PDA

View Full Version : How to kill the NFL


Tedc
10-15-2007, 06:41 AM
Roger Goodell say he will study a plan to put receivers in offensive players helmets to combat crowd noise and reduce the home field advantage.

"EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J.--Roger Goodell said today that one of the issues he's studying in his early days as NFL commissioner is whether the league should take steps to nullify the competitive advantage that some teams get from crowd noise in their home stadiums.

In an afternoon meeting with reporters at Giants Stadium, Goodell said he loves having loud, enthusiastic crowds at games but wonders whether the offenses of visiting clubs should have to suffer when their players can't hear quarterbacks' signals. Goodell said that he and members of the league's competition committee will study possible remedies, including a suggestion to place radio receivers in the helmets of other offensive players so that they can hear the quarterback over the crowd noise."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/nflinsider/2006/09/commissioner_says_hell_study_p.html


This is one way to take the passion out of the game experience. Does anyone know an e-mail for Goodell??:bat: :bat:

Thorn
10-15-2007, 07:06 AM
This is absolute idiocy. I canít believe Iím reading this.

If this is the case, why not just put receivers in all the playersí helmets? Maybe the Texans will play better if they are listening to their favorite songs on the field.

mancunian
10-15-2007, 07:20 AM
Crowd is noise is part of the game, and each team has 8 at home and 8 away. No need for that.

Buffi2
10-15-2007, 07:22 AM
Does anyone know an e-mail for Goodell??:bat: :bat:

I wouldn't stake my life on this being a valid address - but this is what I found on a couple of animal rights websites.

Roger.Goodell2@nfl.net

This is a very bad idea, imo.

Marcus
10-15-2007, 07:40 AM
Oh I dunno . .

Being since those dumbasses at Reliant don't know how to keep their traps shut while our own offense is on the field, I'm thinking this is a good thing.

Put me down for a 'yea'.

Malloy
10-15-2007, 08:27 AM
Make it for all players then... no reason to hurt defense with even more rules aimed at protecting recievers.

dannyboy
10-15-2007, 08:42 AM
As bad as this idea is, and it's pretty bad, it's nowhere near as bad as his idea of adding a 17th game to the schedule and making each team play one regular season game overseas.

Once that happens, making the season longer, they can change the overtime rules to make the games longer. Then we can see some real injuries pile up.

There will be 2 teams signing QBs on Wednesday to play on Sunday every week like there was this past week. Gotta throw in the excessively long suspensions too.

Plenty of 4th string QBs handing off to 4th string RBs to look forward to in the NFL of the future.

SheTexan
10-15-2007, 08:50 AM
Just makes me long for the good old days, before the NFL decided to take away all the fun. They keep this garbage up and fans will have more fun sitting in front of huge plasma TVs, either at home or in a bar, then spending a small fortune to attend a game.

IMHO, I think they should ban ALL electronic receivers. Let the boys go out and play the damn game the old fashioned way. THe NFL has messed with the game enough as it is. Leave it to hell alone!! JMO!!

real
10-15-2007, 08:51 AM
From a players point of view, I think they'd love it.

But part of the fan experience is trying to be as loud as you can to make the opposing offense make mistakes...

I dunno...

jaayteetx
10-15-2007, 08:59 AM
Remember when they used to try to quiet the crowd by giving the home team a penalty? Ya, this is just as stupid. This is the one way fans feel they can influence a game and be part of the team. They pay their hard earn money to go into the game, they should be able to do it. The fans are the reason this game is around, they better never forget that or it will turn into the NBA!

Porky
10-15-2007, 09:17 AM
Stupid idea Goddell. The fans pay your salary, as well as the players salary. The game is too sanitized as it is for my tastes. The home field advantage is part of the game and should remain so. Every team has 8 home games, so it's not as if there is an unfair advantage.

Texans_Chick
10-15-2007, 10:48 AM
I do not have Goodell's address.

But I wrote this for you, Ted.

Roger Goodell Wants To Make Fans Irrelevant (http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/10/15/roger-goodell-wants-to-make-fans-irrelevant/)

Please I urge those of you who care about this issue to leave a comment. (The comment thing asks to leave an email address, but AOL doesn't use that for anything so no worries). I know that the NFL folks read FanHouse--I came about *this* close to getting an interview with someone from the league office about the 45 second rule with video content.

So, there is an email this function at the bottom of the article. Feel free to email it to those you think can make sure they don't change things.

But please leave a comment on the article. Doesn't need to be much. Individuals working together can make a difference. That's what home field advantage is all about.

Errant Hothy
10-15-2007, 10:51 AM
Well since the competition comittee is made up mainly of owners and coaches, both groups who want to win, I doubt they would approve this.

Now, I'm not opposed to making sure there is no "artifical: crows noise.

Double Barrel
10-15-2007, 11:15 AM
Our defense never seems able to stop a 3rd and long no matter how loud we are as fans. I'm up in the air if 'homefield advantage' is all that.

The flip side of this issue is that our offense will have the same advantage going into opponents stadiums, so it can help us, as well.

real
10-15-2007, 11:18 AM
I can see this getting approved...

Most of the time crowd noise causes false starts, not really mistakes by the recievers so much...

So in essence it still wouldn't change that much...

It'd just make it easier for the QB's and recievers to communicate...Instead of the reciever having to come to the tackle box to hear what the QB is saying , he can can just hear it in his ear piece....But offensive linemen would still false start because of not being able to hear the cadence...

Not that big a deal now that I think about it...

BigBull17
10-15-2007, 11:26 AM
This is one way to take the passion out of the game experience. Does anyone know an e-mail for Goodell??:bat: :bat: [/QUOTE]

Um, patsfan899009@nfl.com?

Texans_Chick
10-15-2007, 11:53 AM
I can see this getting approved...

Most of the time crowd noise causes false starts, not really mistakes by the recievers so much...

So in essence it still wouldn't change that much...

It'd just make it easier for the QB's and recievers to communicate...Instead of the reciever having to come to the tackle box to hear what the QB is saying , he can can just hear it in his ear piece....But offensive linemen would still false start because of not being able to hear the cadence...

Not that big a deal now that I think about it...

They are not just studying the putting receivers in offensive player's helmets, they are studying ALL WAYS of reducing crowd noise effects on opposing players. This might end up being one of those changes that happens, before anyone has a chance to really beyotch about it.

As for the Texans defense not being helped by crowd noise on 3rd downs, I sure as heck hope that this is a temporary thing and not something that will plague the Texans for the rest of their existence.

I truly believe that any thing that they would do beyond what is already in place to reduce the effect of crowd noise on visiting offenses, would take away some of the emotion of the game.

Texans_Chick
10-15-2007, 11:54 AM
Well since the competition comittee is made up mainly of owners and coaches, both groups who want to win, I doubt they would approve this.

Now, I'm not opposed to making sure there is no "artifical: crows noise.

As long as the playing field is level, why should they care? Maybe the teams with better home field advantages would.

The owners watch the games from luxury boxes. That's a different experience than trying to yell to get a team to false start, or call a time out.

powerfuldragon
10-15-2007, 12:01 PM
Lame idea and i'm flabbergasted that Goodell would even waste his time entertaining this notion.

Errant Hothy
10-15-2007, 12:01 PM
As long as the playing field is level, why should they care? Maybe the teams with better home field advantages would.

The owners watch the games from luxury boxes. That's a different experience than trying to yell to get a team to false start, or call a time out.

I think owners like Jerry Jones and coaches like BB would certainly care.

They know when the fans are responsible for causing a false start or a delay of game, and they know that those penalties can help there team win; which is what they care most about in the world. Plus it would remove a competitive advantage they get from 8 of there games every year, and I don't think they (the owners and coaches) would go for that.

I also think that the competition comittee would point to the fact taht the problems caused by crowed noise can be over come, and routinly are be the better coached teams in the NFL.

In theory the advantage gained from being at home is equal for everyteam, as they all get 8 home games.

real
10-15-2007, 12:12 PM
In theory the advantage gained from being at home is equal for everyteam, as they all get 8 home games.

I don't think that's really true...

1) teams that play indoors will have more noise
2) teams with more fans will have more noise


Teams like Jacksonville never really gain a competitive advantage at home because of crowd noise, while teams like the Colts get huge advantages from their crowd and arena


And I didn't realize they were trying to totally reduce all noise for all the players...that's dumb...

Texans_Chick
10-15-2007, 12:19 PM
I think owners like Jerry Jones and coaches like BB would certainly care.

They know when the fans are responsible for causing a false start or a delay of game, and they know that those penalties can help there team win; which is what they care most about in the world. Plus it would remove a competitive advantage they get from 8 of there games every year, and I don't think they (the owners and coaches) would go for that.

I also think that the competition comittee would point to the fact taht the problems caused by crowed noise can be over come, and routinly are be the better coached teams in the NFL.

In theory the advantage gained from being at home is equal for everyteam, as they all get 8 home games.

Some teams have much more educated fans and better home field advantages.

I don't know who is promoting this idea--maybe people that really hate playing in Indy--but I really don't think it is a great idea for the NFL at all, and send a horrible message to fans.

DerekLee1
10-15-2007, 01:30 PM
What would be the point of attending games if home field advantage wasn't an issue? Jeez, they've already taken the SuperBowl away from fans; now they want to take away the rest of the season as well?

Speedy
10-15-2007, 02:23 PM
Is there really that much of a home field advantage?? Sure, the home team so far this season has won 52 and lost 36, but when you look at the teams, the winning teams win anywhere and the losing teams lose anywhere.

Teams with a winning record have a 24-10 record ON THE ROAD. Teams with a losing record have a 10-22 record AT HOME.

I don't think "home field advantage" is really all that big a deal. The good teams win and the bad teams lose, no matter where they're playing.

This earpiece in the helmets is stupid. I don't even want the QB to have one. Get your butt on the field and play football. This isn't a Madden video game.

Do we need to start giving a pitcher in baseball an earpiece so the manager can tell him what pitch to throw next? Play the freaking game. If you can't handle noise, then you didn't prepare yourself very well and you probably lose a lot of games.

Tedc
10-15-2007, 02:42 PM
Is there really that much of a home field advantage?? Sure, the home team so far this season has won 52 and lost 36, but when you look at the teams, the winning teams win anywhere and the losing teams lose anywhere.

Teams with a winning record have a 24-10 record ON THE ROAD. Teams with a losing record have a 10-22 record AT HOME.

I don't think "home field advantage" is really all that big a deal. The good teams win and the bad teams lose, no matter where they're playing.

This earpiece in the helmets is stupid. I don't even want the QB to have one. Get your butt on the field and play football. This isn't a Madden video game.

Do we need to start giving a pitcher in baseball an earpiece so the manager can tell him what pitch to throw next? Play the freaking game. If you can't handle noise, then you didn't prepare yourself very well and you probably lose a lot of games.

If there wasn't an advantage, they wouldn't be considering it. Imagine the cost of this proposal. Every offensive helmet would have a receiver. It is mind boggling.

If there wasn't such of an advantage, Vegas wouldn't be giving an automatic 3 points to a home team.

real
10-15-2007, 02:48 PM
You guys are missing the point IMO...

It isn't about whether or not homefield gives an advantage...That much is obvious...


It's more about the fact that some teams have more of a homefield advantage...

Like homefield advantage for the Colts is not the same as homefield advantage for the Jags...

Even if each team has 8 home games, for those eight games the Colts will be playing in front of fans that know how to be rabid and cause opposing teams problems, and shut up while their offense is at work...

In the meanwhile the Jags will be playing in front of tarps...

Same thing for us in Houston...We have fans that don't understand when to make noise and when not to...

Tedc
10-15-2007, 02:57 PM
You guys are missing the point IMO...

It isn't about whether or not homefield gives an advantage...That much is obvious...


It's more about the fact that some teams have more of a homefield advantage...

Like homefield advantage for the Colts is not the same as homefield advantage for the Jags...

But each team has the ability to have the same HFA.

I'd like to think that one day our fans will learn how to act at games. We have the same potential for HFA.

TexansSeminole
10-15-2007, 03:02 PM
Oh I dunno . .

Being since those dumbasses at Reliant don't know how to keep their traps shut while our own offense is on the field, I'm thinking this is a good thing.

Put me down for a 'yea'.

I never understood why fans do this. I have seen it at Texans games, and it is even worse at the Florida State games. I feel like punching people around me who are making noise for the sake of making noise while our offense is on the field. It makes me think of all the knowledgable football fans I know that could be in their seat.

real
10-15-2007, 03:05 PM
But each team has the ability to have the same HFA.

I'd like to think that one day our fans will learn how to act at games. We have the same potential for HFA.

Well...not really...

Some cities are just more populated so they will have more people attend the games...

Some teams have indoor stadiums while others are outside....

The only way for homefield advatage to truly be equal would be for every stadium to hold the same amount of fans, have the same amount of acoustic properties, and for all the fans to cheer in the same mannner...loud on defense, quiet on offense....That isn't logical....

But a lot of folks like that unequalness and just feel it's a part of football...Deal with it....A lot of people like the feeling of having some kind of impact on the game....getting their players hyped...causing confusion for opposing teams...

I dunno...I really don't care either way...I think both are good ideas...


Maybe for the regular season they could play with the ear pieces and then for the play-offs take them out...That'd mean if you had gotten home-field in the play-offs you earned it by beating everyone on an equal playing field...so now you earned the right for the fans to really count when it really matters...LOL

TexansSeminole
10-15-2007, 03:05 PM
You guys are missing the point IMO...

It isn't about whether or not homefield gives an advantage...That much is obvious...


It's more about the fact that some teams have more of a homefield advantage...

Like homefield advantage for the Colts is not the same as homefield advantage for the Jags...

Even if each team has 8 home games, for those eight games the Colts will be playing in front of fans that know how to be rabid and cause opposing teams problems, and shut up while their offense is at work...

In the meanwhile the Jags will be playing in front of tarps...

Same thing for us in Houston...We have fans that don't understand when to make noise and when not to...

In my opinion, you have got to let these advantages continue. What's the point in helping teams that have less attendance and less knowledgable fans? Why take away an advantage that is gained because of the team's fans? That seems to take too much away from the game to me. It's too bad that most of the people that go to the Texans games are not football smart, and make noise while we are on offense, but that is our fault.

Tedc
10-15-2007, 03:08 PM
Maybe for the regular season they could play with the ear pieces and then for the play-offs take them out...That'd mean if you had gotten home-field in the play-offs you earned it by beating everyone on an equal playing field...LOL

Please don't tell that to Goodell.

Bad idea.

Speedy
10-15-2007, 03:15 PM
If there wasn't an advantage, they wouldn't be considering it. Imagine the cost of this proposal. Every offensive helmet would have a receiver. It is mind boggling.

If there wasn't such of an advantage, Vegas wouldn't be giving an automatic 3 points to a home team.

I understand that. And like I mentioned, the home teams are 52-36 this season.

I just think that this plays more for the average teams than it does for the good teams, who will win at home or on the road, or the bad teams who will lose at home or on the road. I don't care how loud the Edward Jones Dome gets, it isn't going to help St. Louis win a football game.

It can be argued that Reliant is one of the loudest places in the NFL. How has that really helped the Texans? We're 14-26 at home. Of course that's better than our road record, so there is something to home field advantage, I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just to what degree. Is it really as big a difference as people, media, Vegas, make it out to be?

real
10-15-2007, 03:23 PM
In my opinion, you have got to let these advantages continue. What's the point in helping teams that have less attendance and less knowledgable fans? Why take away an advantage that is gained because of the team's fans? That seems to take too much away from the game to me. It's too bad that most of the people that go to the Texans games are not football smart, and make noise while we are on offense, but that is our fault.

Because the NFL is a business...

If I'm the owner of a franchise I don't want the next man to have a leg up on me because of circumstances beyond my control....

TexansLucky13
10-15-2007, 03:28 PM
Goodell confuses me. He is ultra-conservative when it comes to player conduct, but ultra-liberal when it comes to rule changes.

This can't turn out good.

Texans_Chick
10-15-2007, 03:33 PM
I understand that. And like I mentioned, the home teams are 52-36 this season.

I just think that this plays more for the average teams than it does for the good teams, who will win at home or on the road, or the bad teams who will lose at home or on the road. I don't care how loud the Edward Jones Dome gets, it isn't going to help St. Louis win a football game.

It can be argued that Reliant is one of the loudest places in the NFL. How has that really helped the Texans? We're 14-26 at home. Of course that's better than our road record, so there is something to home field advantage, I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just to what degree. Is it really as big a difference as people, media, Vegas, make it out to be?

I think there is an advantage. My favorite points in home games are when it is so loud the other team false starts or has to call a time out they don't want to. After that happens, you can see fans high fiving each other, happy that they could play a part.

Being an NFL fan means that you wish you could bust heads on the field but you can't. So you do the next best thing and scream your head off to try to help your team win.

And I don't see how eliminating that personal connection with your team helps make the league better. Home field advantage is part of the NFL mythology and tradition, and minimizing that is a slap in the face to those fans who try to do their part.

I believe fans make a difference, but whether or not they do, the fact that they believe that they make a difference matters in the game viewing experience.

Nobody wants to go to Indy.

The Seahawks retired the number 12 to symbolize their 12th man.

And some day, I envision Reliant Stadium as the toughest place to play in the league. It's been that way at times, and I feel like that can happen again.

brakos82
10-15-2007, 05:34 PM
Does anyone know an e-mail for Goodell??:bat: :bat:

im-an-a-hole@nofunleague.com

ledzeppelin229
10-15-2007, 05:42 PM
I think there is an advantage. My favorite points in home games are when it is so loud the other team false starts or has to call a time out they don't want to. After that happens, you can see fans high fiving each other, happy that they could play a part.

Being an NFL fan means that you wish you could bust heads on the field but you can't. So you do the next best thing and scream your head off to try to help your team win.

And I don't see how eliminating that personal connection with your team helps make the league better. Home field advantage is part of the NFL mythology and tradition, and minimizing that is a slap in the face to those fans who try to do their part.

I believe fans make a difference, but whether or not they do, the fact that they believe that they make a difference matters in the game viewing experience.

Nobody wants to go to Indy.

The Seahawks retired the number 12 to symbolize their 12th man.

And some day, I envision Reliant Stadium as the toughest place to play in the league. It's been that way at times, and I feel like that can happen again.

When the defense is on a roll the place is rocking...it was really evident against KC when Mario had one sack and probably should have had a second (ball was thrown into the ground.)

If the stadium could get like that more often, it would become notorious pretty quickly.

hollywood_texan
10-15-2007, 05:45 PM
This may be a slippery slope thing, but false starts due to crowd noise is mainly due to offensive lineman, not wide receivers.

Personally, I don't like the idea, but I don't think it is really has bad as everyone thinks is if it doesn't carryover to the lineman.

But, if you start with WRs, then why not lineman?

My question is, why is this even being discussed?

Why is it a priorty of some sort?

Maybe they forsee just playing games for TV with no stadiums? That would save a lot of money...

Kaiser Toro
10-15-2007, 06:06 PM
I doubt fans will win a perceived no brainer upgrade for an operational enhancement, that still does not make it right. Home crowds in the NFL are important every game of the year, to the fan. I know no other sport like that. The game is an event and showing your fanaticism via body paint, designer clothes, yelling, waving your freak flag and being a good consumer is a win/win for the NFL, Texans, their partners, the city and the fans.

In my opinion you defeat this with FUD around crowd control, and potential law suits via fans becoming more pointed towards the players, coaches and visiting fans. All of that pent up aggression will be channeled within that stadium. It works now, and is part of a unique culture that polices itself.

In reference to discussions on home crowd noise..
I have never thought our stadium has been that loud when we have the ball. Occasionally, on our own 4th and short situations, you get some folks to erroneously cheer along with many visiting fans that seem to get more tickets when playing a team who has yet to have a winning record. But this is not about us, this is about the Cowboys' fans. They were real loud when the Cowboys had the ball and were pumped to show it. They freaked me out for the better part of the three hour tour to God's toilet in Irving.

Vinny
10-15-2007, 06:16 PM
My question is, why is this even being discussed?

Why is it a priorty of some sort?

Maybe they forsee just playing games for TV with no stadiums? That would save a lot of money...
Sloppy error prone football is hard to watch. I think they just want to bring a tighter product to the fans.