Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

The head injuries are just part of the game. Like I said, for every guy that's had issues there are hundreds that don't have issues.

Part of the game yes, but there are ways to help reduce them. The league owes that to the players for taking the risks that they do, even if the players don't appreciate it now, they will in the long run.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by rbanerjee23

I'm saying that its a lot more subjective than at first glance -- NFL fans are far from perfectly rational beings. Even if the suspensions and rules are good for the NFL in the bigger scheme of things, most negative feelings about rule changes, suspensions etc. are going to be directed towards Goodell who, for better or worse, is the face of the authoritative body of the league. When fans have a problem with a suspension, they are going to be mad at Goodell and feel that their team is being unfairly targeted, as would other fans in that situation. My personal belief is that increased negativity towards the commissioner is bad for the NFL. Do you honestly believe that fans feeling bad towards the commisioner is one city is perfectly balanced out by fans feeling good in another city?

I don't think it's a zero-sum game. No. But I also don't think that what fans think really should matter in this case.

[rbanerjee23]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I don't think it's a zero-sum game. No. But I also don't think that what fans think really should matter in this case.

Oh man, I don't want to get into a philosophical argument about whether it should matter -- for better or worse, I think it ultimately does.

[SmootSmack]

Ok. Agree to disagree then

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Like I said, for every guy that's had issues there are hundreds that don't have issues.

You have the data to support that argument?


Just because it's not reported, doesn't mean they haven't had issues.

[CrustyRedskin]

I really dont like the guy, but if he knew me he wouldnt like me either.

[mlmpetert]

Jack Del Rio: Kickoff change means lower-scoring games | ProFootballTalk

“If you back up the offense and start them on the 20, you’re going to reduce the chances of scoring,” Del Rio said on ESPN Radio. “So I think what’s going to happen is when they get done looking at this year they’re going to say, ‘Boy, scoring dropped. Wow. I wonder what caused that.’ Well, I think kickoffs are going to play a part in that.”

Del Rio is almost certainly right: There will be more touchbacks and fewer returned kickoffs, which means not only fewer return touchdowns but also fewer long returns that set up the offense in good field position. So that will make for less interesting games, unless you find touchbacks interesting.

“You’re going to watch the kicking team line up and then you’ll watch the offense get the ball at the 20,” Del Rio said. “That’s what’s going to happen the majority of the time. Unless you get a real strong breeze or something where the ball can’t go deep enough to not bring it out, you’re going to see a tremendous amount of balls staying in the end zone or kicked through the end zone, and the ball’s going to stay at the 20.”

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Part of the game yes, but there are ways to help reduce them. The league owes that to the players for taking the risks that they do, even if the players don't appreciate it now, they will in the long run.

I think putting in the horse collar rule was a good idea. Guys were getting bad leg injuries. But do you honestly think this kick off rule being moved up to the 35 is a good rule? Yes or no?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think putting in the horse collar rule was a good idea. Guys were getting bad leg injuries. But do you honestly think this kick off rule being moved up to the 35 is a good rule? Yes or no?

Is it a good rule as far as reducing injuries goes, I'm guessing it will be. Is it good for the game in terms of excitement and scoring? Probably not.

But if the league is serious about reducing injuries this is a low hanging fruit for them to pick off.

We'll see what the injury reduction is at the end of the year.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

But do you honestly think this kick off rule being moved up to the 35 is a good rule? Yes or no?

From safety perspective: Yes

From fan perspective: No


We as fans don't care about the players safety. We just want to be entertained.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You have the data to support that argument?


Just because it's not reported, doesn't mean they haven't had issues.

Of course I don't have data. It's common sense. All I'm saying is putting the kick offs back to the 35 was just awful, and like I said I haven't heard one former player or coach that likes the rul.e.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

From safety perspective: Yes

From fan perspective: No


We as fans don't care about the players safety. We just want to be entertained.

As I said, coach the guys up and make sure no heads are lowered.

[mlmpetert]

So from a saftey prespective yes
Fan's no
Player's no
Coach's no

If the play is deemed so dangerous they need to effectively render it useless why not just remove it and get rid of kickoffs? Why risk a players safety some of the time?

I guess i dont understand the purpose of changing the rules before making safety strides in other areas. I mean for God’s sake mouth guards are not mandatory. If you wear the wrong socks you get fined, if you don’t wear a mouth guard its okay???? Im sure some mouth guards are much better than others. A lot of concussions come from knees hitting the helmet, force players to wear knee pads and elbow pads, hip and thigh pads. Force players to wear certain helmets that are proven less risky. Force players to wear neck braces like Chris Samuels. Have a R&D department study safety gear. But making significant changes to the sport before doing any of these things seems completely backwards and ridiculous to me.

[Paintrain]

Overall I think he's good for the league but he's a bit heavy handed and not a great communicator. He can do a better job at explaining his reasoning behind rule changes and desiring changes to the game (18 games, plans for LA market, etc) but he's a little stiff. Some of his decisions on fines and discipline seem to be excessive also and he alienates players by those decisions.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

As I said, coach the guys up and make sure no heads are lowered.

Heads being lowered has nothing to do with this. A upper body impact can cause a concussion regardless if the head is involved or not. A person can have 100% correct form each and every time and they still have concussions.


Concussion - MayoClinic.com

Although concussions usually are caused by a blow to the head, they can also occur when the head and upper body are violently shaken.

Anytime you have a impact with your upper body (chest, shoulder), you can rest assure that your head will be jarred every single time. Regardless if it makes contact or not.