The N.F.L. is under pressure from falling television ratings, lawsuits over its handling of concussions, and fan opposition to player protests during the national anthem.
Yet investors keep lining up to help start new football leagues. On Tuesday, the longtime N.F.L. executive Bill Polian and the television and movie producer Charlie Ebersol became the latest entrepreneurs to join the fray when they unveiled plans for the Alliance of American Football.
There have been several short-lived football leagues before, including the United Football League, United States Football League and XFL. Like others before them, Polian and Ebersol say they have a formula for success. They have acquired investments from Silicon Valley firms that will allow their eight-team league to start playing a week after the Super Bowl in February 2019. Their partners include CBS, which will show a few games on its main channel and some on its cable network. They will also launch a smartphone app on which fans will be able to stream games and play fantasy football.
The league will also aim for two-and-a-half hour games (N.F.L. games generally last at least three hours). To achieve that, there will be no kickoffs or extra points — only 2-point plays — and a 30-second play clock, as opposed to the N.F.L.’s 45-second clock. There will also be no television timeouts, which will lead to about 60 percent fewer commercials. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dayze:
I like the idea of no kick off.
sadly, i don't even watch kickoffs anymore. the odds of the ball being returned out of the endzone seem super low anyway.
I'm not sure how to fix that in the NFL. It's a vital part to strategy, but the play has become basically a useless play.
(too lazy to look up stats of returned kicks, kicks out of the EZ, and kicks returned for TDs).
maybe if a ball is kicked entirely out of the endzone w/out hitting the ground, the receiving team gets it at the 30 or 35, and if he catches it and kneels or lets it roll out of the endzone it goes back to the 20. at least give the returner a decision to make.
I dunno.
That was the idea, when they moved the kickoff to the 35 - they want touchbacks, to reduce injury. I could definitely see kickoffs being removed from the game in the next 5 years. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dayze:
I like the idea of no kick off.
sadly, i don't even watch kickoffs anymore. the odds of the ball being returned out of the endzone seem super low anyway.
I'm not sure how to fix that in the NFL. It's a vital part to strategy, but the play has become basically a useless play.
(too lazy to look up stats of returned kicks, kicks out of the EZ, and kicks returned for TDs).
maybe if a ball is kicked entirely out of the endzone w/out hitting the ground, the receiving team gets it at the 30 or 35, and if he catches it and kneels or lets it roll out of the endzone it goes back to the 20. at least give the returner a decision to make.
I dunno.
You're punishing strong legged kickers with that method. [Reply]
just have the kicker, and the kicker only, go out there on the field. Kick the ball from the 30 (or wherever). If it sails all the way out of the endzone w/out landing on the ground beforehand etc, the opposing team gets the ball at the 20; otherwise they get it at the 30. something to reward a skilled kicker.
as it is now, there's basically zero reason for anyone other than the kicker to be on the field.
Just make it like a kick contest of sorts.
I'm game for almost anything at this point with the NFL. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
You're punishing strong legged kickers with that method.
yeah, now that I re-read that, it's confusing.I was sort of going with the idea of encouraging returns / wanting to see returns...but I forgot they moved the KO spot up to the opposing 35 for player safety so most will sail out of the endzone etc. [Reply]
They should hire Cambridge Analytica to attack the NCAA and drive up discontent with how they run things. Take down the NCAA then sign contracts with Universities to create a new college football league where the players are paid, and the school can give them bullshit scholarships still. Then give a portion of all profits back to the education side of the Universities to keep everyone happy as well. [Reply]
I really would like to see an NFL competitor. Not because I want the nfl to go away. But because it's run by a bunch of stale farts. I hope like hell they combine with the xfl, not compete against each other. This kind of seems like a dick move on ebersols part given that his dad and McMahon were partners in the xfl. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
some things are better as a monopoly I think, NFL being one of them. Please no.
Totally disagree. A competitor league is necessary, and it needs to be one that's actually good and sustainable. The nfl can co-exist with another league, and it would push the nfl to be better. The nfl is stale because it's run by a bunch of billionaires who are afraid of change. [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
Can people trust it enough to gamble on it? That’s key.
What is key is IF this league can pull away the majority of the top talent from colleges and pay more $$ that is how the AFL strong armed NFL into a merger. Until that happens down the drain it will go. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink:
What is key is IF this league can pull away the majority of the top talent from colleges and pay more $$ that is how the AFL strong armed NFL into a merger. Until that happens down the drain it will go.
I disagree. A different league is a perfect place for dynamic football talent that are terrible fits for the nfl. Like Johnny manziel, Jr barrett, Tebow. If they try to compete with the nfl, they're dead in the water. That's where the xfl failed. Can't put 4th string talent in. Guys like manziel are exciting but you'd have to design an offense you'd never run in the NFL. It wouldn't beat the nfl, but I bet they could easily pull off MLS sized crowds. [Reply]