Why is the NFL allowing physical DB play?

It's not debatable anymore, the NFL referee's have received a mandate to let DB's be more physical. It's just obvious. The question is why are they doing that?

One theory; now that the lawsuits out, Roger wants to over-compensate by letting defense reign for a few years.

Second theory; the Seahawks started a trend, Rog likes it, so he's allowed other teams to follow suit. It also decreases Seattle's advantage.

Third theory; it allows the refereeing crew to STILL sway a game if it ever comes to that. Since they're not calling it, mostly, now they can and somewhat control momentum and outcomes.

A mix of all of the above.

Edit: Actually, a mix of all of the above, plus the Seahawks influencing it by understanding what's actually allowed in the rules and has been for many years, and taking full advantage of it. The league didn't change anything.

It's undeniable though right iRo? I hate conspiracy nuts, but yeah, logic tells me theory three is the main factor.

I don't think that's the main factor, personally.

If the NFL wants the most money it can get, there are more available dollars by having every single team's market thinking they can either win the Super Bowl that year, or become competitive within 1-2 years. I just don't buy the "throwing games for all the big market teams" thing. If you can have the entire country thinking their team can compete to win it all, or can be improved to that position quickly, you'll be selling tickets and merchandise for all 32 teams at a good clip. Sexing up just the big market teams isn't as profitable, despite being contrary to popular belief.

The NFL is twice as profitable as the next closest sports league of any kind in the entire world. Parity plays a huge role in that. Look at how the Cleveland fan base still supports the Browns after so very many years of losing; I think it's primarily because there is a realistic expectation that they can improve quickly.

I think that if any refs have thrown games, it has not been because they were pressured to do so by the league, IMO.

I don't think it's for big markets, per say. It's more for the favored owners. Rooney was one of those, and in XL a Djack OPI changed momentum, right from the jump. I also think it would be used to keep everyone in play, then dictate once the tournament starts. In theory at least.

I gave up on it, after technically working for his baby and learning his methods and practices, but I think Allen could take a page out of Irsay, Rooney, Mara, Kraft's book. Not being a drunk tweeting douche like Irsay, but playing ball and lobbying hard for whatever Roger wants. That buys you a little more exposure in scheduling, IMO. And, it might raise you to favored status in the corporate office.

Thankfully though, there's no one better as a face of the NFL than Russell Wilson. There just isn't. He hits all demographics. Roger's preference will be to have Wilson showcased as much as possible.

2. Not Hawks related, but Roger sent the memo last year when he told the SB crew to ease up on physical play. Hidden message: If you want to be considered for the SB, you need to let some stuff go.

I could not help but notice that in pressure moments, Refs let the home crowd sway them. The holding on the Jets bailed the Falcons out on a shitty play call. So they beat on Gonzalez a bit, I didn't see holding.

The Colts dude with his arm wrapped around our WR on the pass deflection. That is a clear call. Should be easily made, the official was in perfect position. Home field advantage.

Early in the Niner game, Daniels gets shoved out of bounds on the plainest non call of the day. Home cooking. Like stunningly bad.

Your third theory is the one that scares me the most. I am torn on it, I don't want to cheer for an orchestrated sport, but the massive amounts of money involved in wagering combined with the large number of corruptible humans involved in the sport make it impossible that it does not happen. Can you imagine the amounts of money to be made by one backjudge who uses pass interference to steer outcomes? Like basketball fouls, it can be called on most plays.

I hope the explanation is more simple. All the rules on striking players the wrong way have made the middle of the field a much safer place. Zone defenses also contribute to players getting drilled. Allowing a lot of grabby secondary play would encourage more teams to play man defense, which takes away a lot of the kill shots. That explanation would make the most sense.

Question: Am I mistaken, or did Ron Winters call one of our pre-season games where we got called for a bunch of ticky tack PI?

Jonathon Winters? Garp's dad (I'll make-out with anyone who gets my hodgepodge reference there)?

BFS brought up a GREAT point that the Colts game is the first game, in a long time, that the Seahawks didn't cover. And, it so happened to occur on Irsay's homefield (squeaky wheel who's had some ethically questionable moments), with the two preferred future faces of the game playing each other. The Seahawks are goliath and when focused have the roster to tower over any team. It's a lot more interesting that Luck won that, now isn't it? Now the Colts are in SB discussions.

It doesn't matter if the conspiracy theory has merit or not. Perception is reality a lot of times. To those who say I hate Roger just to hate him, this would be my rebuttal. The fact you can even realistically make this argument. And, as "nutty" as I am, I know football. So, if someone who knows football even considers this, it's not good.

Eh, that's kind of a specious defense, Pe.

How so, iRo?

You're a Roger fanboy and you think all my theory's have merit. So, by default you're defending the game manipulation puppeteer, right?

If you run and hide by saying I'm trolling, I will haunt you for the rest of your life.

I'm not a Roger fanboy, though. I think he has done a good overall job, (not great, but good/solid) but I've got issues with him. I think I am forced to present myself as more of a Goodell supporter than I really am because of how many people blame him for what are really the actions and decisions of the owners. You say I'm defending the game manipulation puppeteer, but Tagliabue is the commish that screwed us in XL. I'll tell you who I've got way more issues with; Dan Snyder and Jerruh Jones.

However, your point was specious because you're basing the fact that you can even make an argument as evidence to support that argument, and frankly, that's just not how stuff works. I get what you mean, but virtually every level-headed person in existence has some sort of belief or opinion on something that is way out there by the average person's standards, no matter how well-grounded that person is. In other words, if logical person A has an opinion, the opinion has merit because that person is logical, is what your argument amounts to; and it just doesn't work that way, in my opinion. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, but it's not something that can be relied upon.

Also, you're not trolling right now at all. I only accuse you of trolling when you ARE doing it, either intentionally or unintentionally.

pehawk":21suu5hv said:

Jonathon Winters? Garp's dad (I'll make-out with anyone who gets my hodgepodge reference there)?

Click to expand...

I don't need no smoochies, but I'm pretty sure that Jonathon Winters was Garp's son! :2:

Fair enough, Roland.

To the trolling thing, I honestly don't know what that even means. I like to debate.