State of the NFL

[PNW_PantherMan]

The rules have been changing in a linear fashion to help offenses pass the ball.  When are the rules going to change in favor of the defenses?  That's why I don't think its cyclical.  Cyclical implies that we would go through a defensive period.

[w280sax]

I thought last night's game was about as exciting as nfl gets.  It was truly a great opener.

What I hate is the refs just not calling lavonte David for taking his helmet and slamming it.  He was in the middle of the field by himself so I can't believe no one saw that.  It just feels like the refs chose to help Tampa there.  Otherwise, I even felt the officiating was good last night.

[Mr. Scot]

9 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Think about what a guy like Patrick Peterson could've done at CB back in the 70s and 80s when DBs could maul WRs. You basically have a small LB who moves like a CB and he can just manhandle the poo out of your WRs. Good luck with that.

I'm not a fan of hamstringing the defense, though I do understand why the NFL wants more offense.

One thing I have to admit gives me a chuckle: I remember being told numerous times since Michael Vick that running quarterbacks were going to "change the game", yet I sit here watching the league continue to evolve more and more in favor of passing.

The reality is that passing has trumped running since the early days of the AFL, and I seriously doubt that's going to change.

A quarterback who can also run? That's gold. But if they can really only effectively do one or the other, you better hope they're a passer.

[LinvilleGorge]

We haven't seen a shift toward "running" QBs, but we have seen a pretty dramatic shift in the value of mobility in QBs.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

We haven't seen a shift toward "running" QBs, but we have seen a pretty dramatic shift in the value of mobility in QBs.

Honestly, part of that is because offensive line quality has gone way way down.

Now with that said, mobility is great as long as the quarterback is an effective passer first and foremost.

I don't think the idea is his new as people think though. When I was a kid, Fran Tarkenton was a big deal, and he wasn't the only one of his kind.

[Scott12345]

15 minutes ago, w280sax said:

I thought last night's game was about as exciting as nfl gets.  It was truly a great opener.

What I hate is the refs just not calling lavonte David for taking his helmet and slamming it.  He was in the middle of the field by himself so I can't believe no one saw that.  It just feels like the refs chose to help Tampa there.  Otherwise, I even felt the officiating was good last night.

that should have been 15 yds

and the tampa wr should have been flagged for offensive PI on the winning drive

now tampa has the saints refs since brees is gone & brady is left

Edited September 10, 2021 by Scott12345

[Scott12345]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Honestly, part of that is because offensive line quality has gone way way down.

Now with that said, mobility is great as long as the quarterback is an effective passer first and foremost.

I don't think the idea is his new as people think though. When I was a kid, Fran Tarkenton was a big deal, and he wasn't the only one of his kind.

OL play hasnt gone down as much as DL play has gone up

you now have 300 lb DL running 4.3

level of athletism is just off the charts

[shaqattaq]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The casual fan wants to watch high flying, high scoring games. The NFL isn't dumb. They do market research. They know this. They see which games draw the biggest ratings and generate the most buzz.

As long as the casual fan wants high flying, high scoring games the NFL will continue to tweak the rules to encourage that style of football. It is what it is. 

Fantasy football is ruining the game!

[LinvilleGorge]

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm not a fan of hamstringing the defense, though I do understand why the NFL wants more offense.

One thing I have to admit gives me a chuckle: I remember being told numerous times since Michael Vick that running quarterbacks were going to "change the game", yet I sit here watching the league continue to evolve more and more in favor of passing.

The reality is that passing has trumped running since the early days of the AFL, and I seriously doubt that's going to change.

A quarterback who can also run? That's gold. But if they can really only effectively do one or the other, you better hope they're a passer.

No one knocked pocket statues back in the 80s and 90s. It's absolutely a knock on a QB prospect these days. 

 

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

No one knocked pocket statues back in the 80s and 90s. It's absolutely a knock on a QB prospect these days. 

I actually do remember some people knocking Marino for his lack of mobility. Don't know for sure but I think it might have been one of the reasons why the Jets passed on him.

Obviously, he overcame it.

[mav1234]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm not a fan of hamstringing the defense, though I do understand why the NFL wants more offense.

One thing I have to admit gives me a chuckle: I remember being told numerous times since Michael Vick that running quarterbacks were going to "change the game", yet I sit here watching the league continue to evolve more and more in favor of passing.

The reality is that passing has trumped running since the early days of the AFL, and I seriously doubt that's going to change.

A quarterback who can also run? That's gold. But if they can really only effectively do one or the other, you better hope they're a passer.

while "running QBs" may not have changed the game, I would argue that mobility has. The majority of top 10 QBs are definitely more mobile than it has been in the past.  While there have always been mobile QBs once in a while, being a statue is much more of a liability now than it used to be

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, mav1234 said:

while "running QBs" may not have changed the game, I would argue that mobility has. The majority of top 10 QBs are definitely more mobile than it has been in the past.  While there have always been mobile QBs once in a while, being a statue is much more of a liability now than it used to be

Was talking with LG about that too.

Even there though, the reality is that while there are plenty of reasonably mobile quarterbacks, there are precious few true "dual threat" quarterbacks.

Honestly, outside of Lamar Jackson, who in the league right now would a defensive coordinator have to account for as a possible dangerous run threat?

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

while "running QBs" may not have changed the game, I would argue that mobility has. The majority of top 10 QBs are definitely more mobile than it has been in the past.  While there have always been mobile QBs once in a while, being a statue is much more of a liability now than it used to be

This. We've definitely seen a trend over the past decade or so toward an increasing value in overall mobility. If you want to throw the ball constantly with as many receivers as possible out running routes, you better have a QB who can move around a little bit or a damn bot like Brady who can surgically pick apart your defense in an instant. Well, there's only one Brady so everyone else is hedging toward mobility.

[Scott12345]

9 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

Fantasy football is ruining the game!

good point....but fantasy is huge & keeps fans in the game that may not be all over it otherwise

i quit fantasy several yrs ago...kept taking brees and julio to win fantasy and I hating pulling for them to do well

one modern thing i really like is redzone on nfl network