...designed to provoke some middle of the off season discussion...and to make ME feel better.
1. Something Mike Vrabel said struck me as a prime example of how out of touch today's professional athlete is with financial reality....and HE'S one of the good guys. In case you didn't read it, Vrabel was discussing several issues as it affects the player's union, since he is one of the team's reps. The quote concerns the issue of Franchising. This quote was in reference to what the Players view as one of the hardships caused by getting hit with the tag.
"I hope he does and gets the security that he deserves and he's earned"
Here's my problem: If $7.89 MILLION can't provide LIFETIME security, then how the ***** will the rest of us manage. Now of course anyone can blow through millions, but it ISN'T the responsibility of the NFL to guarantee a lifetime supply of money regardless of how one spends it.
ANY player hit with a Franchise tag should be thrilled because that would mean that as soon as he signed the tender, he would ensured all the financial "security" any prudent man could expect in a lifetime. So don't give that security BS, because it doesn't wash. Irritation about getting the the franchise tag isn't about getting ENOUGH, its about getting THE MOST.
IMHO the Union shouldn't be worried about the problems of 6 or so guys who will be making the most money in the league, even with tag, but should concentrated on the issues the MAJORITY of the players deal with (medical coverage, field conditions, education, post career support, etc. and MOST importantly taking care of the older retired members of the union who rarely made in their entire career what amounts to ONE YEAR at the minimum wage in the NFL today
BTW - this isn't an indictment of Vrabel. He is, by and large, very reasoned in most of his comments. BUT it just goes to show you how far apart the gap between fan and player has grown, when EVEN the most reasonable among them, can't see that gap.
2. Someone help me here, I can't decide which word best describes Michael Felger these days. "Gratutitous" or "disingenuous"
He seemed to be willing to suck in all the glory and notiriety when he "broke" the Moss to the Packer story, yet when proved wrong (or as Ron Borges would claim, being 'right' at the time), there was no Mea Culpa, just a report that "no deal was immenent". How come these reporters get to make mistakes at will, with no apparent consequence, yet if a player makes a mistake, on the field or off, the reporter will often harp on that mistake MERCILESSLY....and forever
I couldn't help, after reading Felger's story today about keeping Troy Brown, how gratuitous it was. We all love Troy. He is the most popular Patriot beyond Tom Brady. I even could understand the piece except for his uncalled for shot at the FO. As one of my KFFL bretheren commented, he seemed to be sucking up to Pats fandom inorder to deflect attention from his own shoddy reporting lately. To me he moves further and further to the dark side. Just another self promoting hack, who not longer has any contacts within the team to add ANY meaningful information, that I can't get here....faster....and more accurately.
3. I also thought Felger's relating the story on Stallworth's brush with Miami Beach PD was more than I needed to know. Nothing in it was revealing...except the fact that Stallworth owns a Bently. I did find THAT disturbing.
4. This team is shaping up to be the most talented team the Pats will ever put out on the field. Will it the most talented team in the league? Probably not. Will it mean we WILL win the superbowl. Definitely not! Of all the teams in the NFL, the Patriots, and their fans, should know that the most talented team DOESN'T neccessarily win it all. Just the best T-E-A-M. All these off season manuevers ONLY mean that the Pats are in a position where they CAN win the superbowl next season.
5. On the negative side, I think next season presents a HUGE challenge. Our schedule is AWFULLY tough, and I HATE having face it PLUS having to have 5 exhibition games and going to China in August. I hate the exhaustion it will entail, I hate the distruption to the normal routine, and I will really get pissed if the league forces the Pats to go through that and THEN begin the season 2 day early to play Indy in the opener. BELIEVE ME, going 12-4 next season, will represent a MUCH BIGGER accomplishment than going 12-4 this past season
6. RULES CHANGES: Since the league has been talking about potential rules changes, I thought I add my personal list to add to the discussion. Let me know what you think, pro or con on each
1. I totally agree with the changing the PI rule to include a major and minor infraction. I also want the league to instruct the refs inforce more strictly the "catchable ball" aspect of the penalty.
2. I want to ELIMINATE or change the illegal contact rule. IMO, there has to be 2 things to happen before the flag would be thrown. a. contact has to be made after 5 yards, and b. the route was actually interferred with. Mere incidental contact or touching WOULDN'T be a penalty. This is especially true if the incident occurred AWAY from the play.
3. I would totally eliminate the holding call on defensive linemen. Defensive lineman are allowed to use their hand...period. Pulling an OL to creat a seam, seems like a perfectly reasonable strategy to me.
4. And to those who think I only favor rule changes that help the defense, I want to stop the clock in the last 2 minutes of each half when a first down is made. Why penalize the offense after they make a successfull play. It adds so much to the college game, the only reason I can think of for the NFL NOT to do this, is that that want the game to have as few plays as possible,
5. In the same vein, I see no reason why it should take 45 seconds for a professional team to get a play off, when colleges do just fine with 24 seconds. So I, in the interest of compromise, propose to shorten the time between plays to 35 seconds. The teams are making more money, the Player are getting more money, what is wrong with me wanting to see a few more plays
6. I am against the universal use of instant replay to review ALL penalty calls. The game is played by humans and there are mistakes made by the players all the time. First you would emasculate the refs, and secondly the game would take much too long.
That being said, I would propose that ALL penalties are reviewable, but the team is the only one who can challenge a penalty, and I would now give the coaches 3 challenges That would put the onus on the team to challenge ONLY the "crutial" and/or the most eggregious mistakes. It would also add to the pleasre fans derive from second guessing coaches' decisions.
7. I propose that instant replay be done up in the booth instead of down on the field. It would shorten the time a challenge takes, and is a much more efficient way to resolve a call. The colleges have already developed the technology.
Finally the last two are probably quixotic, but they are my personal pet peeves so I'll offer them anyway.
8. I would eliminate the rule that states the ground can't cause a fumble. I have always wondered...WHY NOT? Isn't the "ground" part of the action. We don't give do overs when a player slips on the "ground". We don't call of games when the condition of the "ground" affects the outcome of a game. IMHO it is up to the player to be in control of the ball when the whistle blows, despite any contact from defensive players or the field. First it will eliminate the usual contraversy that that play generally causes. Second, fumbles are among the most exciting plays in football, we should welcome more of them. Thirdly, it would vastly speed up the pace of the game, by eliminating the usual challenges that are associated with this play.
9. I would eliminate the "breaking the plane" section of what it takes to score a TD. It is one of the most infuriating aspects of THE most important part of the game. In order to score a TD the offensive team SHOULD be required to get the ball INTO the endzone, ergo TOUCH the ball down ACCROSS the GL. Merely reaching accross and being thrown back just WOULDN'T cut it any more. What this rule does is to force the offense to make a good play in order to score. Actually move the ball INTO the endzone.
Even when the Pats score on one of those plays where the runner winds up on the one, but he so called "crossed the plane" leave me vexed and unsatisfied. Gone would be all the contraversial calls. Gone would be the bad plays that wind up with TDs anyway. Gone would be the swan dive. Good Defense would be rewarded and Officials will have an easier job making a definitive call.
Well that's the way I see it. I hope you all enjoyed St. Patricks day (Evacuation Day in Suffolk County - celebrating the British leaving Boston during the Revolutionary War, for those who might not know )
idle thoughts
Linear Mode
