Have you lost interest in the NFL?

[dora_da_destroyer]

NBA stans are funny.

the 1% are getting richer. You're all being exploited

and the NBA has a players union because the NBA is all about generosity, no lockouts . NBA would love to exploit their players, but the union stopped that. Let's give them credit. The NFL is fukk ass, and yet the NBA allowed this guy to own a team for years

Spoiler

In February 2003, the Housing Rights Center of Los Angeles filed a housing discrimination case against Sterling on behalf of 18 tenants. The lawsuit featured several racist statements allegedly made by Sterling to employees, such as that "black people smell and attract vermin" and "hispanics just smoke and hang around the building" as well as Sterling's alleged intent to rent only to Korean tenants because "they will pay the rent and live in whatever conditions I give them". Part of the HRC case's resolution included U.S. District Judge Dale Fischer awarding the plaintiffs' attorney $4.9 million in attorneys fees. While the final terms for the plaintiffs were confidential, the judge said the fees were justified as the settlement obtained by the plaintiffs against Sterling was one of the largest of its kind and the public benefit terms were significant and wide-ranging.

In 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice then sued Sterling for housing discrimination for using race as a factor in filling some of his apartment buildings. The suit charged that Sterling refused to rent to non-Koreans in the Koreatown neighborhood and to African Americans in Beverly Hills.[101] In November 2009, ESPN reported that Sterling agreed to pay a fine of $2.7 million to settle claims brought by the Justice Department and Davin Day of Newport Beach[citation needed] that Sterling engaged in discriminatory rental practices against Hispanics, blacks, and families with children.[102]

In February 2009, Sterling was sued by former longtime Clippers executive Elgin Baylor for employment discrimination on the basis of age and race.[103] The lawsuit alleged that Sterling told Baylor that he wanted to fill his team with "poor black boys from the South and a white head coach".[101] The plaintiffs alleged that during negotiations for Danny Manning, Sterling said "I'm offering a lot of money for a poor black kid".[101][104] The suit also alleged that "the Caucasian head coachwas given a four-year, $22-million contract" while Baylor's salary had "been frozen at a comparatively paltry $350,000 since 2003".[103]

don't get it twisted. The NBA would love to run their league like the NFL. It's all about business at the end of the day.

please quote an actual NBA stan the next time you come with a reply like that. no where in my post did i mention the NBA

 

[CrimsonTider]

They weren't though.

It was an entertaining day after the 11am games

I'm talking about the primetime games

What games are you calling entertaining?

 

[jadillac]

I'm talking about the primetime games

What games are you calling entertaining?

well for starters, there's no way you could have watched all those games at once.

I thought OU/tOSU was very good game. Georgia/ND seemed interesting. Clemson/Auburn seemed like a defensive battle. USC/Stan seemed like a coming out party for USC, fun atmosphere.

But again, I can't say I devoted enough time to watching any replays

 

[King Musa]

NBA stans are funny.

the 1% are getting richer. You're all being exploited

and the NBA has a players union because the NBA is all about generosity, no lockouts . NBA would love to exploit their players, but the union prevented that. Let's give them credit. The NFL is fukk ass, and yet the NBA allowed this guy to own a team for years

Spoiler

In February 2003, the Housing Rights Center of Los Angeles filed a housing discrimination case against Sterling on behalf of 18 tenants. The lawsuit featured several racist statements allegedly made by Sterling to employees, such as that "black people smell and attract vermin" and "hispanics just smoke and hang around the building" as well as Sterling's alleged intent to rent only to Korean tenants because "they will pay the rent and live in whatever conditions I give them". Part of the HRC case's resolution included U.S. District Judge Dale Fischer awarding the plaintiffs' attorney $4.9 million in attorneys fees. While the final terms for the plaintiffs were confidential, the judge said the fees were justified as the settlement obtained by the plaintiffs against Sterling was one of the largest of its kind and the public benefit terms were significant and wide-ranging.

In 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice then sued Sterling for housing discrimination for using race as a factor in filling some of his apartment buildings. The suit charged that Sterling refused to rent to non-Koreans in the Koreatown neighborhood and to African Americans in Beverly Hills.[101] In November 2009, ESPN reported that Sterling agreed to pay a fine of $2.7 million to settle claims brought by the Justice Department and Davin Day of Newport Beach[citation needed] that Sterling engaged in discriminatory rental practices against Hispanics, blacks, and families with children.[102]

In February 2009, Sterling was sued by former longtime Clippers executive Elgin Baylor for employment discrimination on the basis of age and race.[103] The lawsuit alleged that Sterling told Baylor that he wanted to fill his team with "poor black boys from the South and a white head coach".[101] The plaintiffs alleged that during negotiations for Danny Manning, Sterling said "I'm offering a lot of money for a poor black kid".[101][104] The suit also alleged that "the Caucasian head coachwas given a four-year, $22-million contract" while Baylor's salary had "been frozen at a comparatively paltry $350,000 since 2003".[103]

don't get it twisted. The NBA would love to run their league like the NFL. It's all about business at the end of the day.

@dora_da_destroyer Is far from an NBA stan....You must work for goodell or some shyt cuz your cape is always hella tight...The NFL been lost me, and not just because of race issues..But, the shyt has gotten extremely fukking boring..It's even harder to get into when your team fukking sucks also. But, I don't expect much anymore from a 70 percent Black league where the highest paid players and most marketed players are still White as wonder bread.

 

[CrimsonTider]

well for starters, there's no way you could have watched all those games at once.

I thought OU/tOSU was very good game. Georgia/ND seemed interesting. Clemson/Auburn seemed like a defensive battle. USC/Stan seemed like a coming out party for USC, fun atmosphere.

But again, I can't say I devoted enough time to watching any replays

None of those games were good

Baker Mayfield & Darnold were the only good QBs of every team you listed

College &NFL have exciting games at about the same rate. CFB tricks people into thinking games are better than what they are because of underdogs & pageantry

 

[resurrection]

None of those games were good

Baker Mayfield & Darnold were the only good QBs of every team you listed

College &NFL have exciting games at about the same rate. CFB tricks people into thinking games are better than what they are because of underdogs & pageantry

Not really - I think the actual games are better because the refs keep the flags in their pockets (better than NFL refs, anyway) and let the players decide the game on the field, and teams actually still have different identities/playing styles

 

[CrimsonTider]

Not really - I think the actual games are better because the refs keep the flags in thecceir pockets (better than NFL refs, anyway) and let the players decide the game on the field, and teams actually still have different identities/playing styles

Do you have any data to back this up?

Also what different styles? The only thing College does differently is that the run game matters more because of the talent disparities. This means you can be successful with a bad QB.

 

[BlackBall]

It's just sports no one should give that much of a shyt it's just background noise until the Giants play

 

[Rocket Scientist]

I rather watch a boring,unpredictable,flawed league then to watch same teams dominate NBA Warriors,Cavs.Yes I know Lonzo is the future but Lakers aint aren't winning for a while.As for college the 4 team playoff teams probably gonna be Alabama,Clemson,and another 2 storied University outside of Lamar going for Heisman again have no interest

 

[South Paw]

these threads so played out

 

[resurrection]

Do you have any data to back this up?

No - it's what I perceive given the hundreds of hours of football I've watched in my life, which is the only thing I need to make my own opinion on which is more enjoyable. Even though I'm confident the data would back me up here, I don't know for sure and I don't care. There are too many flags in the NFL, period.

Also what different styles? The only thing College does differently is that the run game matters more because of the talent disparities. This means you can be successful with a bad QB.

How can you actually watch college football and ask that? Some teams run "pro style" taking snaps under center with a power run game and pocket passing, some teams run wishbone/triple option all game, some teams run every play out of the shotgun with zone reads/read option/RPO type plays, some do air raid style, etc. The blocking schemes and types of linemen you need to run these offenses are different. The types of QBs and skill players you need to run these offenses are different. And the type of defense you need to run to stop these offenses are different, and sometimes you need to scheme week to week. It's part of what makes college football fun.

In the NFL, if you don't run "pro style" (which I think has evolved from what the college game calls "pro style"), you're fukked. Sure part of that is because NFL DL and LB's are just as fast as athletic QBs so it's hard to get a run game based on the QB going. But a huge part of it also is that you can no longer breathe on a receiver or a QB in the pocket without getting flagged, so it's advantageous to teams to keep their QB in the pocket and look for big plays downfield. And if your RB can't go out and catch passes and contribute to the pass game, he's useless. So essentially every NFL team is going for the same thing. But I guarantee you if DBs were given more freedom to play physical in the secondary and QBs were less protected in the pocket, you'd see a lot more teams draw up creative running schemes, and eventually call upon a lot more athletic QBs running it. If they're getting bashed in the pocket anyway, might as well make them into a weapon on the ground. But, to your point, because the talent gap closes in the NFL, it requires a more special athlete to be successful as a mobile QB than it does in college, so it would be inherently more difficult to pull off, so many teams would forego this and still go with tried and true pocket passing (even though the difficulty has been turned up). You'd have clashes of style, defenses forced to prepare for different types of offenses, etc. You'd actually be able to tell teams apart because they'd have more freedom to run different offensive playbooks, rather than conforming to the only thing that works.

 

[South Paw]

what

No - it's what I perceive given the hundreds of hours of football I've watched in my life, which is the only thing I need to make my own opinion on which is more enjoyable. Even though I'm confident the data would back me up here, I don't know for sure and I don't care. There are too many flags in the NFL, period.


How can you actually watch college football and ask that? Some teams run "pro style" taking snaps under center with a power run game and pocket passing, some teams run wishbone/triple option all game, some teams run every play out of the shotgun with zone reads/read option/RPO type plays, some do air raid style, etc. The blocking schemes and types of linemen you need to run these offenses are different. The types of QBs and skill players you need to run these offenses are different. And the type of defense you need to run to stop these offenses are different, and sometimes you need to scheme week to week. It's part of what makes college football fun.

In the NFL, if you don't run "pro style" (which I think has evolved from what the college game calls "pro style"), you're fukked. Sure part of that is because NFL DL and LB's are just as fast as athletic QBs so it's hard to get a run game based on the QB going. But a huge part of it also is that you can no longer breathe on a receiver or a QB in the pocket without getting flagged, so it's advantageous to teams to keep their QB in the pocket and look for big plays downfield. And if your RB can't go out and catch passes and contribute to the pass game, he's useless. So essentially every NFL team is going for the same thing. But I guarantee you if DBs were given more freedom to play physical in the secondary and QBs were less protected in the pocket, you'd see a lot more teams draw up creative running schemes, and eventually call upon a lot more athletic QBs running it. If they're getting bashed in the pocket anyway, might as well make them into a weapon on the ground. But, to your point, because the talent gap closes in the NFL, it requires a more special athlete to be successful as a mobile QB than it does in college, so it would be inherently more difficult to pull off, so many teams would forego this and still go with tried and true pocket passing (even though the difficulty has been turned up). You'd have clashes of style, defenses forced to prepare for different types of offenses, etc. You'd actually be able to tell teams apart because they'd have more freedom to run different offensive playbooks, rather than conforming to the only thing that works.

what about Seattle San Fran back in the day, baltimore etc?

 

[dora_da_destroyer]

I don't buy the "I am getting older and have more responsibilities" argument though

Yes - for individuals like you and me, that is definitely the case. But from the NFL's perspective, that should constantly be a significant portion of their fanbase. When the game was BLOWING UP in the earlier years of this decade, millennials (the largest media consuming generation) were graduating, getting jobs, getting married, starting families, etc. In the 90s, the game started to overtake baseball, and the generations before millennials were doing the same things. Regardless of how you slice it, "I'm busy now" might be true for YOU, but it's been true of the same portion of their fanbase (if not more) than it's always been, so it's not the problem the NFL is facing, nor can they do a god damn thing about that for folks who do fall in that bucket.

seems a little off base as far as the way you're matching up millenials to those life events in the late 00's/early 10's. Anyway, millenials are very much the generation to break the old cycle, we care about experiences - i.e. not spending Sunday funday glued to hours of football - when you can be out with friends/family or engaging in something more meaningful to you. Add in all the other forms of media catching our attention and the amount of good shows across traditional tv and streaming services, it would make sense that this generation continue to split our attention and not have the same "I have to watch 4-5 games/week" mentality. It's only going to get worse with the generation behind us who are being raised on YouTube and social media and completely avoiding the traditional tv/advertising zeitgeist

 

[Saint1]

seems a little off base as far as the way you're matching up millenials to those life events in the late 00's/early 10's. Anyway, millenials are very much the generation to break the old cycle, we care about experiences - i.e. not spending Sunday funday glued to hours of football - when you can be out with friends/family or engaging in something more meaningful to you. Add in all the other forms of media catching our attention and the amount of good shows across traditional tv and streaming services, it would make sense that this generation continue to split our attention and not have the same "I have to watch 4-5 games/week" mentality. It's only going to get worse with the generation behind us who are being raised on YouTube and social media and completely avoiding the traditional tv/advertising zeitgeist

This is a big point.

The other point being, the NFL hit it's peak like 2 or 3 years ago. Things can't go up forever there has to be a down point, this is the real issue, which isn't an issue at all because the NFL is still a Billion dollar industry.

 

[UserNameless]

seems a little off base as far as the way you're matching up millenials to those life events in the late 00's/early 10's. Anyway, millenials are very much the generation to break the old cycle, we care about experiences - i.e. not spending Sunday funday glued to hours of football - when you can be out with friends/family or engaging in something more meaningful to you. Add in all the other forms of media catching our attention and the amount of good shows across traditional tv and streaming services, it would make sense that this generation continue to split our attention and not have the same "I have to watch 4-5 games/week" mentality. It's only going to get worse with the generation behind us who are being raised on YouTube and social media and completely avoiding the traditional tv/advertising zeitgeist

Yeah these youngins aint gonna be fukkin with American pro football like that.

NBA lends itself to their attention spans. And markets to them way more.

Soccer will keep eating because it's the wave they grew up on.


American Pro FB and pro baseball are gonna be like dinosaurs. At this point they're becoming more of and old head pastime.