NFL ratings, TV deals, Jersey sales, Rule changes, Expansion, etc

Kirk has played well against Philly in the past but we all know he’s a slow starter

Isn't Coach Gruden the slow starter, isn't he 0-4 in openers for the Redskins?

Kirk usually takes a few games to settle down is all I was saying

Kirk usually takes a few games to settle down is all I was saying

yeah but now u watch, he will be on fire week 1 and win lol

Kirk usually takes a few games to settle down is all I was saying

This is absolutely true, he has shown a distinct tendency to make spaz throws and spaz decisions early in the season and in crunch moments late in the season.

I don't think he settles himself down real well. Early in the season you have all that build up, it takes a cool customer to chill out and make good throws. And then when playoff pressure ramps up - spaz city (Giants, ahem).

I don't think he's a big game guy. At least he has to prove that he is. Maybe he will.

Now keep in mind Philly probably won't have Wentz. But the point stands about Kirk being a first game spaz. He is what he is until he proves otherwise.

Of course the NFL had keep a part of the catch that keep creating controversy and protects the offense. 1 & 2 are all that is needed. #3 is stupid.
Go back to the old rule 1 & 2 only.


NFL teams unanimously approve simplified catch rule - NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000923342/article/nfl-teams-unanimously-approve-simplified-catch-rule)

Of course the NFL had keep a part of the catch that keep creating controversy and protects the offense. 1 & 2 are all that is needed. #3 is stupid.
Go back to the old rule 1 & 2 only.


NFL teams unanimously approve simplified catch rule - NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000923342/article/nfl-teams-unanimously-approve-simplified-catch-rule)

I think it's about formulation.

IMHNNESO (FYI, this stands for: In My Humble Non-Native-English-Speaker Opinion) once you have the concept of "control of the ball", you must define a time element.

Because how would you precisely define controlling the ball other than having the ball NOT moving... for a given period of time ?

So the final part simply is a way to phrase that time element without the word "time", so it looks less subjective...

All there's to remember is that they got rid of the "surviving the ground" part, which created so much controversy.

I think it might take a few weeks before the rule is consistently applied the same way, but I feel like it's a step in the direction of closing the gap between the rule and how people think it should be.

Watching ESPN I can’t help but think what’s up with this sneakers with a suit look?

I don’t understand going through the trouble of putting on a nice suit only to wear sneakers. Just sloppy.

I think it's about formulation.

IMHNNESO (FYI, this stands for: In My Humble Non-Native-English-Speaker Opinion) once you have the concept of "control of the ball", you must define a time element.

Because how would you precisely define controlling the ball other than having the ball NOT moving... for a given period of time ?

So the final part simply is a way to phrase that time element without the word "time", so it looks less subjective...

All there's to remember is that they got rid of the "surviving the ground" part, which created so much controversy.


I think it might take a few weeks before the rule is consistently applied the same way, but I feel like it's a step in the direction of closing the gap between the rule and how people think it should be.

However the old rule is ok on the sideline, when the receiver catches the ball near the out of bounds, catches the ball, gets two feet down and gets pushed out of bounds or his momentum forces him out of bounds. That is still ok. No need to make a third move. Why? Because it helps the offense.
How about the new rule for tackling. Really bad.
They have never and will never throw a flag for a ball carrier or offensive player that lowers their head and initiates contact. This only get applied defensive players.
Player lowering head to inflict contact now subject to 15-yard penalty and possible ejection | National | oleantimesherald.com (http://www.oleantimesherald.com/sports/national/player-lowering-head-to-inflict-contact-now-subject-to-/article_7c475111-d828-5673-af28-4ef012bf7ede.html)

However the old rule is ok on the sideline, when the receiver catches the ball near the out of bounds, catches the ball, gets two feet down and gets pushed out of bounds or his momentum forces him out of bounds. That is still ok. No need to make a third move. Why? Because it helps the offense.
How about the new rule for tackling. Really bad.
They have never and will never throw a flag for a ball carrier or offensive player that lowers their head and initiates contact. This only get applied defensive players.
Player lowering head to inflict contact now subject to 15-yard penalty and possible ejection | National | oleantimesherald.com (http://www.oleantimesherald.com/sports/national/player-lowering-head-to-inflict-contact-now-subject-to-/article_7c475111-d828-5673-af28-4ef012bf7ede.html)

Overall I do think the new rule is meant to call more catches, so yeah, it will help the offense a bit.

Pretty much on every tackle a defender has to lower his head. This is just another example of the NFL owners not being able to get out of their own way. I guess what they're saying is a defender has to stay tall to make a tackle. It's so stupid and going to confuse the refs even more than they're already confused.