No Fun League Needs Changes

Bruce Dowbiggen for NFL Commissioner! His article should have also added "reduce 40 second clock".

Anyone else read it and any thoughts?

Excellent article but agree Sportsmen, the 40 sec clock I think is also what makes it a slower game.

Wow, Dowbiggen finally wrote a good article, and finally wrote one that doesn't bash the CFL in any way (he tends to be a very, very, VERY pessimistic writer). Usually he's got some snide remark to make regarding "our league". I wonder if the CFL will get any repercussions from the NFL for making this their "top story" ... I hope not!
Thoughts ... I never even considered the fact that NFL receivers can't move towards the line. Yikes! I can't even picture that! (and it's not like I avoid watching NFL games, either!)
Kicking in the NFL is dull. Kicking in the CFL kicks a$$ (pun intended). Touchbacks are the most boring play in football. Fair catches are the second-most boring play.
Sadly, the NFL won't make any changes ... especially if it's a change suggested by Canadians. Oh well, that's fine - as long as our two versions of football are as different as they should be (and are), I'm happy. Canadian Football and American Football are both football in the same way that apples and oranges are both fruit.
But Dowbiggin is right (a rare event, indeed) ... the "No Fun League" could use some Canadian inspiration!

I really don't think the 40 second clock really impacts the game. The 40 second clock starts right away, as for the other leagues they don't start til the chains are moved. The only time it makes a difference is near the end of the game when a team grinds the clock out. I guess I' am old school, but a team has 60 minutes to win a game. I would like to see some teams manage the clock better when they are down, but todays qb's are not as bright as they use to be.

The NFL is not going to change for the CFL and the CFL is not going to change for the NFL. Both leagues have there good and bad.

No, neither of them will be changing … it’s all purely speculative … that said, perhaps it is bias, but I do prefer the Canadian game to the American. I’m sure most Americans would hate to see their game upended into a “Canadianized” version, thereby destroying all the tradition etc behind American football. For an extreme example, say hockey decided that in order to become higher-scoring, they were going to remove ALL offside rules (like basketball). Americans might find this more entertaining. Canadians would scream! (This seems to have already started happening … no red-line, proposing bigger nets, the shootout … )

but todays qb's are not as bright as they use to be.
That comment makes you sound like such an old fart... I hate people who make stupid generalized statements about how everything was better 50 years ago.

But that's the whole point Peter. Grinding the clock makes for a slow finish. No matter what you did to win the game in the first 57 minutes, the game will end in a boring fashion as soon as the team with the lead will get the ball.

And if they have a 14 or 17 points lead entering the fourth quarter, then they start gringing the clock with 10 minutes to go.

Should they have less time to put the ball into play, it would also have another good impact: linemen would stop trying to inflate themselves at over 300 pounds with artificial drugs. Because 300+ pounders can't keep up the pace in a faster game. Just look at how many of these guys we have in the CFL. 20 seconds clocks are too hard on them.

So with quicker clocks, teams would hire more linemen of a human size and less of them would die in their late 30s- early 40s.

NFL sucks, but no charges are needed.

That is "their" game, this is "OUR" game.

NFL euro though needs new rules to bring fans to the game that they can call their own. No changes there and NFL euro is dead, like NATO will be when the United States of Europe forms.

Three words say it all, NO FUN LEAGUE.

I agree that I don't think that the 40-second clock does all that much to the game, as long as it starts immediately. When I watch CFL vs. NFL, I don't see a difference in the speed between plays at all.

What makes the CFL seems faster is the following:

-Space. 195 foot wide field makes for a significantly more open game (just watch international hockey come February and you'll see what I mean). 160 feet wide in the NFL makes the game incredibly congested, and for a game where finding open space is the primary objective, it turns NFL 3 yard runs into CFL 6 yard runs.

-3-downs. When you only have two chances to advance the ball, each down matters. I can assure you that 2nd down in NFL is pretty unimportant from an impact standpoint, but 1st and 3rd are. 4 downs means that offenses are given more leeway to produce, but not more offensive play. Also, defenses only need to make two stops to get the ball back...this is critical, THIS is what makes the Canadian game so great IMO.

-Timeouts. 3 timeouts and 2 challenges per half in the NFL make for a slow, "time-management" game. Sure, the game has been time-management in the past, and that's some of the beauty of it I guess, but it slows down the game so much and really detracts from the entertainment value a lot. I'd rather see one timeout per half. I'd also rather see challenges not have a number limit, but rather be called from the box (no refs looking into a camera), and every failed challenge is a 15-yard delay-of-game penalty.

I don't really have a qualm with the grinding the clock that the NFL does...I grew up on that and I don't totally understand what the CFL does here. What I'd love to see to counteract the 40-second clock remaining is a 20-minute quarter, no clock stoppage, and a forced 10- or 15-second lapse between plays. Incomplete passes and out-of-bounds balls would be set within 15 seconds and the ball cannot be snapped before :25 on the play clock - you don't really need to stop the clock for those plays. Until the last two minutes of each half, you'd play on a constantly moving clock, only stopping for turnovers, scores, and timeouts (old rules for clock stoppage in the two minute drill). Also, I think that assessment of delay-of-game penalties for not snapping the ball should just be loss of down. The game is over inside two minutes, no point to go through the motions.

Anyways, 60-yard fields, 3 downs, and less referee stoppages.

Steve, I think you sould just stick with Rugby mate! :mrgreen:

lol.

Say what you want to say. I' am talking 5-10 years ago. Elway, Moon, Kelly, Young, Marino, Montana, Cunningham. These are qb's that knew how to pick apart the defense. The qb's 50 years ago stunk, football was mostly a ground game back then.

I can't argue that. Want proof? Just look at how Mcnabb screwed up clock management in the 4th quarter of the Superbowl last year. He's considered among the best right now.

And all those qbs were playing in the league at the same time.

Call me old school but i think a team that has a 14 to 17 point lead should have the right to grind the clock out. It's up to the opposing defense to stop them, not to give the defense help by having the clock stop.

I cannot see the difference in the speed of the game. Have you watched a Colts game, and the way Peyton Manning hurries his offense. His offense runs quicker than the CFL teams.

As for the comment about 300lb lineman half those guys are in better shape than qb's. Have you seen the speed and stamina a guy like Vince Wilfork who is clearly over 360lbs has. Maybe back in the 80's they couldn't keep up. Some lineman in the NFL have run 4.5 40's. The NFL is a young mans game and if you can't stay on the field for a drive in the 4th quarter, you better be looking in the help wanted section.

Are you accusing NFL players of using drugs?? They have the strictest testing policy of any league. They get tested in the offseason and when they are on vacation. They take some over the counter supplements, but everyone NFL and CFL does it. Do you realize that half the CFL players have competed on the same field as these players that have taken articfical drugs. Name a player in the NFL or CFL that doesn't take supplements besides coaches and kickers. Answer :None, they all do. And another question do you understand the demands football puts on a persons body? Do you realize half these guys end up losing there vision and are barely able to walk when they reach there 40's. Look at TEDY BRUSCHI. Not trying to sound too dramatic but having known many ex-professional players i have seen the toll the sport takes.

But the Colts are the exception to the rule. I used to like watching Buffalo when Marv Levy (Correct spelling?) coached and Jim Kelly played. That fast paced hurry up offense was fun to watch. Probably why I like watching the Colts too! But those 9-7, 12-10 games are such a bore.

What drives me crazy about the 40 second clock is the QB calling a timeout because he needs longer than 40 seconds to call his play!

I can see where our opinions collide: we're not analyzing it from the same point of view. You're thinking like a player. I'm thinking like a fan. From a player's perspective, it is absolutely legit and fair to use the time as a way to protect a hard-earn lead. I totally agree. But from a fan's perspective, you want to see as much action as possible. You paid for a whole 60 minutes, and you'll have to wait a whole week before you can see your idols play again. You don't want it to be a previsible display of clock management.

True. But the Colts are one of 32 teams. You don't make a league out of one team. .

I don't deny they are in good shape. What I say is most will "reinforce" that shape with substances that will drastically affect their lives forever. And "forever" sometimes ends faster than expected. And they don't necessarily juice themselves up to become able to play at pro level, but they do to improve their chances of getting that startting job because in the NFL, there is a culture of "who looks good on paper". 340 pounders will be invited to training camps. 260 guys... it's a little less of a sure shot.

I hope you're not really believeing the NFLers drink nothing but clear water, man...

I haven't said CFLers were boy scouts either. But clearly, the higher the challenge, the more you push it to the max. And I could see why (not that I condone it) an NFL offensive tackle would juice himself up to keep a job worth 2 M$ a year, whereas I don't think most guys would dare risking screwing up their future this much for a 55 000$ job in the CFL.

If Ezra Landry had some, it failed lamentably. :stuck_out_tongue:

And just what makes you able to state that as a fact? You fingerpoint me for making generalizations, but you just accused everyone of doing something you have know way of verifying.

Isn't that another reason why they would want "a little extra help" ?

The only real problem I have with the NFL rules is not the fact that teams try to run out the clock when tehy have a lead - that happens in all sports that have a time limit.

My problem is that with 40 second play clock and 4 downs, it is much easier for the offense to protect a lead, and much more difficult for the team that's behind to get the ball back with enough time for a comeback.

But on the bright side, at least they reduced the play clock from 45 seconds. Yikes!

And on the issue of performance-enhancing drugs, I agree with Third: spome of it occurs in all sports. It's inevitable. hink it would be more rampant in the NFL than the CFL simply because multi-million dollar contracts are on the line. In the CFL, football is more of a part-time job, and it's not going to make the difference between being a millionaire or not.

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think that there's little or no steroid use in the CFL. The CFL has no drug testing unlike the NFL . I just recently watched a show about CFL drug use featuring Glen Kulka (former D-lineman for the Argo's, Ottawa roughriders) and he sure begged to differ with your opinions. According to him it's rampant in the CFL . As for your "they only make $50,000 so they wouldn't do it for only that" rationalizing , you guys sure are naive . Gym's across the country are full of guy's who do steriods till the cows come home for no money at all. :roll:

I said by third's reasoning you coiuld make an argument that it would probably be more likely. I didn't say it was an absolute fact. And I was referring to all performance enhancers, not just steroids.

But your points are taken.