Right now I have two major gripes with the NFL that are serious hurdles for my enjoyment of the game. One is flow, and the other is needless violence.
Flow: the problem. Football games should really only take 1.5 hours or, at most, 2 hours to play from start to finish (including breaks and halftime). The number of breaks in the game for changes of possession, timeouts, scores, injury timeouts, instant replay reviews, and breaks at the end of quarters is maddening. There really isn't any reason to have 2/3rds of the commercial breaks they take. And worse, the TV networks have for some time influenced the way the game is played: all of the above breaks are longer than they used to be because the networks want to run commercials. They've lengthened special timeouts for the purpose of ads. And recently was that story about how the refs asked a coach to take a needless timeout because the network was worried about running short on commercial time.
Flow: the solution.
- Use a running gameclock. No stoppages for out-of-bounds plays, incomplete passes, or scoring plays. The clock will stop for injuries and replay reviews, and team timeouts are 60-second breaks during which the clock does not run. At the end of each half, play will continue until an appropriate stoppage (i.e., change of possession, a score).
- Kickoffs proceed immediately after the point-after attempt. Changes of possession do not cause play (or the clock) to stop.
- Convert replay reviews from on-field reviews by the head ref to an upstairs review. Cut review time from "90 seconds" (like they ever hold to that) to a strict 45-second rule.
Needless violence: the problem. My main problem with violence in the NFL is when tackles don't have much to do with bringing down the ball carrier and become more about causing injuries. Rather than rearrange the tackling rules, which I wouldn't be in favor of, I think just a few indirect tweaks can significantly improve the situation and keep players safer.
The solution:
- Instead of a 53-man gameday roster, teams field a 22-man gameday roster. 11 starers and 11 backups. The 11 starters play the whole game and can only leave the field for injuries. (No offense / defense squads, no specialists, no personnel packages, rotating lines, etc.) You field a team that you expect can win the game.
- Downgrade the amount of padding and protection players can wear significantly.
Both of these may seem like unintuitive solutions, but there is a logic at work. It's been fairly well documented that increased padding and protection, rather than merely protecting players, frees them to use their bodies in increasingly violent ways. The launching missile hits are not a product of tough players but of incredibly absorbing padding and helmets. Get rid of pads outside of light body padding and get rid of head gear except for minimalist protection, and we'd see a safer game.
The 60-minute men solution actually serves several purposes. First, if players have to be on the field the whole game, then they will need to be in much better holistic athletic condition than players currently are (cough Haynesworth cough). More well rounded athletes means fewer injuries because players won't be pushing themselves to extremes as much. Second, you can't field a skinny QB who can't run or take a hit, because he will need to be able to play defense. So once again, specialization will be limited and overall fitness emphasized.
I've got about a 20-page document of rules I'd like to see eliminated or altered. I think American football could be a much simpler, more elegant game with all of the things we currently enjoy (including big hits). But these are a couple of the ones that I feel would make a big, positive impact if they were implemented tomorrow.
