Bringing balance back to football

[Blackout]

With the shifts to more offense and more passing I've found myself much less intrigued by the game of football. The myth out there is that more scoring is good. Well, no. If you are forced into bend but don't break it takes away the notion of what the sport is and makes it entirely too predictable.

So here's my solution to the passing and offense imbalance. OUTLAW GLOVES.

That's right get rid of players wearing gloves to assist in catching the football. This will shift the offense back towards balance and bring a much needed boost to defense. The WR with the best hands will actually be able to shine above the rest more than now.

What are the boards thoughts? Ban gloves, balance it back up.

[TStationDawg]

Forget banning gloves. Simply let defense play football again. End of story.

[sleepy dawg]

With the shifts to more offense and more passing I've found myself much less intrigued by the game of football. The myth out there is that more scoring is good. Well, no. If you are forced into bend but don't break it takes away the notion of what the sport is and makes it entirely too predictable.

So here's my solution to the passing and offense imbalance. OUTLAW GLOVES.

That's right get rid of players wearing gloves to assist in catching the football. This will shift the offense back towards balance and bring a much needed boost to defense. The WR with the best hands will actually be able to shine above the rest more than now.

What are the boards thoughts? Ban gloves, balance it back up.

I agree about the myth, and I too believe it is bad for the game. I don't know if outlawing gloves is the right answer or not, but I definitely think something needs to change. At one point I thought it was illegal to use catching "assistants" like putting sticky stuff on your hands.

[jbjones]

That's an interesting idea. I watched the spot on MNF (maybe?) where they had various High School athletes catching balls before and after gloves....along with the idiot reporter, and various passers-by (taxi drivers, etc). Yeah, the gloves worked in this TV program. However, was this real or like reality TV where everything is scripted, just with non-actors?

I think the gloves are a good advantage. You might bring back some balance there. However the Defense will always suffer in these new times in the name of "safety". You just can't go out there and wad-up everyone you see (which was the purpose of a good D). I suffered more than one concussion in High School as a Free Safety, so I am kind of torn on the subject. I really like "letting them play", and I do see the issues with the "free for all" that it used to be.

I'd be willing to allow a no-gloves rule to test for non-conference games to start.

[Bothrops]

Until some guru comes up with a revolutionary new style to a answer the spread offense, defenses will keep falling behind.

[Liverpooldawg]

I agree and my solution: Make the offensive linemen keep their hands in and no use of the palms in blocking. Bring back the illegal use of the hands rule.

[Jack Lambert]

Lets take helmets away. That would solve a lot of problems.

[Pinto]

This would cause more change than anything. Imagine if they put an emphasis on holding like targeting. That would slow offenses down. That and o lineman no more than a yard downfield unless a run play.

[lastmajordog]

Forget banning gloves. Simply let defense play football again. End of story.

Big two thumbs up!!!!

[jumbo]

Lets take helmets away. That would solve a lot of problems.

I agree with this. Yes, it's pretty radical and seems like it would cause more harm than good. But I guarantee you there would be no more head to head shots if the players weren't wearing helmets.

[Prediction? Pain.]

One of the sportswriters at ESPN made a point last year about up-tempo offenses that may address part of the issue you're identifying:


Before college football adopted the 40-second play clock in 2008, the umpire stood over the ball for a short period of time before he "wound up" the 25-second play clock. Up-tempo offenses succeed in part by preventing the defense from substituting. This is what's best for the game? The intent of the 40-second clock, to speed up the time of the game, sped up the game itself. I'd rather watch an offense and defense match strategy than watch which team has the most organized sideline. Amend the rule to allow the umpire to stand over the ball for 10 seconds until both teams have had a chance to sub. Let an up-tempo team win because it wears out the defense once the ball is snapped, not before it's snapped.

I can see the other side saying that up-tempo is essentially a "strategy" under the current rules and that defenses aren't hampered by some of the same formation and motion restrictions that offenses face. And of course, the offensive machine we had in 2014 took full advantage of this -- we had the fasted adjusted offensive pace (http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/5/15/8586169/hurry-up-offense-fastest-slowest) in the SEC and were one of the fasted in the country.

But I think I agree with your sentiment that higher scoring games are not better to watch simply because they are higher scoring. I'd be interested to know how much total scoring has gone up on average over the past 15 or 20 years. Just glancing at cfbstats.com, it looks like it's gone up by roughly 3-to-5 points per game since 2008 when the 40-second play clock was introduced.

[scottycameron]

I agree with this. Yes, it's pretty radical and seems like it would cause more harm than good. But I guarantee you there would be no more head to head shots if the players weren't wearing helmets.

there is zero doubt head injuries would fall drastically. And the better the helmet the more damage. The football helmet evolved as a weapon more than a protection device. The best thing the helmet now does is protect a player from other helmets. The funny thing is (sad really) the better you make the helmet, the more dangerous it becomes.

[scottycameron]

I agree with this. Yes, it's pretty radical and seems like it would cause more harm than good. But I guarantee you there would be no more head to head shots if the players weren't wearing helmets.

It's a lot like a parachute. They are great things and a very key safety feature. But if you banned them there would be a lot less people jumping out of airplanes. Skydiving accidents would drop to zero.

[bulldawg28]

Until some guru comes up with a revolutionary new style to a answer the spread offense, defenses will keep falling behind.

Watch how teams defend Chip Kelly in the NFL they don't seem to have a problem with it. College teams should mimic or get training from those DC's.

[sleepy dawg]

Until some guru comes up with a revolutionary new style to a answer the spread offense, defenses will keep falling behind.

When/if they do, they'll just further modify the rules to keep the scoring up. There's a constant push to get more and more offense. It will never be a defensive dominated league ever again.