The NFL Should Revert to 1990s rules and expand by 32 teams

[adembroski]

That's right... double the size of the league and go back to the rules that existed in the '80s and '90s for the passing game.

Yes, talent would be a bit diluted, but wouldn't you love to see an NFL team win the Superbowl with the option?

NFL Football would still be vastly faster and a better brand of football than college, but it would create greater disparity in talent, allowing for more diversity in the game. Not quite to the degree of College Football, but at least something more akin to the '80s, when we had the West Coast, the K-Gun, the Gibbs singleback, and many more divergent systems. In Today's NFL, one team's 5 WR set looks much like the next team's 5 WR set, and quite honestly, it's becoming dull.

Roll back the offensive orientated rule changes of the 2000s and double the number of teams, and the league will become infinitely more interesting.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

[Saluki]

If i wanted to watch college football on sunday i'd tape the game saturday and watch it a day later

 

[Archer]

Not a fan of extending the league at all . I would like to see some more diversity in offenses though

 

[SHOGUN]

While it would be nice to see some variety from offenses and defenses not being castrated by the new rule enforcement, expanding the league is not the answer. 32 teams is perfect.

 

[strahanfan92]

Yeah when you have a big city with a great team like San Diego having trouble selling out their games, expanding is not the solution.

 

[Hasselbeck]

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

You are.

[/thread]

 

[adembroski]

You guys are the party of no. How would you bring diversity to the league if you were tasked to do so?

 

[Hasselbeck]

You guys are the party of no. How would you bring diversity to the league if you were tasked to do so?

You can't expand by 32 teams when right now there is such a huge gap of talent among .. well 32 teams.

We almost had two teams go 16-0 this season.. the Colts likely would have had they wanted to. The talent level between the Colts, Saints and the like are ridiculous in comparison to the Rams, Bucs, Lions and the like.

If you add teams that doesn't make the quality of play better - it makes it much much worse.

 

[Saluki]

What do you mean by diversity? I think NFL teams are plenty diverse without having to double the teams or having teams run gimmicky college offenses

 

[Goober]

I don't think the league would be successful with teams like the Wyoming Cougars and New Hampshire Sailors.

 

[strahanfan92]

More asians

 

[adembroski]

No, no Asians, that's worse than my idea. Next?

Really, I'm just looking for ideas to encourage a situation where the teams no longer look like the same thing in different uniforms. The only teams that look remotely different from other teams are the 49ers and Colts, and that's because the Colts still run the system that Manning knows inside out and upside down, and the 49ers don't know what the fuck they're doing.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

What do you mean by diversity? I think NFL teams are plenty diverse without having to double the teams or having teams run gimmicky college offenses

There is very little diversity in today's NFL.

Just about every team runs the same 2 or three offensive systems. If you gave everyone the same uniforms, you would be hard pressed to be able to tell the difference between the teams based on offensive strategies--especially compared to 20 years ago. Pretty much every team runs some variation of what we now call the WCO (which is a far cry from what Bill Walsh was running in the 80's. Reid's offense is the closest).

 

[adembroski]

What do you mean by diversity? I think NFL teams are plenty diverse without having to double the teams or having teams run gimmicky college offenses

Gimmicky? Look at the history of NFL Football... 70+ years worth... and honestly tell me that the triple option is gimmicky but empty backfield 5 wide is not.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

You can't expand by 32 teams when right now there is such a huge gap of talent among .. well 32 teams.

We almost had two teams go 16-0 this season.. the Colts likely would have had they wanted to. The talent level between the Colts, Saints and the like are ridiculous in comparison to the Rams, Bucs, Lions and the like.

If you add teams that doesn't make the quality of play better - it makes it much much worse.

The only gap in talent is at QB.

For the most part, teams who find QB's win, teams who don't lose.

RB's are largely interchangable. I thouched on this in a post earlier in the season. Same goes for WR's. You have a few elite guys scattered around the league, and everyone esle is largely the same, with production only varying based on situation.

Aside from QB, you have two positions where a team can really seperate themselves--LT, and elite level pass rusher. That's it. Three positions where talent is thin.

The only real reason you can't have more expansion is because of the already bad QB play.

EDIT--Just look how terrible the Colts looked without Manning. That's proof enough that the precieved talent gap really only extends to QB's.

 

[adembroski]

While it would be nice to see some variety from offenses and defenses not being castrated by the new rule enforcement, expanding the league is not the answer. 32 teams is perfect.

I do agree that 32 teams is perfect, which is why I advocated precisely doubling the number of teams... the basic structure of the league would remain the same, there would simply be 4 conference championships and a Final Four before the Superbowl instead.

The problem with 32 teams being perfect is that the NFL will expand, whether 32 is perfect or not, and I seriously doubt they're going to expand by exactly 8 teams and keep the division structure intact. We'll be back to an unbalanced league, so we might as well think long term and decide where it's going.

In time, we will have the European and Oceanic Football Conferences, we might as well accept that.

 

[adembroski]

The NFL seems terrified to think outside the box. It's kinda like having a high school class with one or two regular kids and a bunch of cheaters. The minute one person does something, everyone else is doing it. Whether it's the Tampa 2, the 3-4, the spread offense, timeouts before kicks, the always prevalent prevent defense.

Which is probably why I prefer college ball. You've got all types of offenses, teams willing to try gimmicky offenses, out of the ordinary defenses (the 5-2 or 3-3-5), converting players, hook and ladders, anything you could think of. Hell, the NFL even stole the Wildcat offense. That had a little success and now half the teams in the NFL have a package for it.

For being "higher level football", it sure is a watered down, copycat league thats mostly scared shit-less when it comes to new ideas.

I agree, which is why I think more teams can only improve the situation. More opportunities, instead of this constantly cycling same 40-some odd Head Coaches, someone with some new ideas might show up.

I mean how in the fuck did Jim Mora Jr. get another chance? Really! I can't think of anyone who's ever called that guy a good coach. Dennis Erickson? They keep recycling the same fucking people. The same failures.

If the Broncos defense is good next year, Mike Nolan will get another job... and he'll suck again.

Furthermore, the talent gap created by more teams would be almost instantly closed by the creation of new roles in the NFL. 275LB guards that can move will be a commodity again, option quarterbacks... by doubling the number of TYPES of players, the talent level closes because now an extremely talented player who simply doesn't fit the way the NFL uses a given player today has a place to go at that level.

 

[Aso]

What about adding 8 teams... 1 team in each division. I like that idea.

 

[Hasselbeck]

The only gap in talent is at QB.

For the most part, teams who find QB's win, teams who don't lose.

RB's are largely interchangable. I thouched on this in a post earlier in the season. Same goes for WR's. You have a few elite guys scattered around the league, and everyone esle is largely the same, with production only varying based on situation.

Aside from QB, you have two positions where a team can really seperate themselves--LT, and elite level pass rusher. That's it. Three positions where talent is thin.

The only real reason you can't have more expansion is because of the already bad QB play.

EDIT--Just look how terrible the Colts looked without Manning. That's proof enough that the precieved talent gap really only extends to QB's.

Agreed. But you throw more teams in the mix and that further waters down the talent. Then other positions would become similar to the QB, LT, DE.. etc

 

[adembroski]

Agreed. But you throw more teams in the mix and that further waters down the talent. Then other positions would become similar to the QB, LT, DE.. etc

I disagree. On the surface, yes, you have more teams, you add less talented players... but there are plenty of very talented college players who simply don't fit into the NFL system.

Look at the number of terrible starting QBs in the NFL right now. Rather than going with a guy who'd be a backup today, you're gonna go with a guy who can be effective in a completely different system. If the spread option was a viable offense in the NFL, Alex Smith is a pro-bowler. With 64 teams, the spread option is a viable option in the NFL.

What I'm saying is that I don't think an Alex Smith is any less talented than an Aaron Rogers, they're just different types of QBs, and the lack of diversity in the NFL means only one type of QB fits, and that, frankly, is boring.

My main point is that... the NFL has become goddamn boring. The Cardinals Packers game just set me off. If I wanted to watch quarterbacks throw more TDs than Incompletions, I'd watch the AFL.