I'm with "living" here. Some NFL representative actually discussed the "optimal" points per game maybe a couple years ago, and they were right where they wanted to be.
I don't think we want more scoring, as a rule, and extending/"globalizing" the game will mean appealing to people used to thinking of 3-1 as a slaughter. In fact, to make a better analog for Europeans, they might want to do away with the extra point and field goals, and award a single point for a TD.
Of course, they won't. But you get the idea.
The year-round problem is a tough one. I would be a huge fan of some kind of "minor league" football, allied with the actual NFL - a farm system. Europe didn't work that way, of course. But it would be far superior to see marginal guys if they have a chance to "make it." Just make it a league where the annual rookie-deal salary structure (rookie, 1 yr vet, 2 yr vet minimums) pertain) but the money doesn't get better. You get stashed there, but if you don't make it in 3 years, well then you're a minor leaguer, period, and probably get pushed out soon enough. But the goal would be to develop guys who end up in the pros without screwing them financially (rookie money would still be around, whichever end you end up in.) And yes, play those rookie league games in the north, in Domes, whatever, March to (say) June. That would give minor league teams a big bump as their major league franchise allocates guys post-draft.
Hey, I didn't say I expect it, I said I liked it.
The globalization of the sport seems to be going another whole direction, now that the WLAF/NFL Europe/NFL Europa seems to be in less than perfect shape. Ship games over there a few at a time... what is phase III? Do they ever want to really see an "AFC Really East" and "NFC Really East," or an "AFC Far East" or an "NFC South Of the Border" division?
I personally do not get what the plan is here. Are they thinking they can create a fan base, without the fan rooting for his (even sort-of) local team?
I disagree that the game will be watered down to unrecognizability. I do think they put in new rules all the time to "protect" vulnerable players, but they affect the game around the edges. The major beneficiaries in the last 5 years haven't been in the trenches. They've been receivers who are no longer considered pieces of luggage with handles for DBacks to pull them around by, and QBs who want their knees to bend with the knobby part pointing out, if at all possible. I don't think 40 years will change the game like the first 40 years or so changed it, from a run-only league with virtually no pads, to a high-velocity collision sport with both air and ground games, which no human could survive without really durable helmets, pads, and face guards.
To keep the NFL money pie expanding, they'll no doubt try everything. The expansion of commercializtion has been mentioned, and I think that is (regrettably) coming. Oddly enough, that's just a big-dollar way to come full circle. Many forget that the Green Bay Packers started out as the Green Bay Fudge Packers, named for a factory that made candy or something like that. Anyway I don't see it going counter to fan loyalty if we end up with a Michelin patch or something on our beloved uniform. Ugly, yes -- but we would still shrug and watch. It's calling the team the New England Michelin Patriots that won't fly... so the "old timer" base might be a partial drag on that movement.
Finally, in the far future, the QB will be allowed to plant a rhythmic thumping stick in the grainy turf to call a giant sandworm, and, if he can successfully mount it without being sacked, and stay atop it, the QB will be permitted to ride to victory in the end zone, unless a defensive player is able to divert the great beast out of bounds by establishing a defensive perimeter of water, which is poisonous to it.
PFnV
