PDA

View Full Version : Huddling


Saul Good
06-21-2013, 10:09 PM
Would football be better if huddling was eliminated by reducing the play clock to 20 seconds?

Am I crazy to think that NFL teams shouldn't need to huddle? No other sport does it. NBA players don't draw up a play after every change of possession. It's boring as shit. It slows the game down. It's a complete waste of time.

Two reasons that it could actually happen.

1. The league is so worried about concussions that they might want to see the players get smaller. 325 pound D-Lineman won't exist. This could reduce the force in the collissions and reduce concussions.

2. The league is dying to figure out how to get more global appeal. The rest of the world loves soccer because it's a continuous game. When they see football, they get bored. It's funny because Americans think soccer is too boring because there isn't as much action, and they think football is boring because there's too much inaction. If you combined the superior action of football with the superior lack of inaction in soccer, that sport would take over the world.



Am I nuts? Should we eliminate the huddle?

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2013, 10:13 PM
Momentum=force times velocity. Getting drilled by a 260 pounder running a 4.58 is every bit as ruinous, if not more so, than getting pancaked by a Wilfork.

Sweet Daddy Hate
06-21-2013, 10:14 PM
LMAO A non-stop, no huddle with Alex Smith:

Yeah, let's get that boy to the IR asap!

Inmem58
06-21-2013, 10:15 PM
We need to tire these guys out ASAP.


I say 10 seconds on the clock

Inmem58
06-21-2013, 10:16 PM
LMAO A non-stop, no huddle with Alex Smith:

Yeah, let's get that boy to the IR asap!

I didn't see your "ASAP" until now. Sorry I Q'd your abbreviation

KcMizzou
06-21-2013, 10:16 PM
Yeah, you're nuts. NFL football is all about violent collisions.

I'm all for making the game as safe as it can be, but I really don't give a shit what the rest of the world thinks.

Saul Good
06-21-2013, 10:18 PM
Momentum=force times velocity. Getting drilled by a 260 pounder running a 4.58 is every bit as ruinous, if not more so, than getting pancaked by a Wilfork.

Right, but you're slowing down the players as well. They don't get to recover between plays. They don't get to sub.

cosmo20002
06-21-2013, 10:18 PM
Would football be better if huddling was eliminated by reducing the play clock to 20 seconds?

Am I crazy to think that NFL teams shouldn't need to huddle? No other sport does it. NBA players don't draw up a play after every change of possession. It's boring as shit. It slows the game down. It's a complete waste of time.

Two reasons that it could actually happen.

1. The league is so worried about concussions that they might want to see the players get smaller. 325 pound D-Lineman won't exist. This could reduce the force in the collissions and reduce concussions.

2. The league is dying to figure out how to get more global appeal. The rest of the world loves soccer because it's a continuous game. When they see football, they get bored. It's funny because Americans think soccer is too boring because there isn't as much action, and they think football is boring because there's too much inaction. If you combined the superior action of football with the superior lack of inaction in soccer, that sport would take over the world.



Am I nuts? Should we eliminate the huddle?

Sounds like it could be appealing, but what is the relation of huddles to #1 - concussions and smaller players?

Actually, reducing the play clock to 20 seconds would mean more plays, and therefore likely more injuries/concussions.

Sweet Daddy Hate
06-21-2013, 10:20 PM
We need to tire these guys out ASAP.


I say 10 seconds on the clock

Eh, great minds and all...

Sweet Daddy Hate
06-21-2013, 10:21 PM
Why not? I'm betting the Axl Reid "Deer in Headlights"-offense would be spec-fucking-tacular!LMAO

Saul Good
06-21-2013, 10:23 PM
Sounds like it could be appealing, but what is the relation of huddles to #1 - concussions and smaller players?

Actually, reducing the play clock to 20 seconds would mean more plays, and therefore likely more injuries/concussions.

You'd shorten the game. You could have shorter quarters.

Huddling gives players time to catch their breath between plays. If you can't catch your breath, you are going to need to focus more on endurance and less on explosion. Smaller, faster, more in shape athletes will dominate the game.

-King-
06-21-2013, 10:38 PM
Are you trying to compare NBA plays to NFL plays?

And plus, without the huddles, how are QBs supposed to communicate with the WRs to tell them what to run? Can't go to each of them or else that would take up more time than the actual huddle.

cosmo20002
06-21-2013, 10:45 PM
You'd shorten the game. You could have shorter quarters.

Huddling gives players time to catch their breath between plays. If you can't catch your breath, you are going to need to focus more on endurance and less on explosion. Smaller, faster, more in shape athletes will dominate the game.

I suppose, but not sure it would make a huge difference.

Shortening the game, shorter quarters--yeah, now you're getting a bit nutty. I know this is just a "what if?" exercise, but the league would never go for that. Shorter game = less ads = less money

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2013, 10:48 PM
Are you trying to compare NBA plays to NFL plays?

And plus, without the huddles, how are QBs supposed to communicate with the WRs to tell them what to run? Can't go to each of them or else that would take up more time than the actual huddle.

We already have dozens of examples in college and pro football of successful ways to operate an offense without a huddle. Sign boards, hand signals, vocal audibles...they all work.

Phobia
06-21-2013, 10:48 PM
Even Donger is saying, "Woah, this guy is an idiot!"

teedubya
06-21-2013, 10:49 PM
I thought this thread was going to be about Rex Hudler.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2013, 10:52 PM
Despite the intentions of such a change, research into CTE shows that concussions, while extremely dangerous, are not the primary culprit of brain injuries in most of these players. Thousands of sub-concussive impacts, the kind you receive on almost every play, are the impacts that led to CTE.

It's like radiation. Yes, a large dose can be lethal, but health physicists determined that there is no safe minimum level of radiation exposure. Any exposure increases potential health risks.

The fact of the matter is that football cannot be played in a way that current neurologists would determine as safe and retain its core characteristics. Thus, fans and players will either have to accept the danger implicit in the game, or do and follow something else.

KcMizzou
06-21-2013, 10:52 PM
I thought this thread was going to be about Rex Hudler.Woah, that guy is an idiot!

-King-
06-21-2013, 10:53 PM
We already have dozens of examples in college and pro football of successful ways to operate an offense without a huddle. Sign boards, hand signals, vocal audibles...they all work.

I don't know if sign boards would work in the NFL. And the hand signals/vocal audibles occur after the huddles for the most part. Even Peyton Manning teams still huddle for the majority of the plays.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2013, 10:57 PM
I don't know if sign boards would work in the NFL. And the hand signals/vocal audibles occur after the huddles for the most part. Even Peyton Manning teams still huddle for the majority of the plays.

There's no reason why a sign board wouldn't work in the NFL. It looks foolish, but the concept of coding a play is commonplace.

The K-Gun worked pretty well for Buffalo. There's no reason why any NFL QB couldn't call his own plays.

Demonpenz
06-21-2013, 10:58 PM
The rest of the world loves soccer because Juan and habib can't afford anything but a soccer ball.

KS Smitty
06-21-2013, 11:07 PM
Crap! I thought this post was about football cuddling. It sure would lead to a lot fewer fumbles.

aturnis
06-21-2013, 11:21 PM
Sounds like the worst idea of all time. Seriously.

Fast sloppy football, is not better than regular football.

tk13
06-21-2013, 11:28 PM
I think you could do many of the things suggested in the thread. Would it make the game better? I don't know. It would probably increase the gap even more between good QBs and bad QBs. Might make the game more like the NBA. Then again the Colts, Patriots, Steelers and Ravens have won the AFC almost every year this century anyway.

TribalElder
06-21-2013, 11:38 PM
Merican football ain't for the world it's for Merica'. The rest of the world likes soccer because they are pussy and just jealous cause they ain't Merican.

KS Smitty
06-21-2013, 11:43 PM
The rest of the world loves soccer because Juan and habib can't afford anything but a soccer ball.

But they have a lot of pig skin available so why not football?

AussieChiefsFan
06-21-2013, 11:45 PM
So, basically like one huge no huddle game. That'd mess some teams up so bad. LMAO

Phobia
06-22-2013, 12:45 AM
But they have a lot of pig skin available so why not football?

Why not just play rugby?

Phobia
06-22-2013, 12:45 AM
Why not play football with remote controlled robots? That way nobody gets hurt.

Ace Gunner
06-22-2013, 01:38 AM
Would football be better if huddling was eliminated by reducing the play clock to 20 seconds?

Am I crazy to think that NFL teams shouldn't need to huddle? No other sport does it. NBA players don't draw up a play after every change of possession. It's boring as shit. It slows the game down. It's a complete waste of time.

Two reasons that it could actually happen.

1. The league is so worried about concussions that they might want to see the players get smaller. 325 pound D-Lineman won't exist. This could reduce the force in the collissions and reduce concussions.

2. The league is dying to figure out how to get more global appeal. The rest of the world loves soccer because it's a continuous game. When they see football, they get bored. It's funny because Americans think soccer is too boring because there isn't as much action, and they think football is boring because there's too much inaction. If you combined the superior action of football with the superior lack of inaction in soccer, that sport would take over the world.



Am I nuts? Should we eliminate the huddle?

No. JFC football is not for you.

Exoter175
06-22-2013, 02:40 AM
Would football be better if huddling was eliminated by reducing the play clock to 20 seconds?

Am I crazy to think that NFL teams shouldn't need to huddle? No other sport does it. NBA players don't draw up a play after every change of possession. It's boring as shit. It slows the game down. It's a complete waste of time.

Two reasons that it could actually happen.

1. The league is so worried about concussions that they might want to see the players get smaller. 325 pound D-Lineman won't exist. This could reduce the force in the collissions and reduce concussions.

2. The league is dying to figure out how to get more global appeal. The rest of the world loves soccer because it's a continuous game. When they see football, they get bored. It's funny because Americans think soccer is too boring because there isn't as much action, and they think football is boring because there's too much inaction. If you combined the superior action of football with the superior lack of inaction in soccer, that sport would take over the world.



Am I nuts? Should we eliminate the huddle?

Yeah, you're nuts.

Football is a methodic, intentional sport. Possessions are guaranteed, and with 22 players on the field at any one time, you're going to need time to coordinate with them.

On top of that, the NFL is a business. Which you seem to completely forget in this case. If they took time away from the clock, they drastically reduce ad revenues in their network deals, concessions sales at the game, and there's absolutely no corroboration supporting the idea that a faster, smaller defense would lead to less concussions.

If anything, the guys giving the concussions in this league are largely the smaller frame guys. Safeties, Linebackers, Corners, Running Backs, etc.

You don't really see a lot of Centers and Defensive Tackles handing out concussions as frequently.

theelusiveeightrop
06-22-2013, 05:58 AM
No huddles is a great idea.

LoneWolf
06-22-2013, 06:44 AM
Would football be better if huddling was eliminated by reducing the play clock to 20 seconds?

Am I crazy to think that NFL teams shouldn't need to huddle? No other sport does it. NBA players don't draw up a play after every change of possession. It's boring as shit. It slows the game down. It's a complete waste of time.

Two reasons that it could actually happen.

1. The league is so worried about concussions that they might want to see the players get smaller. 325 pound D-Lineman won't exist. This could reduce the force in the collissions and reduce concussions.

2. The league is dying to figure out how to get more global appeal. The rest of the world loves soccer because it's a continuous game. When they see football, they get bored. It's funny because Americans think soccer is too boring because there isn't as much action, and they think football is boring because there's too much inaction. If you combined the superior action of football with the superior lack of inaction in soccer, that sport would take over the world.



Am I nuts? Should we eliminate the huddle?

The rest of the world loves soccer because they grew up watching and playing soccer, it's cheap to play, and you can play soccer almost anywhere there's open space. To claim that soccer is internationally liked because of its non-stop action is beyond stupid. Every time the ball is kicked out of bounds play stops (this can happen several times within a minute of play), setting up a corner kick stops play, and any time one of these Euro trash douchebags falls down after being slightly touched there is a stop in play.

Football doesn't necessarily need a huddle, but it does require a significant amount of time between plays. The line of scrimmage itself dictates this. "Hey, Brandon Flowers, you just sprinted 70 yards covering Calvin Johnson on a deep fly pattern, you jumped up and knocked the ball down, and fell flat on your back after making the play. Now get your ass up and sprint back to the line if scrimmage because there is a another play in 20 seconds. Oh, and while your sprinting back to the line make sure to get the next defensive play from the sideline." You'd have to have rosters of 100 players to keep up with that pace.

Saul Good
06-22-2013, 07:01 AM
The rest of the world loves soccer because they grew up watching and playing soccer, it's cheap to play, and you can play soccer almost anywhere there's open space. To claim that soccer is internationally liked because of its non-stop action is beyond stupid. Every time the ball is kicked out of bounds play stops (this can happen several times within a minute of play), setting up a corner kick stops play, and any time one of these Euro trash douchebags falls down after being slightly touched there is a stop in play.

Football doesn't necessarily need a huddle, but it does require a significant amount of time between plays. The line of scrimmage itself dictates this. "Hey, Brandon Flowers, you just sprinted 70 yards covering Calvin Johnson on a deep fly pattern, you jumped up and knocked the ball down, and fell flat on your back after making the play. Now get your ass up and sprint back to the line if scrimmage because there is a another play in 20 seconds. Oh, and while your sprinting back to the line make sure to get the next defensive play from the sideline." You'd have to have rosters of 100 players to keep up with that pace.

If hockey players can make entire line changes while the plays are going on, I'm pretty sure football players can manage to get lined up. People are acting like there aren't already teams that go no-huddle already. (If you haven't noticed, they tend to be pretty successful, too.)



As for the rest of the world, you act like they still all live in huts. Europe can afford to play football. They've been exposed to it their entire lives. They just don't like it. They've been exposed to basketball, and it's caught on. The constant stopping is what most sports fans in other countries don't like about football.

There's simply no reason that players need to huddle for 30 seconds between plays that last 5 seconds...at least not every time. Let the huddle after first downs or something. 120 huddles per game is overkill.

LoneWolf
06-22-2013, 07:20 AM
If hockey players can make entire line changes while the plays are going on, I'm pretty sure football players can manage to get lined up. People are acting like there aren't already teams that go no-huddle already. (If you haven't noticed, they tend to be pretty successful, too.)



As for the rest of the world, you act like they still all live in huts. Europe can afford to play football. They've been exposed to it their entire lives. They just don't like it. They've been exposed to basketball, and it's caught on. The constant stopping is what most sports fans in other countries don't like about football.

There's simply no reason that players need to huddle for 30 seconds between plays that last 5 seconds...at least not every time. Let the huddle after first downs or something. 120 huddles per game is overkill.

I said that the huddle might not be necessary, but the time between plays is. Even the teams that run a no huddle extensively use a significant portion of the play clock before they snap the ball. The no-huddle is used as a strategic tactic to stop the defense from substituting and to allow the offense to see how the defense is lining up and possibly audible to another play to take advantage of the defensive alignment.

Have you ever played football?

BCD
06-22-2013, 07:35 AM
Yeah, you're nuts.

unnecessary drama
06-22-2013, 07:37 AM
here is my thought on NFL football:

It isn't broke, stop trying to fix it.

notorious
06-22-2013, 07:38 AM
here is my thought on NFL football:

It isn't broke, stop trying to fix it.

/thread

BCD
06-22-2013, 07:39 AM
Terrible idea.

Goodell will love it!

BCD
06-22-2013, 07:40 AM
here is my thought on NFL football:

It isn't broke, stop trying to fix it.

:clap:

Fish
06-22-2013, 07:40 AM
Why would we want to make football retarded?

Psyko Tek
06-22-2013, 07:41 AM
But they have a lot of pig skin available so why not football?

religious reasons

LoneWolf
06-22-2013, 07:43 AM
Why would we want to make football retarded?

Because that would make it special. Look what it did for the Olympics.

Olympics + Retarded = Special Olympics

Saul Good
06-22-2013, 07:48 AM
here is my thought on NFL football:

It isn't broke, stop trying to fix it.

I would prefer that...Roger isn't going to let that happen, though.

Chief Roundup
06-22-2013, 08:13 AM
Man just leave shit alone. Violent things are going to happen when you are playing, watching, or participating in a violent sport.

Dave Lane
06-22-2013, 08:22 AM
Right, but you're slowing down the players as well. They don't get to recover between plays. They don't get to sub.

Being tired leads to more injuries I promise you that.

Ace Gunner
06-22-2013, 08:30 AM
people who have not at least played/coached this game at the college level should not get their grubby hands on it. hello roger.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 09:04 AM
Momentum=force times velocity. Getting drilled by a 260 pounder running a 4.58 is every bit as ruinous, if not more so, than getting pancaked by a Wilfork.

Close. Momentum=mass times velocity. Your point is a good one. I think the mass is more important than velocity for the repetitive collisions that linemen experience though.

Saul Good
06-22-2013, 09:06 AM
The idea is more about making the game better. If everyone always played like Oregon, people would laugh at the idea of huddling between plays.

wazu
06-22-2013, 09:16 AM
Do the same thing with baseball. 10 second clock between pitches, 20 second clock between batters.

Saul Good
06-22-2013, 09:19 AM
Do the same thing with baseball. 10 second clock between pitches, 20 second clock between batters.

And get rid of the warmup games of catch between half innings.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 09:25 AM
I like the idea. Someone needs to start flying a banner over NFL stadiums, "NO MORE HUDDLES!"

Saul Good
06-22-2013, 11:48 AM
For all the shit the XFL tried, this would have been interesting.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 11:54 AM
Close. Momentum=mass times velocity. Your point is a good one. I think the mass is more important than velocity for the repetitive collisions that linemen experience though.

I was originally going to type the force equation, then changed to momentum w/o the appropriate edit. This is why I was shitty at physics.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 11:55 AM
And get rid of the warmup games of catch between half innings.

That is a terrible idea.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 12:07 PM
For all the shit the XFL tried, this would have been interesting.

One XFL idea I liked was paying players to win games. I don't remember exactly how it worked, but I think there was a pot of money riding on each game and the winning team got to split it.

KCrockaholic
06-22-2013, 12:11 PM
The game was perfect 8 years ago.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 12:21 PM
One XFL idea I liked was paying players to win games. I don't remember exactly how it worked, but I think there was a pot of money riding on each game and the winning team got to split it.

What do you think playoff shares are?

The NFL has a bonus system in place for players who outperform their contracts. It's called performance-based bonuses. Burfict made almost 300K extra last year.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 12:27 PM
What do you think playoff shares are?

The NFL has a bonus system in place for players who outperform their contracts. It's called performance-based bonuses. Burfict made almost 300K extra last year.

I understand that teams are allowed to include performance incentives in contracts now. I'd like to see it built into the system and be team oriented. Playoff shares are fine, but I'm talking about the regular season. Playoff shares pay for additional work based on each game they play. I want a portion of the player's normal non-playoff pay to come from each game they win.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 12:52 PM
You obviously don't understand.

It's not a performance incentive in the contract. It's doled out from the league as a part of the CBA:

Players have been paid nearly $700 million cumulatively since the inception of the Performance-Based Pay program, which was implemented as part of the NFL's 2002 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the NFL Players Association.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 01:04 PM
You obviously don't understand.

It's not a performance incentive in the contract. It's doled out from the league as a part of the CBA:

Players have been paid nearly $700 million cumulatively since the inception of the Performance-Based Pay program, which was implemented as part of the NFL's 2002 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the NFL Players Association.

You're right, I was unaware of that. How is it payed out?

DJ's left nut
06-22-2013, 01:10 PM
The gaps between the haves/have nots at QB would be completely insurmountable at that point.

Right now you can still compete and at least make the playoffs with an average QB. If everything was no huddle, you'd have 6-8 teams that would just fist-fuck the rest of the league.

There'd be one way and one way to win only. It would become arcade football.

Nah, I'd probably end up watching fewer and fewer NFL games at that point and turn my attention to college football, where you can still win using several different styles.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 01:11 PM
You're right, I was unaware of that. How is it payed out?

Under the Performance-Based Pay system, a fund is created and used as a supplemental form of player compensation based on a comparison of playing time to salary. Players become eligible to receive a bonus distribution in any regular season in which they play at least one official down.

Performance-Based Pay is computed by using a "player index." To produce the index, a player's regular-season playtime (total plays on offense, defense and special teams) is divided by his adjusted regular-season compensation (full season salary, prorated portion of signing bonus, earned incentives). Each player's index is then compared to those of the other players on his team to determine the amount of his pay.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000152307/article/vontaze-burfict-earns-top-figure-in-performancebased-pay

Rausch
06-22-2013, 01:15 PM
Under the Performance-Based Pay system, a fund is created and used as a supplemental form of player compensation based on a comparison of playing time to salary. Players become eligible to receive a bonus distribution in any regular season in which they play at least one official down.

Performance-Based Pay is computed by using a "player index." To produce the index, a player's regular-season playtime (total plays on offense, defense and special teams) is divided by his adjusted regular-season compensation (full season salary, prorated portion of signing bonus, earned incentives). Each player's index is then compared to those of the other players on his team to determine the amount of his pay.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000152307/article/vontaze-burfict-earns-top-figure-in-performancebased-pay

Sounds incredibly complicated...

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 01:18 PM
Sounds incredibly complicated...

Two guys show up to work with the same job. Guy A establishes himself as a better worker, works longer hours and is more productive in those hours than Guy B.

Subsequently, Guy A earns a bonus. Guy B doesn't.

sedated
06-22-2013, 01:29 PM
If you want to make the game safer, go back to minimal pads and leather helmets.

The more protection you have, the more you can give up your body to destroy someone else.

Guru
06-22-2013, 01:33 PM
yes, lets make the game even more favorable to the top tier QBs.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 05:09 PM
Under the Performance-Based Pay system, a fund is created and used as a supplemental form of player compensation based on a comparison of playing time to salary. Players become eligible to receive a bonus distribution in any regular season in which they play at least one official down.

Performance-Based Pay is computed by using a "player index." To produce the index, a player's regular-season playtime (total plays on offense, defense and special teams) is divided by his adjusted regular-season compensation (full season salary, prorated portion of signing bonus, earned incentives). Each player's index is then compared to those of the other players on his team to determine the amount of his pay.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000152307/article/vontaze-burfict-earns-top-figure-in-performancebased-pay

Ok, well that's similar, except that it's rewarding being on the field, win or lose, instead of winning. The formula sounds reasonable except that I'd like to see each game's allocation of money go only to the winning team.

PGM
06-22-2013, 05:22 PM
This is going in your Cons section Saul...

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-22-2013, 06:48 PM
Ok, well that's similar, except that it's rewarding being on the field, win or lose, instead of winning. The formula sounds reasonable except that I'd like to see each game's allocation of money go only to the winning team.

So if Jamaal Charles puts up 240 all purpose yards and his team loses because he has worthless ass Brady Quinn at QB he gets no money, but the CB who blew multiple assignments and missed tackles does because Quinn was so incompetent that he was unable to complete a forward pass.

cosmo20002
06-22-2013, 07:02 PM
One XFL idea I liked was paying players to win games. I don't remember exactly how it worked, but I think there was a pot of money riding on each game and the winning team got to split it.

Fun XFL rule: A punt over 25 yards was a "live" ball, just like a kickoff.

unnecessary drama
06-22-2013, 07:09 PM
yeah lets change the NFL to the XFL

it worked so well

patteeu
06-22-2013, 07:12 PM
So if Jamaal Charles puts up 240 all purpose yards and his team loses because he has worthless ass Brady Quinn at QB he gets no money, but the CB who blew multiple assignments and missed tackles does because Quinn was so incompetent that he was unable to complete a forward pass.

Yes. Team reward for winning.

unnecessary drama
06-22-2013, 07:12 PM
Yes. Team reward for winning.

Ridiculous.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 07:14 PM
yeah lets change the NFL to the XFL

it worked so well

The NFL wouldn't have a well-established, extraordinarily-well-funded, already-stocked-with-the-best-players league to compete with like the XFL did.

patteeu
06-22-2013, 07:14 PM
Ridiculous.

Why?

unnecessary drama
06-22-2013, 07:18 PM
Why?

so Barry Sanders should have never made any money

got it

patteeu
06-22-2013, 07:45 PM
so Barry Sanders should have never made any money

got it

No, where did you get that? I'm talking about a bonus after each game for the winning team. The players would still have individual contracts just like they do now.

listopencil
06-22-2013, 10:33 PM
If hockey players can make entire line changes while the plays are going on...

A hockey line is five guys, and line changes tend to happen behind the play.