Playing Devil's Advocate here, do you really believe that the league is a less competitive watered down version of what it was 30-40 years ago?
I would not say less competitive, because that's a perception thing.
But, it is certainly watered down. QB rules alone have heavily favored offenses. Is the guy a football player or not? It seems more and more like QBs are given a bubble around them, and while some rules are understandable (i.e. hits below the knee), others are just making defenders play less aggressive than they were in the 1970's and '80's.
I just disclaimer right now that I'm a BIG fan of great defenses, so this is my perspective.
Here's a good article from five years ago, and the rules are just getting more and more about protecting the marque players....errrr...QBs:
NFL rules about hitting the QB handcuffing defenders
•Questionable calls. Flags have been thrown in cases when defenders seemed unable to stop momentum.
•Passive grasps. Some defenders in position to tackle quarterbacks let them slip away because they feared a penalty.
----------------------
"It's almost like a punter, where you just try to avoid the guy," Smith said.
Roughing-the-passer is a judgment call. Mike Pereira, NFL director of officials, is clear on how crews should lean: "When in doubt, do make the call."
Do we really want defenders treating QBs like freakin' punters?? That's certainly not our dad's NFL, no doubt about it.
And another more recent article:
Peyton Manning: Consecutive QB Start Streak Record Will Soon Be Unimpressive
Peyton Manning made his 200th career and consecutive start yesterday, but unfortunately for him it came with a loss. And as we all know, his start streak is the second-longest in NFL history. But if, and when, he breaks Brett Favre's record, it won't be as impressive.
With the current "safety" rules in place in the NFL that are strictly enforced for the quarterback, it seems as if Peyton Manning will never get hurt. This all came to my attention after watching the Colts-Eagles game yesterday afternoon when on a fourth- and-18 late in the fourth quarter, Trent Cole was penalized for grazing Manning's helmet.
Now I do think some of the safety rules are valid, such as clearly hitting a defenseless player. But it is obvious from the above articles and others that officials are to call the benefit of the doubt for QBs, thus watering down defenses.
There is more parity now, the players are bigger, faster, stronger, etc.
Some folks see parity as equalling mediocrity.
I used to be a fan of parity. But honestly, after a decade as a Texans fan, we haven't seen any benefits of so-called parity. I'm not so sold on it these days.
Either way, it's good for business, as clearly revealed by increased ratings.
Is there more parity? This is from the 2009 season:
In N.F.L., Parity Is Taking a Turn for the Worse
In a league celebrated for its competitive balance, in which coaches say that games come down to “inches” and are won or lost on a “handful” of plays, the bottom of the standings has ballooned with more teams that appear worse than usual.
----------------------
In the N.F.L., this is not supposed to happen. With revenue sharing, the salary cap, draft rules that reward the highest draft selections to the teams with the worst records and schedules based, in part, on the previous season’s results, the standings are supposed to be swollen in the middle, filled with competitive teams fighting for playoff spots.
Parity, they call this concept that is highlighted toward the end of every season. So where is it?
As far as your other point, that "players are bigger, faster, stronger", this actually supports the notion that they are at a higher risk of injury as a result of being bigger, faster, stronger.
Concussions are more prevalent today, both because they are better diagnosed, but also because players are hitting and getting hit harder than ever due to the increase in size, weight, and strength.
And let's not forget that while you can increase your muscles, you cannot increase the strength of your joints. The torque put on knees is much greater today than before due to the increase in mass and strength (plus speed). Logically, this tends to lead to more injuries, which waters down the product because the top talent is more spread about among teams (which will only continue to trend if they expand the league).
NFL injuries cause concern as league evolves
“I think the game is unsafer. Just look at the physicalness of football now. Athletes are bigger and stronger and faster, and mass media has the effect of glamorizing big hits, and it increases risks of concussions,” said Dr. Adam Shunk, a neuropsychologist at St. Vincent Sports Performance Center in Indianapolis, in an Associated Press article. Training equipment maximizes a player’s ability to build muscle and gain more athletic ability.
Now it would seem a contradiction to point out the increased safety rules for QBs while also revealing the increase in injury statistics, but the key point here is that the league is heavily favoring one position over the others. QBs are highly protected because they help sell tickets. And it is this heavy marketing angle that starts to differentiate between today's game and the football that we grew up on.
I personally feel that the league is a constantly evolving force, which will change to meet whatever demands are put on it. 18 game season? Players with less injury problems and better endurance will start to replace higher risk players. Sure, you might lose guys like Bob Sanders, but is this a bad thing? On the one hand you never get to experience his amazing play in short bursts. But on the other hand teams won't take the chance on a guy who only gives you 5-6 games a year. So you'll get someone who is less talented but more consistent coming in.
I understand where you are coming from, but there is a breaking point somewhere. There cannot be an infinity placed on the game, where extending the season and diluting the talent has no implications on the product.
Now, instead of multiple dynasties of the past, we have wars of attrition, where injury reports are much more of an impact on the game because bench talent is nowhere near the level that it was 30 years ago.
Teams like the Patriots and Colts excel because they have elite QBs - who are already highly protected by the league - exploiting the weakness of teams often decimated by injuries or teams just not good because there are simply not enough good secondary players to go around. Add to that the hogtied rules of defenders as it relates to interference, holding, and zone hits, and defenses are clearly being weakened in order to continue the trend of increasing scores which is directly correlated to ratings numbers.
I'm not criticizing the NFL here, at least that's not my objective. It's a good product, but it's not our dad's NFL anymore. And I can see a point 10-20 years from now when some fundamental aspects have shifted so much that it's not even my NFL anymore.
That's not a "good" or "bad" thing, but like you said, it's an evolution that I can either accept or reject. JMO
