PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Typical NFL Game: 11 minutes of action


Status
Not open for further replies.
I like lobster. I enjoy filet mignon. Just because I like one it doesn't mean I don't like the other. Likewise, just because one is good it doesn't make the other bad.


Why the need to say one sport is somehow, someway better than the other? Would you rate and rank your own children that way? Can't we just watch any and all sports that we enjoy, without having to pick one over the other?
 
I was responding to something specific you said: "The NFL has had to implement new rules to prevent players from serious injury.". As for head shots, guys like Savard could explain it to you, I'm sure.

Ridiculous as usual, but I would expect nothing less from you.

So, NHL deliberately launch themselves head first into opposing players on a frequent basis. GTFO
 
Even for offseason, this thread is silly.
 
I think the 11 minutes is a little low, DirectTV has a feature which cuts the game down to just the plays, (and some select replays) and they fit it in to a thirty minute time slot. I would put the average action to about somewhere between the 18-22 minute range.

Lets also remember that hockey shifts usually don't last longer than one minute. If anyone is on the ice for more than that, they are usually gassed. And even with that, it is not like they are skating up and down the ice five times in that minute. Football is full speed, full contact for a good seven to ten seconds (12 if your name is Mankins), then the rest and then back at it.

Hockey is a great game, but football is definatley more violent, in a typical game their are about thirty violent checks, in a typical football game there are seven violent collisions on each and every play.
 
Last edited:
The kicker for me:

Fans love football. The only thing better than football, is more football.

Yet even most of the fans are against an 18-game season. In a world where everyone wants more, even the most avid supporters of the game can recognize the detriment lengthening the season would be to the overall health of the game (and its players).

It's easy to look at football and say, "only 16-19 games a season? why not play more?" But once you watch those games every week, especially towards the end of the year, you will understand why it should stay the way it is.
 
I think the 11 minutes is a little low, DirectTV has a feature which cuts the game down to just the plays, (and some select replays) and they fit it in to a thirty minute time slot. I would put the average action to about somewhere between the 18-22 minute range.

Lets also remember that hockey shifts usually don't last longer than one minute. If anyone is on the ice for more than that, they are usually gassed. And even with that, it is not like they are skating up and down the ice five times in that minute. Football is full speed, full contact for a good seven to ten seconds (12 if your name is Mankins), then the rest and then back at it.

Hockey is a great game, but football is definatley more violent, in a typical game their are about thirty violent checks, in a typical football game there are seven violent collisions on each and every play.

Good points. These are two violent sports.

If we take your numbers. With thirty violent checks per game, a hockey team would endure around 2,460 such checks in a season. With seven violent collisions per play, with 130 or so plays per game on offense and defense combined (the Pats average in 2010 was 127.6), an NFL team would endure 14,560 such hits in a season.
 
Ridiculous as usual, but I would expect nothing less from you.

So, NHL deliberately launch themselves head first into opposing players on a frequent basis. GTFO

I'm sorry that you don't grasp the correlation/response. Perhaps I wasn't being clear enough. Let me try to make it more obvious.

You made a claim, implying the NFL was doing something the NHL didn't have to do.

Precisely

The NFL has had to implement new rules to prevent players from serious injury.The NFL is far more dangerous and violent.

I noted that the NHL had done the same thing. Here's the NHL on head shots:


Illegal checks to the head, defined as "a lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principle point of contact is not permitted," will now be subject to a five-minute major penalty and automatic game misconduct, as well as possible supplemental discipline if deemed appropriate by the League.

New rule on head hits designed to curb concussions - NHL.com - Rules

Targeted head hits from any direction on the ice will be subject to a two-minute minor penalty under Rule 48 starting with the 2011-12 NHL season.

The NHL's Board of Governors on Tuesday approved changes to the wording of Rule 48 that were initially passed by the League's general managers and then the Competition Committee at meetings in Boston during the Stanley Cup Final.

Rule 48 previously provided the on-ice officials with the ability to call a major penalty for any targeted head hit from the lateral or blind side, but the re-written rule no longer includes the words lateral or blind side, and the major penalty provision has been replaced by the minor penalty provision.

Board of Governors approves changes to two rules - NHL.com - News

So, first banning at one level, and then ratcheting up the rules even higher this year. That's what the NFL has done with head shots/launching/defenseless receiver over the past couple of years.

As I noted, Savard is an example of why the NHL has had to make the change. His career may be over as a result of repeated concussions.
 
Last edited:
I think the 11 minutes is a little low, DirectTV has a feature which cuts the game down to just the plays, (and some select replays) and they fit it in to a thirty minute time slot. I would put the average action to about somewhere between the 18-22 minute range.

Lets also remember that hockey shifts usually don't last longer than one minute. If anyone is on the ice for more than that, they are usually gassed. And even with that, it is not like they are skating up and down the ice five times in that minute. Football is full speed, full contact for a good seven to ten seconds (12 if your name is Mankins), then the rest and then back at it.

Hockey is a great game, but football is definatley more violent, in a typical game their are about thirty violent checks, in a typical football game there are seven violent collisions on each and every play.

Google..."nfl actual minutes"...and you will be able to read dozens of articles stating game time is between 11-12 minutes

As to your paragragh describing hockey shifts....clearly you don't know what you are talking about.

Back to NFL:
Average length of each play: 5.5 seconds
Remaining game clock allowed after each average length play: 39.5 seconds

Expanding NFL action/rest in NHL terms (5.5 secs NFL : 1min NHL) gets you 39.5 secs/395 secs. In other words, if NHL players rested the same proportion between shifts as NFL players rest between plays., NHL players would rest 6.5 minutes per shift. But since the typical NHL team uses 3.5 lines (4th line is used sporadically), NHL players get half the rest

Incidental Hits topic: I seem to recall that the amount of "incidental" hits vs Vancouver was about 2-3 per possession and 2-3 per forechecking. In other words, the battles were won and lost in the corners with bodies flying into each other continuously....and usually longer than 5.5 seconds.

Violent hits topic: certainly different angles of hitting ...with NHL players only able to throw punches at heads instead of arm tackles around pads. Curious, do you think violent hitting is occurring on the line when Brady goes back to pass 35 times per game. O linemen standing/fending off defenders trying to go around them. Seems Chara is acting in a similar manner defending in front of his own net....yet he can play 30 times more minutes over a season, 3 times a week over 9 months. Again my point is: I don't buy the NFLPA arguement that more than 16 games in a regular season is too many. Seems to me that the underlying reason that restricts more games is that NFL rosters are too small to begin with....basically 1.25 reserve players for every starter. The NHL has a 4:1 ratio, NBA 3:1.

By the way, did any one watch the college rugby 7s championships last week.....teams played 3 games a day plus on consecutive days. Imagine...continuous action, tackling, no pads, games every two hours....all weekend.
 
Last edited:
Having played both sports I'll take a hockey check as opposed to a football hit every day of the week. Football hits are violent, hockey checks are mostly strategy. Most of the big hockey hits come when the guy being hit is in a bad position, has his head down, or the guy dishing out the hit is doing something illegal.
 
Borg, stop already with the apples-to-oranges hitting comparisons -- they're hugely different between the sports as I've tried to point out. Other aspects you need to consider:

* Almost all hockey hits are limited to the well-padded upper body area.
* Impacts seldom involve collisions with both players moving full speed into each other -- the "hittee" usually is static or moving much slower than the "hitter."
* Being on a slick playing surface lessens the amount of force absorbed as the "hittee" usually moves with the blow.
* And as I've noted, hockey contact is incidental -- players can go for long stretches of time, even full games, without hard hits.
 
Borg, stop already with the apples-to-oranges hitting comparisons -- they're hugely different between the sports as I've tried to point out. Other aspects you need to consider:

* Almost all hockey hits are limited to the well-padded upper body area.
* Impacts seldom involve collisions with both players moving full speed into each other -- the "hittee" usually is static or moving much slower than the "hitter."
* Being on a slick playing surface lessens the amount of force absorbed as the "hittee" usually moves with the blow.
* And as I've noted, hockey contact is incidental -- players can go for long stretches of time, even full games, without hard hits.

Yeah, but, what about the teeth thing? :(
 
Yeah, but, what about the teeth thing? :(

It just gives them a bigger space to spit through, is all. :singing: (Actually, a lot of NFL players lose teeth, and it's not from fighting.)
 
Last edited:
Borg, stop already with the apples-to-oranges hitting comparisons -- they're hugely different between the sports as I've tried to point out. Other aspects you need to consider:

* Almost all hockey hits are limited to the well-padded upper body area.
* Impacts seldom involve collisions with both players moving full speed into each other -- the "hittee" usually is static or moving much slower than the "hitter."
* Being on a slick playing surface lessens the amount of force absorbed as the "hittee" usually moves with the blow.
* And as I've noted, hockey contact is incidental -- players can go for long stretches of time, even full games, without hard hits.

I agree that there's a difference, but contact is not incidental in hockey.
 
It just gives them a bigger space to spit through, is all. :singing: (Actually, a lot of NFL players lose teeth, and it's not from fighting.)

I think football players leave the sport better looking than hockey players. Many ex-hockey players have that hockey face. ...cheap bridge work, bent nose, pinched scar on lip, missing chunks of eyebrow. By the end of his career Marchand should be able to touch his ear with his nose. I'd rather be ugly than unable to walk up a flight of stairs though.
 
I agree that there's a difference, but contact is not incidental in hockey.

Hitting is part of the game in hockey, but when and where it occurs is incidental. That's my only point. It doesn't occur on every "play" with the same players, every change of possession, etc.

I think football players leave the sport better looking than hockey players. Many ex-hockey players have that hockey face. ...cheap bridge work, bent nose, pinched scar on lip, missing chunks of eyebrow. By the end of his career Marchand should be able to touch his ear with his nose. I'd rather be ugly than unable to walk up a flight of stairs though.

Marchand is probably the only Bruin I don't care for on a personal level, he just seems immature and punk-ish. Good player, though.
 
Last edited:
Hitting is part of the game in hockey, but when and where it occurs is incidental. That's my only point. It doesn't occur on every "play" with the same players, every change of possession, etc.

Hockey and football are both collision sports, with violent physical contact being an important part of the game, and a part of the rules. I get where you're going with the notion that contact is more central to football, and I absolutely agree with you. Without hitting, tackling isn't possible, and football becomes flag football. But you seem to be dismissing the hitting in hockey as almost a non-event or side show, and I think that's a step too far.

My apologies if I'm interpreting your use of 'incidental' incorrectly.
 
Hockey and football are both collision sports, with violent physical contact being an important part of the game, and a part of the rules. I get where you're going with the notion that contact is more central to football, and I absolutely agree with you. Without hitting, tackling isn't possible, and football becomes flag football. But you seem to be dismissing the hitting in hockey as almost a non-event or side show, and I think that's a step too far.

My apologies if I'm interpreting your use of 'incidental' incorrectly.

No, I agree that contact definitely is integral to hockey, you are misinterpreting my point. How, when, where and to what degree it occurs is the incidental aspect.
 
You hate Marchand????

War has now been declared.....I will fight to my last breath for my binkie!!!!!...:yeeha::yeeha::yeeha::yeeha::yeeha:
 
No, I agree that contact definitely is integral to hockey, you are misinterpreting my point. How, when, where and to what degree it occurs is the incidental aspect.

In that case, we seem to agree on the acts and intents, and it seems our only difference is the word choice of "incidental" instead of some other word choice. I don't think either of us cares enough to go to the mat over that, so I say let's just have a great day. "Incidental" it is.
 
Last edited:
You hate Marchand????

War has now been declared.....I will fight to my last breath for my binkie!!!!!...:yeeha::yeeha::yeeha::yeeha::yeeha:

No, I don't hate him. I just think he's a bit of a punk. Hopefully that will change as he grows and matures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/25: News and Notes
Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/24: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
MORSE: Final 7 Round Patriots Mock Draft, Matthew Slater News
Bruschi’s Proudest Moment: Former LB Speaks to MusketFire’s Marshall in Recent Interview
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/22: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-21, Kraft-Belichick, A.J. Brown Trade?
Back
Top