So it begins

Let me just check, see if they've fixed the whole CBA thing yet.... .... nope. Far from it. With the CBA due to expire in about 3 hours (from when I write this), the two sides have packed it in and the NFLPA has formerly decertified. At this point I would just like to call bullshit on DeMaurice Smith, who has spent the last six months banging on about a lockout and how the players should prepare for it etc, knowing full well that the Union was planning to shut itself down and prevent a lockout, just like I've been saying for the last six months that it would. Now the fun begins. Ten players have filed an anti-trust law suit against the NFL. Those ten are; Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Vincent Jackson, Ben Leber, Logan Mankins, Brian Robison, Osi Umenyiora, Mike Vrabel and Von Miller. Wait, what? Von Miller? He doesn't even fucking play for a team! He hasn't even been drafted yet! How the hell can he file suit? What's this horse shit? Ah well. What now follows is a ton of legal rambling and junk which I kinda have my head around, but really can't be bothered to explain. It's all speculation anyway. Until we hear anything from the courts, then all the networks can say with any certainty is about as much as you or I can. E.G. Jack shit. Free agency should begin at 1 minute past midnight, which is a pain in the arse because I still haven't got round to previewing the AFC West or North. Ah well. Just because it begins, doesn't mean anyone is gonna move. The owners might be sitting in a room right now deciding that they'll all agree not to do any deals until this thing sorts itself out. As for the anti-trust lawsuit? Again, I'm not sure how Von Miller fits into all of this. What catches my eye though is that the players technically filed their suit before the CBA expired. Now God knows I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can't file a lawsuit against someone because of something they might do. I wonder if that might invalidate it? Of course the biggest losers here are the fans, as always. I had a brief look over some of the comments made by people on the various articles over at ProFootballTalk.com and here are some of the my favourites. "Eat sh*t, DeMaurice." (over 125 thumbs up) "I’m kind of tired of hearing about the $1B figure. The league has 32 owners. Splitting that is only a little over $31 million more a year per team. If the owners came down, then it is obviously less than that. In the grand scheme of things, that is close to what Tom Brady and Peyton Manning will make this next year. Using one big figure makes it sound worse than it actually is. I don’t feel sympathy toward either side, but the union and players are a little less sympathetic to me know [sic] with this stunt today." "I saw his statement on TV, and Smith kept suggesting the NFLPA represented the players as well as the fans against the greedy Scrooge ownership. I would have found that more convincing if he said even one thing about making the game more AFFORDABLE for the fans. All these billions of dollars getting tossed around, and not a word about cutting ticket prices? Food? Parking?" (112 thumbs up, 6 down) "Ok so correct me if I’m wrong but the owners are people that have worked hard in their lives and were smart enough to acquire wealth to buy the NFL teams. They are the ones who have made this league this profitable. Now due to the economy and all the expenses that they have their profits have taken a hit and they want a piece of the pie back. Now the players mostly have not even graduated from college yet get a minimum pay of 400K a year, while players with larger roles on teams usually make millions. How much would these players be making in the outside world with no NFL that the owners created. The players are the greedy ones, not even listening to the owners offers." "The question I have is Why are the owners under any obligation whatsoever to show that they are in less advantageous financial position now than they were before the current (now expired) CBA as a basis for this renegotiation? I think the basis for terminating the CBA early was the Owners decided it was not fair to them, not that they were having financial trouble, just htat it was not fair to them. I think a 50/50 split of revenue (revenue, not profit) IS unfair given that the players don’t incur any of the costs associated with running an NFL franchise (team facilities, stadiums, training camps, medical costs, etc etc) why should they get 50% of revenue? I think it would be fair if the players union assumed 50% of the costs of running a franchise if they insist they should get 50% of revenue. The current model probably is unsustainable." "Public opinion has shifted to the Owners. Seeing the deal that the owners were willing to go with just confirms that the Players have no argument when it comes to the fight of who is more greedy. Give me replacements. Every player we like today will be gone in a few years anyway. I’ll get over it. F them. Go work at walmart." "I hope the owners win the injunction or whatever and can lock these bums out and show them what hard times are." "With all this action from the union happening so quickly it’s hard not to believe the owners when they say that the Union never intended on negotiating. Seems like the union had everything in place and lined up to go." "And thus begins the one week of “We are UNITED!” and then the “Oh Sh#T i’m not getting paid…lets do this.”" "So the ink wasn’t even dry on the statement and these guys file suit??? Yeah, the union really wanted to negotiate–not. And Von Miller, you’re a fool–you’re not even in the NFL yet and are already a part of this suit?? If you were hoping to go in the 1st round, I think you’ll be waiting in round 3–if you’re lucky." For those that might accuse me o being one sided with the comments, the reality is that the fans (at least those that read PFT) are overwhelmingly against the players. There are a few pro player comments, but they nearly all have way more thumbs down than up. I guess the fans have chosen their side. And lastly, for those that are interested, here is a summary by PFT.com of the alleged final offer that the owners put on the table for the players.

A Dollar and 68 cents

In today's post; - More back and forth in the Labor dispute, - Jeff Fisher gets the boot... - .... as does Jim Zorn, So we'll start with the labor issue being that March is just around the corner, kind of, and the expiration of the CBA could lead to a loss of football in 2011. But commissioner Roger Goodell has laid down a gauntlet, a challenge if you will, to the heads of the NFLPA to get the deal done... by saying he'll take a pay cut in 2011 if there is a work stoppage. How much of a pay cut? From $10 million to just $1. Now the issue of paying a jackass executive like Goodell $10 million a year is a blog post in it's own. In fact I not so long ago tackled such an issue, albeit briefly (you're telling me you couldn't find someone equally skilled for say $1 million?). But taking a pay cut from such a hefty amount to just a single dollar is quite the promise. Maybe I could grow to like Goodell? (erm... no). So how did the head of the NFLPA DeMaurice Smith respond? By announcing on Twitter that he'll take a pay cut to just 68 cents.... if a deal gets done before the Super Bowl. Wait. What?? That makes no sense. The only incentive I can see in that is the unlikely event of the league rushing to the table to get a deal done just to see the tears in Smiths eyes when he realises he has to man up and take the cut. But being that the league doesn't pay his wages, the players do, I can't see them throwing away their entire position just for a bit of personal gratification. So that only leaves the incentive to Smith to get the job done. Except, if he does do a deal before the Super Bowl then he would have to take a massive pay cut. See what I mean? It makes absolutely no sense at all. If he'd said "if we don't get a deal done by the Super Bowl then I'll take a pay cut", that might have made a bit more sense. But as it stands that statement basically gives him zero reason to strike a bargain early. So the question is now; where the hell is this post leading? Well I'm glad you asked. The point is, this is the man who is negotiating for the players. This is the guy who is facing down the $10 million dollar man (for now) at the bargaining table. A guy who can't even string together a coherent and logical Twitter post. Further proof maybe that some people in this world are being grossly over paid for the services they provide? Maybe. One thing's for sure, if I was a member of the NFLPA I'd be pretty damn nervous right about now. As Kevin Mawae, their President is. On the issue of the 18-game regular season Mawae has now said that he can't see a way to sell that to the players. Remember that any deal that is reached has to be approved by a majority of the players and not many of them are keen to see an 18-game regular season. That's two more games of fast paced, dangerous football they'll have to endure. Just ask the injury racked Packers how they'd have felt about playing another two games before they made it to the play offs. The stupid thing is, the players have a secret weapon up their sleeve when it comes to the issue of the length of the season and it could even be a tool that swings some of that public support back in their direction (and man do they need some support right now). All they have to do is walk up to the negotiating table and throw in a demand that Season Tickets only cover regular season games, with an opt-in for one or more pre-season games at the buyers discretion, and that all pre-season games be reduced in price to a third of normal prices along with free parking for ticket holders and reduced prices for beer and food concessions. That's pretty much guaranteed to at least turn a few heads in the players favour. Not many. But some. Of course the NFLPA hasn't exactly helped itself in trying to win fan support, primarily because there are two major lies that they keep propagating in the vain hope that the fans will put the blinkers on and not see through them. The first is any notion of a lockout. Pretty much every NFL fan in the entire world now knows that the NFLPA holds in its hands the ability to decertify the union and prevent any lockout. If there is one, it's because the NFLPA allowed it to happen. The second is that league will get paid for not playing games. Strictly speaking, as I understand it, the owners will get the money from the TV contracts to tide them over. But having just been paid a big pile of money for producing a product (games) and then having failed to produce that product, the owners will be obliged to pay back every last cent, possibly with interest on top. While that might tide them over in the interim, it will leave them saddled with a big ass debt that needs repaying sooner rather than later. This also glosses over the fact that the league is already losing money, as we speak, and will continue to do so until the moment that it can guarantee that football will be back on. The cause of this loss is sponsorship. Simply put, nobody is going to fork out huge sums of cash to sponsor various elements of the NFL, including coverage on its own network, without there being anything to sponsor. I'm sure there are also a number of clever advertising executives, if such a thing truly exists, around the country right now applying the screw to the NFL, trying to push down the costs of future sponsorship using the "you might not even play a game this year" chip. All in all both sides need to pull their fingers out of their butts, stop throwing turds at each other through the media, and actually sit down and get a deal done. After all, Jeff Fisher needs a team to coach. It just wont be the Titans. Which it's safe to say came as quite a surprise to me. Forgive me for being dumb, but I'm pretty damn sure that Titans owner Bud Adams recently said that he was dumping Vince Young in favour of Fisher? So what happened to that promise? I'm sure more details will come out soon and there is bound to be some personal dispute at the root of this, but for now we're just left staring at the legacy that Fisher left behind. A legacy that is (or rather was) largely based around his being the longest tenure among active Head Coaches. Fisher joined the Titans in 1994, back when they were still called the Houston Oilers. Since then he's produced a Super Bowl appearance and a few AFC Championship showings, but it's been a while now since the Titans actually won a playoff game. The last two season have been particularly hard for Titans fans. Overall Fisher has achieved a reasonably consistent record, especially given the amount of time he's been the head honcho of the Titans. There are certainly plenty of names out there in the coaching world who, if they were holding a candle, wouldn't be able to hold it against Fisher's. On that odd analogous note, let's finish with Jim Zorn. Ah yes, the much maligned Zorn. Previously the Head Coach in Washington, Zorn was fired after what was a frankly rubbish 2009 season. The Ravens saw an opportunity and pounced, picking up Zorn as their new QB coach. But it appears Zorn, QB Joe Flacco and offensive coordinator Cam Cameron can't all get along and play nicely so someone has to go. In this case it's Zorn. As part of the shuffle the Ravens have announced that offensive assistant Craig Van Steeg will now assist with the quarterbacks, and that Cameron will take a much bigger role in their coaching. Not sure how happy Ravens fans will be with this, considering that many were after Cameron's head for the part he and the offense played in Baltimore's post season exit. Unfortunately for them, it looks like Zorn has once again become the scapegoat du jour.

Sorry, who did you say is the new Denver coach? WTF?

Tomorrow; previews of the Divisional round. Today; just random banter. Starting with... -- Jamie Dukes of the NFL Network, on air, calling a pick play for what it is. Yeah, this old chestnut again. Like I keep saying, it's in the rulebook so if they're not going to call it then guys like James Harrison have a case for complaining about why the league should be allowed to fine them excessively for the infringement of other rules, representing a clear bias in favour of the offense. If this went to a work tribunal for a normal job an employer would be hard pressed to justify allowing some employees to break certain rules but not others. -- The Cleveland Browns have found themselves a new Head Coach, Pat Shurmur. Pat spent nearly ten years as the QB coach for the Eagles, before taking a job on Steve Spagnuolo's staff as the offensive coordinator of the Rams. Head Coaching material? Hmm. Time will tell I guess, but there's growing rumblings around certain corners of the web that this a puppet assignment, with Mike Holmgren (The Dark Lord of the West Coast Offense) obviously the one pulling the strings. Personally I don't see how this is an upgrade over Mangini (do you realise how much it hurts me to defend him) and with the possibility that Rob Ryan might be shown the door soon as well, I'm not entirely sure that Browns fans are going to like the direction their franchise is headed. Of course this could do the opposite and instead provide an invigorating spark that the franchise needs. Just don't count on it. -- Yes, did I mention; Rob Ryan could be on his way out. I would reference you to the original article where I sourced the information, but bugger me if I haven't deleted the bloody link at some point. Trust me though the rumours are out there. If he does happen to be going free this off season, may I kindly and politely ask Jim Harbaugh to go snatch him. Ryan is a good coordinator with a good pedigree. It's just a shame that the Browns personnel has sucked balls for so long. -- Next, the first of two trips to deadspin.com starting with this article by Nate Jackson. To be honest I disagree with a fair chunk of this and have real trouble taking the players side in the CBA argument, but please note I only take the leagues side because I happen to be a Capitalist and because I think the owners are the lesser of two evils in this one. This letter though is aimed purely at Rodger Goodell and made me laugh at times as he stuck it to the worst thing to hit the NFL since Ryan Leaf. -- And now we return to Deadspin.com for quite simply the funniest, truest and generally most entertaining letters I've ever seen. Found here. -- Not so much an article or anything, but it's worth reading the comments sections in the above two articles. It seems that unlike a lot of the mainstream sites, deadspin seems to have a strange power that draws in comparably larger numbers of intelligent people to comment on it's articles than say.... most of the major networks and their affiliates. -- Finally, the Broncos have swooped on the hottest coaching candidate for 2011; John Fox! Wait, what? John Fox? What happened to John Elway promising that money would be no barrier to the Broncos getting the best candidate? Or is this a hire made in light of the fact that the Saints Greg Williams flat declined an offer to interview for the job? Well, what's done is done, so let's just remind ourselves of who John Fox is. He started with around 10 years experience coaching in college, mainly handling defensive backs. Then he hit the pro ranks in the early 90's with the Steelers and later the Chargers, before getting a coordinator gig with the Raiders. He moved across to the Giants to perform the same role. He then spent from 2002 until this season as head coach of the Panthers. During that time he compiled a 73-71 regular season record, with a 5-3 post season record. That included taking the Panthers to the Super Bowl in the '03 season and to the NFC Championship game in '05. From 2006 onwards however the Panthers had just one winning season in 5 under Fox, when they went 12-4 in 2008 before crashing out Arizona in the playoffs. And that is what worries me. Fox has a reputation as a solid defensive coach and certainly in Carolina he was able to put together a reasonably strong D. But the offense in the last few years has been atrocious. In that '08 season the Panthers had been running ball very well and did so right up until the second drive of the game against Arizona. Having toasted the Cardinals D on the opening drive with their rushing attack, the Panthers now got cute and it all went down hill from there. Now former QB Jake Delhomme is playing (or rather watching from the bench) in Cleveland and Fox is off to try and recover the Broncos. Some of the blame for that has to fall at Fox's own feet. I understand that coordinators are responsible for running their side of the ball, but the Head Coach is ultimately responsible for wins and losses, and thus by default he must make himself responsible for the performance of all the facets of his team. That means that if his offense isn't pulling its weight, he has to step in and make sure that it does. His failure to exercise some measure of control over the Panthers offense is the reason I don't like Fox. He had the ability to pull his offensive coordinator to one side during any of the many weeks this season (or last) and quietly whisper into the guys ear "run the fu-reaking football". But what about Dick LeBeau in Pittsburgh I hear you cry. He has almost untouched control over the Steelers defense, so shouldn't all coordinators. Well Dick LeBeau has one major factor in his favour; proven success. You have to remember that success brought about LeBeaus current level of autonomy, not the other way around. Which is more than can be said for the Panthers. Play to your strengths. "Know Thyself". Know yourself and the enemy. All the things that the Chiefs failed to do against the Ravens on Sunday. These are things the Panthers have been doing for the last two years. Despite a strong running attack that proved its immense worth in 2008, the Panthers under Fox stubbornly refused to make use of their ground game, wasting the valuable talents of guys like DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart. That pisses me off and I imagine it annoyed a few Panthers fans as well. Will things get better in Denver under Fox? I'm sorry but it don't think they will. Denver have some wonderful young talents on their team so I hope for their sake that it does pan out alright in the end.

Thursday Night Football

Time for a bit of Thursday Night pick 'em. But first, more complaining. I have a simple question; who the hell does Rodger Goodell think he is? Two of the latest fines that have caught my attention are these: Kenny Britt; fined $5,000 for wearing a towel that had "#10 VY" written on it during the Colts game. Tony Brown; fined $5,000 for wearing red cleats during the Colts game. I don't get it? How in the name of god does the NFL have the power or even the right to fine someone $5,000 (Five. Thousand. Dollars.) just for wearing a pair of cleats that aren't of an approved color? I could understand if the team itself wanted to discipline a player who had been asked not to do a certain thing (like wear red cleats) or who they felt was taking actions negative to the clubs image (with the VY towel), but even then not to the tune of $5,000. It's just getting ludicrous. The amount of control wielded by the commissioner and the way it's being wielded is absolutely absurd. What annoys me the most though is three fold: 1) Goodell's smug face. 2) Why the national media aren't doing more. 3) Why the players aren't doing more. Everyone just seems to be sitting on their God damn hands hoping that this is some aberration for the 2010 season that will blow over in time. Well it's not going to is it. What we've seen consistently is that if Goodell wants something and nobody puts up a fight, then he gets it. He's not going to back down from his current dictatorial approach unless someone applies a little pressure. Which is why I'd like to see the US media do something for a change. The analysts on NFL Network sometimes mention it in passing, or complain during a highlight reel, but I don't see an organised resistance. I don't see them banding together and making their feelings known more vociferously. And what about the other networks? Everyone complains briefly but then does nothing more. Why? As a mere blogger with a (very) limited reach, I have basically zero power to put a stop to all of this. But the big networks? They represent (or at least should do) NFL fans across the states and the world, and they have an obligation I feel to make the fans concerns known. They also have the power, if they dislike Goodell (which, judging by their comments many do) to put that message out there and make it clear that Goodell is an ass who needs to go. And the Players? I've heard some comments from a few Baltimore and Pittsburgh players, but that's it. The rest of the league..... almost nothing. Everyone seems to be happy to complain about these things on Twitter or to quietly grumble to their local rag, but where is the concerted effort to make a stand? When are these people going to grow a sack and start hitting out with a unified voice against Goodell? Yeah you might get fined a few thousand dollars. Yeah maybe the owners might look at you with a little suspicion. But that's why you all get together and go balls to the wall to make a point. That goes for the press to. They've got to stop kissing Goodell's ass and actually stand up for what's right. Just look at that weasel Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk.com. He used to be all about the fans and reporting unbiasedly about whatever issues came up. Now he's practically a step away from being Goodell's lap dog because he smells a chance to get a permanent slot on NBC television. This is precisely what free speech and free press was designed for; to allow people to hit back at dictatorial regimes like Goodell's. It's about fucking time some of these big shot media people exercised that right and told Goodell - on behalf of the fans if nothing else - where he can stuff his fines, stuff his "enhanced season" and where he can stuff his ridiculous "roughing the passer" penalties too! Ahem. What was I saying? Ah yes, Thursday Night pick! San Francisco 49ers @ San Diego Chargers: Interesting. The 49ers had a great game last Sunday, as did the Chargers. Both teams need a win pretty badly to keep alive their respective hopes of making it to the playoffs. Of course, the fact that I just mentioned the 49ers and the playoffs in the same sentence says a lot about the NFC West this year. San Francisco's hopes are alive only because of the spectacular level of mediocrity that exists in their division. They've been no better really. Or have they? After getting soundly whipped by the Seahawks in week 1, they then took the defending Super Bowl champions right to the wire. The Chiefs battered them the next week only for the 49ers to have the Falcons nearly wrapped up a week later. Only a god awful fumble allowed the Falcons to snatch victory from the Jaws of certain defeat. A week after the 49ers took the Eagles to the wire and lost by 3, then went on to beat the Raiders. Then lost, somehow, to the Panthers. They then beat the Broncos and Rams in successive games before being blown out by the Bucs'. They trounced the Cardinals, got run over a week later by the Packers, then hammered the Seahawks into the floor. All in all, something of a sketchy season for my 49ers. But they are probably a bit better than that record tells. Especially when you look at the performance of Alex Smith last week. Operating in the Shotgun and using more of a spread style look, Smith was suddenly back in his comfort zone and doing well. Well enough to beat the Chargers? That's hard to say. The 49ers defense isn't exactly the most stout in the league, despite sporting a number of very good (read; under rated) players at various positions. That kind of poses a problem against the Chargers, what with them having Philip Rivers at Quarterback. And Vincent Jackson at wide receiver. And the rest of the Chargers receivers. And Jacob Hester at Fullback. And Mike Tolbert or Darren Sproles at running back. That's before we even get to the defense. In summary; shit bags. Chargers win. Have a great day everyone.

Goodell-two-shoes

Just a few things to mull over this morning with your coffee: -- Randy Moss was claimed off of waivers by the Tennessee Titans. With their main receiver Kenny Britt done for possibly the rest of the regular season, Moss is an important addition. In fact, I think everyone wins here. Titans coach Jeff Fisher is not going to mess around and has dealt with more troublesome players than Moss in the past. The Titans get a great (and respected) deep ball threat to help alleviate pressure on their run game, which I'm sure Chris Johnson is delighted about. Moss should in turn enjoy his opportunities to go deep looking to get on the receiving end of play-action passes, as well as being a little more tucked away from the media. It looks very good on paper, but we'll have to wait till after the Titans bye week to find out how it all pans out. -- The other big name on the waiver wire was Shawne Merriman, who has now landed in Buffalo. And again, it's not a bad spot. The Bills defense -- in particular that front 7 -- needs all the help it can get. Pass rush has been a problem for the Bills this year and although Merrimans numbers have wained in recent years, a lot of that has to do with injuries. He's back now, healthy, and I think he can add a little bit of extra punch to that Bills defense. When you consider how well their offense has been playing lately, it would only take a small jump from the Bills defense to make a big difference in their wins column. Like 1. -- Finally, I've been wavering back and forth over ProFootballTalk.com in the last week or so. Spotted a bad article, then a very good one, and now.... another bad one. Mike Florio brought up an article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that features Steelers safety Troy Polamalu speaking out against the new penalties and harsher enforcement of rules regarding hits on defenseless receivers. Polamalu seems to share much the same sentiments on the subject as I do (told you the guy was awesome); that big hits and physical contact are major reasons why a lot of people watch football. Troy then goes on to suggest that maybe Goodell shouldn't solely wield all the power that he does, and that maybe a series of checks and balances should be introduced into the system, much the same way as the US government operates (Executive branch; President. Legislative branch; Congress. Judicial Branch; Federal courts). What angers me (and presumably a lot of the people leaving comments on the article) is the way Florio dismisses this so off hand, as if people speaking their minds was somehow a ridiculous thing. To quote Florio: "Regardless of what Polamalu or any other Steelers player thinks, the reality is that they don't get to make the rules. Thus, objecting to the new approach to protecting defenseless receivers has the same benefit as objecting to a touchdown being worth six points." He continues: "The management and coaching staff of the Steelers are doing the team and the league no favors by fomenting this rebellion. We realize that the Steelers simply want to win games and that they've built a team premised on hitting opponents hard, but the franchise for which Mike Webster played should have greater sensitivity to the league's attempt to protect today's players from a similar consequence." So basically Florio seems to think people should just shut up and take it lying down? He also seems to be suggesting that Polamalu's sole interest is in winning games, not perhaps the enjoyment of the fans, as I understood his comments. As for not doing themselves any favours, conversely I think the Steelers are doing themselves the biggest favour possible. Unlike the commissioner or Mike Florio, they've caught the current pulse of the fans. Whether that's an honest attempt or a cynical attempt, the reality is that they're far more in touch with the people who pay high sums to watch the NFL than either Roger or Mike. And using Mike Webster in the argument? Not only does that smack a little of a cheap shot, but someone should also point out to Florio that Webster played Center. The big hoo-hah lately has been surrounding defenseless receivers. There's quite a difference between how those two types of players play and get hit. It just doesn't seem to make sense. I remember that Florio used to be just as cynical and cutting of Goodell as anybody at times. But now that he's creeping onto the mainstream TV with NBC, he's suddenly gone all Goodell-two-shoes..... Right, I have to get ready for work. Joy. Hopefully later or tomorrow, or at least sometime before the weekend, I'll go through the rookie watch list and we'll have a look at how they're all getting on. Till then, Have a great day everyone.

London calling

Ugh. My recent work schedule has piled upon me once again, so this is again a very brief stop. Tomorrow I should have time to fit in my picks and even if I can't go into detail, I'll at least produce a list for you. But today I want to harp briefly on a subject that means a lot to me; the prospect of a London franchise. I hate the idea. This week Commissioner Goodell has restated his desire to see a regular franchise in Europe, most likely in London. It -- in my opinion -- is the single stupidest idea that guy has ever had. Now don't get me wrong, I was very appreciative of the chance two years ago to watch the Saints play the Chargers. It was my first live, in the flesh NFL game. And I'm very appreciative this year of the chance to go and watch the 49ers play (well, I'd be more so if they weren't sucking so badly). But a London franchise? I wouldn't support it. I wouldn't care about it. I very much doubt anyone else would either. One reason for this is that when you walk around the stadium on game day, what you see is a flurry of jersey's. Pretty much every team is represented (hand on heart, I didn't see a single Texans jersey last time). This is because everyone else like me who is in to football has been watching it for years. In that time we have all developed our favourites. We have no interest in a London team. But even that isn't the main reason. The main reason is because I know how pissed off British soccer fans would be if the Premier league suddenly turned around and said "oh by the way, we're moving Manchester United to New York". The fans would be in uproar and the rest of the teams would look at that calendar date with dread. It's just such a dumb idea, god knows how it made it past the drawing board. Surely the minute this left Goodells mouth his own advisers should have just shot it down, with big, exploding, armor piercing-incendiary, 40mm rounds. Surely someone stood up and said "Roger, don't be a dumb ass!". Please tell me someone had the sense and balls to stand up to Goodell and tell him how crazy this is? Not that Goodell would listen anyway, but that's not the point. Anyway, must sleep. Have a great day everyone.

The Packer Sweep

Ok, rant time.

This whole "player safety" issue has gone overboard. The league has announced that it will be sending teams a video of what does and does not constitute a legal hit, along with some corporate message that they want coaches to read out. And it's starting to get ridiculous.

The main points of contention are the hits laid on Mohamed Massaquoi and Josh Cribbs by Steelers LB James Harrison, plus the hit laid by Dunta Robinson on DeSean Jackson. Personally, I don't see it. I don't get it. I've seen the hits and I don't get what all the fuss is about. Maybe on the Robinson hit you could argue "shoulder to the head of a defenseless receiver", but It's questionable how defenseless Jackson is and it's a stupid rule anyway. What are you supposed to do about a "defenseless" receiver who might be about to score a TD or get a first down? You decide, "I'll hit him low, in the chest". Then the guy ducks. Now it's helmet to helmet again.

And now the league is making a big thing out of helmet contact? Well how about you stop offensive players from ducking then? I don't know about you, but I don't think my reactions would be quick enough to avoid hitting a player who ducks at the last minute in the head. And I said helmet contact and not "helmet to helmet" contact because there have been a number of questionable calls -- including one this week in the Chargers/Rams game -- where a pass rusher has incidentally stroked a QB on the head with his forearm and drawn a 15 yard flag.

For me, it's getting close to the "quit point"; that is, the moment in time when you decide it's not worth the hassle of watching. You know you'll only get frustrated and worked up about something that doesn't really matter. So you just tune out. For me the "quit point" in soccer came last year after the world cup. I was sick of watching the England teams millionaire "superstars" (really need to lay off the quotation marks) bottoming out to teams made up of part-time players. The annoyance and frustration was superseding any semblance of fun and ultimately that is why we watch sports.

Someone should really tell Roger Goodell that. I think he believes that if he can just remove all the hitting from the game and any notion of defensive play, then people will come flocking in to watch. I think instead Mr. Goodell should try reading the comments section of a few posts on some of the various news outlets. What he would find is an army of die hard football fans who are approaching their own "quit point".

Football is football. It's a violent game. That's the reality. Boxing is violent to. It's also another big sport. Except in boxing they've already thought about safety. They make amateur boxers wear helmets and the bouts are scored based on clean hits with the glove on the head. If you're a boxing fan it can be ok to watch, to see whose is coming up through the ranks. But nobody is going to pay Pay Per View money for an amateur bout.

It's not the skill factor that's the problem. If anything, amateur boxers tend to be very highly skillful. It has more to do with the same reason people pay more money to watch heavyweights than they do flyweights. It's because they want to watch two grown men punching the living daylights out of each other. That's a fact.

That's also a big reason why people watch football. Now I know there will be coaches reading this who will be jumping out of their chairs to bemoan the fact that they watch football for the tactics and the strategy etc. That's certainly true. But a big reason for that is because you, me and many other people understand a little deeper about the inner workings of a football team and how strategy and tactics operate in relation to football. The average fan whose never been exposed to this has a slightly less well developed understanding, but can still appreciate it.

But let's be real. People watch football because at heart, it is a violent, crunching sport. They -- as do I -- enjoy the collisions. We enjoy watching a good defensive hit as much a beautifully spiralled pass into the end zone. It's one of the key factors in the enjoyment of the game. If you take it out, it ceases to be football. You can market it as some other sport, but it's not football and never will be, no matter how hard you try to call it that.

And as for the players and players safety? Find a different sport.

The main argument I have against the "player safety" crowd (which currently appears to consist of Commissioner Roger Goodell, and Mike Florio from ProFootballTalk.com) is simply that nobody is forcing the players to play. They won't get paid the millions if they leave, but then that's tough. The reality is that NFL players are like strippers (possibly the kind that you would find in a back street of Bangkok).

Like strippers, Players get paid only so long as they continue to do the things that people are willing to pay money to watch. If a stripper came onto the stage one day and announced that she refused to remove her clothes because she felt it was demeaning and degrading to women and that she was making a stand for the equal rights of the feminine half of the human race, that's fine...... but she would be booed of the stage, penniless.

Ergo, if NFL players wish to earn millions of dollars then they must dance to the sound of the public purse strings. If the public wants hits to the head, then they must have hits to the head. If they want to see a reasonably violent sport where players get injured and beaten up on a routine basis, then so be it. Anyone who doesn't want to play, merely has to step down and go and play somewhere else. If Goodell wants to turn football into a non-contact sport then that's fine, but just don't expect the millions of the past to tune in and pay to watch.

The players union and the league are currently locked in a CBA battle over hard dollars. At this rate, the next CBA will be over who gets the leagues sole dime and the remaining contents of the coffee machine.

-------

Now for something completely different. This will probably appeal more to football coaches and those who take an interest in the deeper workings of football, but basically I stumbled across a video on YouTube of Vince Lombardi doing a bit of coaching. Nothing major. So I contacted the YouTube user who posted the video and with much persuasion managed to convince him to dig out his old VHS tapes and have a go at posting some of the other material. What he came up with is a true historical gem. Vince Lombardi, one of the greatest coaches in the history of professional football, coaching the famous "Packer Sweep". With thanks to LuckyLaRue17, enjoy.








Have a great day everyone.

Wednesday. Booooo!!!!!

It's Wednesday, so expecting any great swathe of news is optimistic at best. Looking ahead at the week that will be, I'll be previewing this weekends games on Friday and Saturday, covering the one o'clock (Eastern) kick offs on Friday and the rest of the games on Saturday. Tomorrow I will..... think of some fantastically insightful article to write. Today however I have nothing to offer except a brain fart of the first degree. There is some hope thanks to ProFootballTalk.com. Two articles catch the eye: "Raheem Morris wants NFL to change blackout policy" -- And I agree. I've harped on this before. I find it stunning that a company like the NFL would be retarded enough to believe that keeping their product off air will somehow magically generate tickets. People don't like being punished into doing things. They don't like having their freedom of choice removed. Given the option of "watch football at the stadium or don't watch it at all" most people will stick two fingers up and tune in to something else. The blackout policy needs to go, hopefully with Roger Goodell following soon after. 'Roger Staubach thinks rules changes make NFL "a wussy game"' -- And I agree. Yes, concussions are bad. But concussions are what I would describe as an "occupational hazard". Fireman understand that they risk getting burnt to death, or at least seriously injured/maimed. Soldiers understand that they may get blown up, shot, or lose a limb in the blink of an eye. As a Bouncer (ahem, 'Door Supervisor') I used to go to work on the understanding that if someone didn't like me asking them to leave, they might just choose to smash a bottle or glass on the table and attempt to stuff what's left of it into my throat. Or they might come back later and stab me. Or they might follow me to my car/home and jump me, attempting to steal my property. Sometimes people just shouted bad words and made me cry (chortle). The point is that at any time I could have stopped and said "This s**t is laughed off, I'll stick to the day job," (and ultimately had to, to avoid losing said day job). Any one of those NFL Players can stop, whenever they want. Ex-49ers RB Glen Coffee decided God was calling him to a different path & off he went. Just like a boxer stepping into the ring, you have to be aware that your night on the football field could end with you lying on the floor wondering what the hell just happened. Players take that risk and get paid handsomely for it. Reasonable steps to protect players are fine. Helmets, pads, etc. But a line has to be drawn. At some point someone has to say "this is as safe as we're gonna make it. If you don't want to get hurt, don't play football." And it has to happen soon. If you make football into a non/little contact sport, people will fall away in droves. We know this because; a) flag football is not a nationally televised sport watched by over 100 million people, and b) neither is Arena Football. Have a great day everyone.