Andrew. It makes your "true football fan" argument a little weak.
I never said I was a true football fan. I'm not a Green Bay fan, I'm not an ATL fan, and I'm not a Redskins fan. I don't care how you spell Favrefarvewhocares. People try to peg me as this or that to validate their dismissal of me. Just admit you're a bandwagon fan and get on with your day. I have a losing hockey team to go cheer on and bandwagon fans to make fun of.
Fun fact: The Seahawks have had 100%+ attendance for home games every year except one since 2006. Incidentally, since 2006, they have also had a better home game attendance percentage than Atlanta or either New York team. We may have fair weather fans, but they've been there since the 2005 Superbowl.
Awwww. How cute. The Packers have sold out every home game since 1960. :-D
I can't quite put a finger in why but Seattle fans have really gotten on my nerves this year. I think a large part of it is the upswell of fair weather fans but there is more to it. It's not unbearable, just slightly annoying. But I'd much rather be slightly annoyed at the SeaChickens than have to deal with New England or Chicago fans. :-D
Almost all adamant football fans annoy me, doesn't matter which team it is.
The only reason I'm a Seahawks fan is because my girlfriends brother keeps taking me to home games and they're pretty fun. So I'll root for them also since I live here and don't give a shit about other cities seems like an okay choice.
Fun fact: The Seahawks have had 100%+ attendance for home games every year except one since 2006. Incidentally, since 2006, they have also had a better home game attendance percentage than Atlanta or either New York team. We may have fair weather fans, but they've been there since the 2005 Superbowl.
As far as sports go, 2006 may as well be yesterday. How about Chicago Cubs fans who have been waiting for a World Series since 1908, and even had to suffer through things like the black cat and Bartman incidents? That's real sports fandom.
The reason Jets home game attendance is low is because they are a disgrace. They can't give those tickets away. Hopefully they'll just go bankrupt and move to another city.
The reason Giants attendance is low is because they are so high class that almost all of the tickets belong to corporations, ticket brokers, and rich people who aren't necessarily die hard fans. Not all those tickets get used if nobody buys them on StubHub for a zillion dollars.
Ugh. Both Seattle franchises haven't even been active for fifty years. Comparing teams that have been established for almost a century vs teams that haven't been even established for half that amount is a bit unfair. Seattle will never catch up.
I'm on board with Rym. Clearly walking the walk is a dominant strategy, but whether you want to talk the talk or speak softly and carry a big stick depends on how you want to go down in history.
For what it's worth, I'd rather have crazy postgame interviews where people actually say something of substance. I totally understand why an individual wouldn't want to, though. Just wish it happened more.
I wouldn't mind if they just outlawed kicking the PAT. Make everyone go for it. One or two points, I don't care. I can't think of a compelling reason to not just make it a 1-point conversion from the 2.
Starfox's graphic should really include Alexandre Daigle (pronounced "day-g") and not Ryan Leaf. Leaf is probably more famous (though I hadn't heard of him before I saw this graphic, but maybe that's the point) but nothing tops Daigle's draft day quote of "I'm glad I got drafted first, because no one remembers number two". Daigle was selected 1st overall in 1993, but 2nd overall was Chris Pronger, who is essentially a Hall of Fame lock while Daigle did fuck all in the NHL.
Fun fact: The Seahawks have had 100%+ attendance for home games every year except one since 2006. Incidentally, since 2006, they have also had a better home game attendance percentage than Atlanta or either New York team. We may have fair weather fans, but they've been there since the 2005 Superbowl.
As far as sports go, 2006 may as well be yesterday. How about Chicago Cubs fans who have been waiting for a World Series since 1908, and even had to suffer through things like the black cat and Bartman incidents? That's real sports fandom.
I only went back as far as 2006 because I could find those numbers easily. If I could easily find the attendance records for every year the Seahawks have been around, I would've used those.
Anyway, I'm not going to dispute the claim that a lot of recent fans are fair weather because it's true. And they can be quite annoying, but that's why I don't pay attention to them. I just watch the games and enjoy them.
Sportsball fans like their history. That's why, no matter how good an NHL team ever gets, if it isn't one of the original six, there's at least a small vestigial disdain in the commentary.
Sportsball fans like their history. That's why, no matter how good an NHL team ever gets, if it isn't one of the original six, there's at least a small vestigial disdain in the commentary.
TRUTH.
There's actually double history aspects. Not only is it that a team has history, but a fan has a personal history. My parents are Rangers/Mets/Giants fans. My grandparents are Rangers/Mets(Brooklyn Dodgers)/Giants fans. My great grandparents got off a boat in NYC and had a valid reason to be fans of NYC teams.
Meanwhile some people out there are fans of expansion teams that were created yesterday. It's hard to respect someone who just decided to be a fan of a team when it starts winning, or if it has no history whatsoever. There's nothing to grab onto.
Watching some Sports Center. Every time an old white man calls a young black man "articulate" I cringe.
Wait, what was the context of this? If it's about Sherman's postgame rant, it may have some merit. E.g. "Richard Sherman is normally very articulate, but his post-game explosion was anything but."
It was about his post postgame rant press conference. It was in the context of of an older white man being surprised that a young black man can string together three sentences to form a slightly more subtle and coherent point.
And yet I feel like I'm watching the future of American Football. This match could be played without helmets, and everyone would be fine. The players would probably have way few concussions and injuries than with helmets.
And so, because I don't think the NFL will last more than 10 more years without changing its policies in regards to player safety, the Pro Bowl could become a good test venue for future improvements in this regard.
For example, how about playing the Pro Bowl last year without any armor or helmets on the top half of the body. And all tackles have to be made on the lower half of the body. That means that only unprotected parts of the body (the top half) can attack only protected parts of the body (the waist down).
This COULD be an interesting game, but played with the same care for health. It feels like a game is broken if the only way to play it properly is to break opponents' bodies. The basketball Allstars game doesn't have this problem.
I've said this before, but all you really have to do to fix NFL football is to remove all the helmets and armor. If you're not wearing a helmet yourself, you're not going to slam your head into some other dude. The problem is that until players unlearn what they have learned, there will be carnage of teeth, blood, and whatnot. I'm sure that playing AFL or Rugby isn't great for your body, but they don't seem to be having the same issues the NFL is having. The protective equipment used in the NFL is actually a violent weapon.
Another thought I had. Almost definitely a bad idea, but an interesting question nonetheless. What if only players on offense wore the pads and helmets? Besides the obvious issues on turnover plays, it would be very interesting.
No rushing on a field goal attempt. Because, well, why bother? Just stupid action for the sake of the a mistake that almost never happens. I wasn't clear about what happens in the event of that mistake, but I'm guessing possession goes to the defending team.
In the last two minutes, clock stopping unless the offense makes one yard. This is great! I say no time outs in the last minute either, with the clock stopping automatically each down that doesn't make one yard. It'd put some urgency into the game, and stop so many knees running down the clock. Your only option is to run the clock down during game time, or try to move it forward.
Also they should pay players more not by which team wins, but for the winning team, plus a bonus to the team based on yards covered by offense, minus yards by the other team's offense, plus some bonuses for touchdowns and successful kicks. This would mean that every yard counts in the Pro Bowl, so they all try a little bit harder!
This wasn't my idea, but it sounds interesting to me. Require players to wrap up when making a tackle. Blocking, you've got to get your hands on him. Drive into a player with your shoulder or helmet, 15 yards. If you've got your arms around him, you're fine. I think Goodell wouldn't even consider enacting this, but it's less drastic a change than no pads.
Also Luke: rushing on a field goal attempt is actually a big deal, even if they don't actually block it. On a kickoff, kickers can often blast it through the goalposts. If you put them under time pressure to get the kick off and at a high angle, their range shortens considerably.
For example, how about playing the Pro Bowl last year without any armor or helmets on the top half of the body. And all tackles have to be made on the lower half of the body. That means that only unprotected parts of the body (the top half) can attack only protected parts of the body (the waist down).
That still may not help much. You may still be able to do a vicious knee attack that results in a torn ACL or something.
Oddly enough, there happened to be Rugby Sevens on TV this past weekend and I watched some of it out of curiosity. One interesting thing about it (and rugby in general, at least as far as I can tell from my limited knowledge) is that they have very strict tackling rules so as the game can still be quite physical but injuries are somewhat limited despite not wearing all the armor that your typical American football player wears. For example, apparently you're only allowed to tackle between the waist and shoulders and you have to wrap up -- no spearing with your head or anything like that. It makes me wonder if American football should maybe go back more to its rugby roots in order to deal with some of the injury problems.
It'd put some urgency into the game, and stop so many knees running down the clock. Your only option is to run the clock down during game time, or try to move it forward.
Actually, the kneel down to let the clock run is a relatively recent rule/strategy that dates back to the 80's. It wasn't really done or allowed before then.
Basically, there was a game between the New York Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles where the Giants ended up losing the game on a fumble due to not doing a kneel down. After that game, the kneel down become acceptable strategy in the NFL.
Comments
I can't quite put a finger in why but Seattle fans have really gotten on my nerves this year. I think a large part of it is the upswell of fair weather fans but there is more to it. It's not unbearable, just slightly annoying. But I'd much rather be slightly annoyed at the SeaChickens than have to deal with New England or Chicago fans. :-D
The only reason I'm a Seahawks fan is because my girlfriends brother keeps taking me to home games and they're pretty fun. So I'll root for them also since I live here and don't give a shit about other cities seems like an okay choice.
The reason Jets home game attendance is low is because they are a disgrace. They can't give those tickets away. Hopefully they'll just go bankrupt and move to another city.
The reason Giants attendance is low is because they are so high class that almost all of the tickets belong to corporations, ticket brokers, and rich people who aren't necessarily die hard fans. Not all those tickets get used if nobody buys them on StubHub for a zillion dollars.
For what it's worth, I'd rather have crazy postgame interviews where people actually say something of substance. I totally understand why an individual wouldn't want to, though. Just wish it happened more.
I was just talking about Leaf today with a coworker. I totally forgot what happened to him. I read the wiki and laughed.
Edit: So Goodell is considering of getting rid of the 1 point field goal kick after TDs. It's interesting, but at the same time I don't think it will be popular.
Anyway, I'm not going to dispute the claim that a lot of recent fans are fair weather because it's true. And they can be quite annoying, but that's why I don't pay attention to them. I just watch the games and enjoy them.
There's actually double history aspects. Not only is it that a team has history, but a fan has a personal history. My parents are Rangers/Mets/Giants fans. My grandparents are Rangers/Mets(Brooklyn Dodgers)/Giants fans. My great grandparents got off a boat in NYC and had a valid reason to be fans of NYC teams.
Meanwhile some people out there are fans of expansion teams that were created yesterday. It's hard to respect someone who just decided to be a fan of a team when it starts winning, or if it has no history whatsoever. There's nothing to grab onto.
I'm a Red Wings fan, but I will root for the Rangers unless they're in direct competition.
I'm a Lions fan because why not?
I care not at all for any particular basketball team.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacers–Pistons_brawl
Otherwise... Yeah, probably not so great.
And yet I feel like I'm watching the future of American Football. This match could be played without helmets, and everyone would be fine. The players would probably have way few concussions and injuries than with helmets.
And so, because I don't think the NFL will last more than 10 more years without changing its policies in regards to player safety, the Pro Bowl could become a good test venue for future improvements in this regard.
For example, how about playing the Pro Bowl last year without any armor or helmets on the top half of the body. And all tackles have to be made on the lower half of the body. That means that only unprotected parts of the body (the top half) can attack only protected parts of the body (the waist down).
This COULD be an interesting game, but played with the same care for health. It feels like a game is broken if the only way to play it properly is to break opponents' bodies. The basketball Allstars game doesn't have this problem.
I've said this before, but all you really have to do to fix NFL football is to remove all the helmets and armor. If you're not wearing a helmet yourself, you're not going to slam your head into some other dude. The problem is that until players unlearn what they have learned, there will be carnage of teeth, blood, and whatnot. I'm sure that playing AFL or Rugby isn't great for your body, but they don't seem to be having the same issues the NFL is having. The protective equipment used in the NFL is actually a violent weapon.
Another thought I had. Almost definitely a bad idea, but an interesting question nonetheless. What if only players on offense wore the pads and helmets? Besides the obvious issues on turnover plays, it would be very interesting.
No rushing on a field goal attempt. Because, well, why bother? Just stupid action for the sake of the a mistake that almost never happens. I wasn't clear about what happens in the event of that mistake, but I'm guessing possession goes to the defending team.
In the last two minutes, clock stopping unless the offense makes one yard. This is great! I say no time outs in the last minute either, with the clock stopping automatically each down that doesn't make one yard. It'd put some urgency into the game, and stop so many knees running down the clock. Your only option is to run the clock down during game time, or try to move it forward.
Also they should pay players more not by which team wins, but for the winning team, plus a bonus to the team based on yards covered by offense, minus yards by the other team's offense, plus some bonuses for touchdowns and successful kicks. This would mean that every yard counts in the Pro Bowl, so they all try a little bit harder!
Also Luke: rushing on a field goal attempt is actually a big deal, even if they don't actually block it. On a kickoff, kickers can often blast it through the goalposts. If you put them under time pressure to get the kick off and at a high angle, their range shortens considerably.
Oddly enough, there happened to be Rugby Sevens on TV this past weekend and I watched some of it out of curiosity. One interesting thing about it (and rugby in general, at least as far as I can tell from my limited knowledge) is that they have very strict tackling rules so as the game can still be quite physical but injuries are somewhat limited despite not wearing all the armor that your typical American football player wears. For example, apparently you're only allowed to tackle between the waist and shoulders and you have to wrap up -- no spearing with your head or anything like that. It makes me wonder if American football should maybe go back more to its rugby roots in order to deal with some of the injury problems. Actually, the kneel down to let the clock run is a relatively recent rule/strategy that dates back to the 80's. It wasn't really done or allowed before then.
Basically, there was a game between the New York Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles where the Giants ended up losing the game on a fumble due to not doing a kneel down. After that game, the kneel down become acceptable strategy in the NFL.