers can come, that is definitely an area that needs to be addressed. Maybe you define 'quality football' differently than I do, but I've been coaching for 14 years, so I don't see your point... Arizona's QB has 275 passing and 4TDs halfway through the 4th. I believe his point was that fans, accustomed to NFL stat line performances , may not be enamored with 60% completion rates and multiple interceptions.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 21:39:05 GMT -6
"Quality football" is a subjective term. Football coaches would define "quality football" much differently than football fans. But I digress. I do agree that OL play has been bad. In the games I watched, there had to be well over double digits in sacks. Given the rules limiting the number of pass rushers and from where those pass rushers can come, that is definitely an area that needs to be addressed. Maybe you define 'quality football' differently than I do, but I've been coaching for 14 years, so I don't see your point... Arizona's QB has 275 passing and 4TDs halfway through the 4th. Right. You are a football coach. As such, you have a decidely different perspective on the intricities of the game as compared to some casual fan who is simply looking to be entertained for 3 hours. Regarding the Arizona QB's performance, the AAF is going to need much more of that to keep people watching.
|
|
|
Post by mattharris75 on Feb 10, 2019 22:00:59 GMT -6
Maybe you define 'quality football' differently than I do, but I've been coaching for 14 years, so I don't see your point... Arizona's QB has 275 passing and 4TDs halfway through the 4th. I believe his point was that fans, accustomed to NFL stat line performances , may not be enamored with 60% completion rates and multiple interceptions. And yet this is not the NFL... Only 42% of D1 colleges had a completion percentage over 60% this past season. But I see your point. However I'm not sure stat lines directly affect the entertainment value of games per se. Of course I wouldn't say that I have a grasp of the socioeconomic factors that dictate the success of a football league either(Obviously not many people do, or one of these other leagues would still be around). If the games are entertaining (however you define that) and competitive, the marketing is good, and the business plan is solid... Well, then, maybe they'll succeed. I sure hope they do. After a weekend of games this seems to be the best chance for a 'minor league' football league to succeed that we've seen in a long time. And who really wants to be forced to watch basketball?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2019 22:30:40 GMT -6
I believe his point was that fans, accustomed to NFL stat line performances , may not be enamored with 60% completion rates and multiple interceptions. If the games are entertaining (however you define that) and competitive, the marketing is good, and the business plan is solid... Well, then, maybe they'll succeed. I sure hope they do. After a weekend of games this seems to be the best chance for a 'minor league' football league to succeed that we've seen in a long time. And who really wants to be forced to watch basketball? I agree. I want it to succeed. More football is good.
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Feb 11, 2019 6:22:44 GMT -6
Its an experiment for the NFL. Limited blitzing, no kickoffs. You wait, blocking and tackling are on the docket, might be down there but it there.Theey are playing with flags I think that clip of the qb getting smoked, and no flag, proves it's not a flag football league. If it were, the rules would be just as strict as the nfl. Being able to hit the QB is them trying to gain viewers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 7:14:07 GMT -6
Perez for Birmingham was 19-34 for 252. Good stats. Gilbert for Orlando was 15-25 for 227. Also very solid. Pretty efficient QB play by those guys. I don't think that is very "efficient" at all. What is that? About a 60% completion rate? That would be just average for a high school kid. Even if we can set that aside, "efficient" is not going to keep fans watching. How many TDs passes were thrown in the 3 games so far? And how many INTs? And how many of those TD passes were big plays? Those two QBs played well. I think that 3 of the 8 QBs had "solid" numbers by NFL and FBS standards. The other 5 were abysmal, from what I saw. As I said earlier in this thread, the rules in place favor more emphasis on pass coverage and limiting big plays, which I suspected might actually be counterproductive to scoring and big plays, because the defenses are pretty much forced by rule into capping the deep routes to make sure nothing breaks long. That's basically what we saw this weekend. With the awful OL play so far, defenses didn't need to do anything fancy to get home, anyway. The whole thing has had high production values, which you'd expect since it was launched by a TV producer who is himself the son of a TV producer, but watching the games reminds me of the 4th quarter of an NFL preseason game in a lot of ways. The opening games had good ratings (relative to a marquee NBA regular season game--they were mediocre compared to a top reality show or sitcom), but they were only a fraction of what the original XFL's premiere had years ago and we saw how that turned out. I want it to succeed, but I think that the league's best course might be to stop being "NFL-lite" and embrace other styles of play to stand out and make things more interesting. If it lasts past a 2nd year, I suspect that you'll see it evolve into a league of Air Raid and spread RPO stuff with a lot of dual threat QBs running the ball a fair amount, more akin to the CFL and FBS than the NFL style of play.
|
|
|
Post by wolverine55 on Feb 11, 2019 7:33:22 GMT -6
I think that clip of the qb getting smoked, and no flag, proves it's not a flag football league. If it were, the rules would be just as strict as the nfl. Being able to hit the QB is them trying to gain viewers. no kickoffs? Sounds like nfl! No no extra point att.? Sounds like NFL? All but eliminating blitzing? Sounds like NFL! Extra protection coming for Qb in new league? That is coming, and oh by the way is the NFL. It doesn't have to be black and white to know what is up. It's not a conspiracy theory. They've never hidden the fact they are wanting to be a developmental league for the NFL. So, yes, some of the ideas they are developing may be used by the NFL in the future. I'm not sure what there is to get wound up about?
|
|
|
Post by M4 on Feb 11, 2019 7:53:54 GMT -6
no kickoffs? Sounds like nfl! No no extra point att.? Sounds like NFL? All but eliminating blitzing? Sounds like NFL! Extra protection coming for Qb in new league? That is coming, and oh by the way is the NFL. It doesn't have to be black and white to know what is up. It's not a conspiracy theory. They've never hidden the fact they are wanting to be a developmental league for the NFL. So, yes, some of the ideas they are developing may be used by the NFL in the future. I'm not sure what there is to get wound up about? Some people just gravitate to hating on things so they can seem contrarian and smart. It's a lower level football being targeted to football fans who want to watch football in a time where there is no football to be watched that is being shown on a niche sports channel that is watched by people who really like sports. It's won't be NFL quality because the players aren't NFL players. If they were, they would be in the NFL. The CFL does quite well as a niche football product. I expect the AAF to find it's niche and be the most successful of the various minor league attempts because of the simple fact that - they seem to know their role and will likely stay in their lane. Having coaches with finger prints in the NFL running NFL style systems is the best bet for them to attract coaches with NFL dreams (or NFL shadows) and players with NFL dreams (or NFL shadows).
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 11, 2019 7:55:49 GMT -6
Also though, they have had what..a month to practice (with NO OTAs or spring ball or any carryover from previous year etc) and only one "pre season" game. I don't disagree that they better get going in a hurry though. Seems like someone should be posting a "why don't they run the flexbone in the AAF" any minute now... REgarding the previous post, I wasn't trying to contradict you at all. I was pointing out a potential reason it is higher quality than the original XFL, and has a different goal than the XFL did. But you are right, they better get a bit better on offense in a hurry or it will flame out quickly. I'm not an offensive guru. But I have to wonder if NFL offensive schemes are being implemented with players, especially QBs, who aren't capable of executing an NFL offense, the results probably aren't going to be pretty. Perhaps it would be better to use more of a college offensive scheme if those are going to be the type of players the AAF is going to get? I suspect it has more to do w having only 30 secs. (presumably from the dead ball call) to play the ball. When the WLAF in its 1st season allowed just 35, simplified schemes such as run & shoot and programmed series were thus encouraged, & overall offense prod'n suffered. I can't imagine it'd be better w only 0:30. So you get off more plays, but the defense has fewer threats to prepare vs.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Feb 11, 2019 7:57:42 GMT -6
i sure wish paul johnson would get a shot at coaching in this league,,, flexbone would be awesome here.
LMAO
|
|
|
Post by jamesskeeler on Feb 11, 2019 7:58:30 GMT -6
The offense will catch up. Offense as we all know is built on rhythm and timing. They've had minimal practice and one preseason game. The NFL has numerous mini camps, training camp, and 4 preason games and how many teams does it takes up to week 4 or 5 before they start clicking on offense! I actually enjoy numerous aspects. The viewing of the replay ref, going for 2 instead of FGs, I like the onside kick rule... As far as the blitzing you have to keep it in perspective this is developmental, if the qb is getting hit in the mouth every snap because the defense is sending the house and the oline has minimum playing time etc its going to get sloppy, if you actually watched you would see its not really an issue. I saw 3 or 4 plays where the qb's got smoked!
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 11, 2019 8:03:31 GMT -6
The xfl paid a whole lot less than this league. The AAF is making it clear they are absolutely trying to be a football league in "alliance" with the NFL. Not to compete with it. Also, they are definitely real football guys, not trying to be "football entertainment" I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not saying that the AAF is trying to compete with the NFL. What I am saying is that the real football guys who run the AAF had better find a way to encourage more offense because people aren't going to watch games when the halftime score is 6-3. And for it to continue to be viable, it has to be entertaining. I don't think the average football fan would have found the first three games particularly entertaining. If I opened a pro football league, I wouldn't concentrate on trying to be big or big-time. Rather, I'd focus on maximizing profit margins. Sell a product that's different, not necessarily better quality objectively. All you need is some audience that prefers what you've got, doesn't have to be anything like even a large minority of fans for football generally, & then keep costs down. Don't need the avg. fan.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 11, 2019 8:06:45 GMT -6
I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not saying that the AAF is trying to compete with the NFL. What I am saying is that the real football guys who run the AAF had better find a way to encourage more offense because people aren't going to watch games when the halftime score is 6-3. And for it to continue to be viable, it has to be entertaining. I don't think the average football fan would have found the first three games particularly entertaining. If I opened a pro football league, I wouldn't concentrate on trying to be big or big-time. Rather, I'd focus on maximizing profit margins. Sell a product that's different, not necessarily better quality objectively. All you need is some audience that prefers what you've got, doesn't have to be anything like even a large minority of fans for football generally, & then keep costs down. Don't need the avg. fan. But if people aren't watching, there isn't going to be any profit.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 11, 2019 8:15:44 GMT -6
So no extra point att.? Sounds like NFL? "Sounds like" what should've been done, I don't know, at least 75 yrs. ago? The try in any form is a relic, something that should've been eliminated but somehow keeps hanging on as an itch they keep scratching instead of just flicking that bug off. Just call a TD 7 pts. & kick off. No bonus round, no double or 0, no delay, just chop that whole section out.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Feb 11, 2019 8:18:03 GMT -6
I'm not an offensive guru. But I have to wonder if NFL offensive schemes are being implemented with players, especially QBs, who aren't capable of executing an NFL offense, the results probably aren't going to be pretty. Perhaps it would be better to use more of a college offensive scheme if those are going to be the type of players the AAF is going to get? It is a good question. However, as I mentioned they seem to be trying very hard to be a developmental league not a stand alone enterprise , so mirroring the standard NFL offense is probably how they will proceed. That's exactly right. They will not be running college offenses because they want to develop and audition QB's and OL for the NFL. I wouldn't be surprised to see NFL teams send young backup QB's down for half of a season to get them some live reps.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 11, 2019 8:21:51 GMT -6
If I opened a pro football league, I wouldn't concentrate on trying to be big or big-time. Rather, I'd focus on maximizing profit margins. Sell a product that's different, not necessarily better quality objectively. All you need is some audience that prefers what you've got, doesn't have to be anything like even a large minority of fans for football generally, & then keep costs down. Don't need the avg. fan. But if people aren't watching, there isn't going to be any profit. Of course. But you don't need a lot of people watching. This was observed yrs. ago in movie making. The films w the biggest profit margins are indie prod'ns, much smaller budgets than the major studios. You put all these indies together, the gross is just a tiny part of the industry. But their return on investment is much greater than the big boys'. Do they have many flops? Sure! But when they flop, they don't take the major bath the big studios do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 8:40:32 GMT -6
But if people aren't watching, there isn't going to be any profit. Of course. But you don't need a lot of people watching. This was observed yrs. ago in movie making. The films w the biggest profit margins are indie prod'ns, much smaller budgets than the major studios. You put all these indies together, the gross is just a tiny part of the industry. But their return on investment is much greater than the big boys'. Do they have many flops? Sure! But when they flop, they don't take the major bath the big studios do. The movie business is apples and oranges, though. There are exponentially more small budget individual films being made than big budget studio tentpoles now and 99% of the smaller films lose almost their entire budgets. The few who are successful are extremely profitable, but that doesn't make up for all that the other indies would have lost. Studios all bank on making a handful of "tentpole" blockbusters a year and pour hundreds of millions of dollars into those to insure their success. Even then, about half of them disappoint, but the few that are successful are so hugely successful worldwide that it floats the entire company for the year and makes up for all the losses on the others--unless they have a particularly bad year, where nothing blows up and a few of their attempts bomb, that is. Personally, I've long thought that something akin to the Arena League or a 6 man football league, but played in the spring and summer and ran more along the lines of minor league baseball or (or even professional wrestling back in the territorial days) might do well. Set up a few regional leagues nationwide with minimal rosters to save on gear and player salaries (play most players both ways), sign players from the local HS and colleges whose amateur days are done, pay the players solid living wages rather than small game checks or superstar athlete wages, and then focus on marketing it in the communities as a hipster or youth-friendly alternative to the NFL. The issue with upstart leagues is always putting butts in the seats and staying financially solvent. They tend to be managed by people who love football, but aren't the best business minds or can't get along, and the product on the field tends to be painful to watch with little connection to the fanbase. The dissolution of the Arena League, which was doing well in the late 90s, is a painful case study in what *not* to do.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Feb 11, 2019 9:47:06 GMT -6
I for 1, enjoyed the product on the field. the offenses were slow to start, but thats more the norm for high school type offenses that only get X amount of time at the begining of spring ball to get things rolling. defenses are much better earlier on, just because schemes are a bit easier and not nearly as sophisticated as some of the offenses. cover 2 is cover 2, regardless of how you disguise it. a 3 tech is a 3 tech, b gap, cross face slant, etc.. offense, power is ran 36 ways from sunday by every dam coach in the world, as is shallow, ncaa, dagger, china, smash, outside zone, stretch and wide zone,,(arent those all the same thing really?). but there are real football players out there that you may have heard of, trent richardson, matt asista(sic), will hill, etc. and alot you may have never heard of. but its not like arena ball where you know zero to 5 guys in the whole league. its the NFL version of try this out and see if these rules work. no kickoff, no onsides, no PAT. AAF is a good start to a minor leagues for the NFL. all for it. now get the coaches out of there and let some up and comers in so they to can have some of that chance you are giving the almost nfl players! cool to have those names to invigorate some excitment(neuhisel and spurrier, singletary, etc), but what about get some new life in and see what could happen! THATS WHEN WE WILL SEE THE FLEXBONE HAPPEN!!!!
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Feb 11, 2019 11:49:53 GMT -6
I think that clip of the qb getting smoked, and no flag, proves it's not a flag football league. If it were, the rules would be just as strict as the nfl. Being able to hit the QB is them trying to gain viewers. no kickoffs? Sounds like nfl! No no extra point att.? Sounds like NFL? All but eliminating blitzing? Sounds like NFL! Extra protection coming for Qb in new league? That is coming, and oh by the way is the NFL. It doesn't have to be black and white to know what is up. Currently, 1) The NFL has kickoffs 2) The NFL has extra points 3) You can bring all 11 on a blitz in the NFL if you want. Not sure what your point is.
|
|
|
Post by coachdavis11 on Feb 11, 2019 11:54:37 GMT -6
I enjoyed watching it... I watched the Birmingham-Memphis game and the Salt Lake- Arizona game... I was entertained and the rule changes did not bother me... I actually like the no kickoff, heck most kickers put it in the end zone anyway so theres no kickoff anyway... I think the play that replaces onside kicks is a good idea... It's gotta be easier to get 10-12 yards than cover an onside kick.... I'm going to watch and see what happens, they hooked me
|
|