Why is the NFL playing bad football now?
- Thread starter TomRicardo
- Start date
I don't watch football anymore, but based off of the thread titles here in BbtL, I am going to go with, "It's all Mac Jones' fault."
There’s more crappy teams on national TV than ever before, I think that’s mostly it. And a bunch of teams that the league and its media partners thought would be at least interesting to watch (Jets, Giants, Patriots) are not.
Not enough practice/training camp time, not enough contact in practice, not enough coaching in the offseason due to CBA.
All of this, plus I bet continuity within the OL on teams is down. The new concussion protocol seems to have increased the incidence of offensive linemen leaving games early and missing games entirely. Back in the day, good offensive linemen were among the players with the longest NFL careers and did not miss a lot of time.
All of the rule changes, selective enforcement, etc. to favor the passing game have not been good for the game holistically.
Passing is great but passing also leads to more incompletions, holding penalties, and replays with increasingly incomprehensible decisions over catch:no catch, etc. - and the players are so fast now that it’s too bang bang. The game never breathes.
The impeccable environments of field turf and indoor stadiums, too. Again the whole thing moves so fast and the playing surface is just too perfect. Just as much as the running game, the kicking game is de emphasized and boring. Kicking off turf is a much different, and easier, proposition than a grass field, especially in weather. Kicking is not supposed to be as easy as it’s become.
I really believe that mandating grass fields and rolling back the rule changes would result in a better game.
If I were really going to think big -
- Adopt Canadian rules. 12 players, much bigger field, you can have receivers in crazy motion before the snap. I don’t like the three downs but otherwise I find it enormously entertaining. The bigger field in particular, todays athletes are so big and fast it’s like theyveoutgrown the space.
- a way to put the foot back in football, and make the most boring part now (FG/xp) the most thrilling- kicks must be made by the last player to handle the ball. Make the point after a true conversion. So many dilemmas- 3rd and 2 from the 30 - do you run your placekicker up the guy to position yourself for the FG, or do you think about which of your RB/WR/TE can make the kick if need be? Bonus fun on those occasions where a 360 lb DL is the last guy to handle on a fumble recovery.
- Adopt Canadian rules. 12 players, much bigger field, you can have receivers in crazy motion before the snap. I don’t like the three downs but otherwise I find it enormously entertaining. The bigger field in particular, todays athletes are so big and fast it’s like theyveoutgrown the space.
- a way to put the foot back in football, and make the most boring part now (FG/xp) the most thrilling- kicks must be made by the last player to handle the ball. Make the point after a true conversion. So many dilemmas- 3rd and 2 from the 30 - do you run your placekicker up the guy to position yourself for the FG, or do you think about which of your RB/WR/TE can make the kick if need be? Bonus fun on those occasions where a 360 lb DL is the last guy to handle on a fumble recovery.
The defenses are ridiculous. Every guy out on the field is fast, strong, and agile. Watch games from the 1990s or even 2000s - the guys just look different. And they play a lot slower. Everyone out on the field right now is basically some combination of LT and Ty Law.
Combine this with incredibly complicated defensive schemes, and you have offensive linemen and QBs who have to thread such a small needle to be successful that only the very best can succeed.
Not that it has that much to do with bad games per se, but I wish they'd redo the rules pertaining to forward progress, assisting the runner, etc. When and if the whistle blows seems at this point arbitrary and people get involved in plays that have no business being involved in them.
Amazing post. So the question becomes who can find an answer (and what will that answer be) to solve a 2-high shell that will kick off another round of copycatting?
Honestly, this is why football is great.
And even Pete has gone to a lot of Cover-2 in the past couple of years. Mostly because he doesn't have Earl Thomas playing center field any mroe.
And so has Dan Quinn. It's helped see an improvement in Dallas, they are one of the best defenses in football. Has it helped the Seahawks?
12, 21, 13, etc. and heavier personnel groups that you can pass out of. Bill saw it coming! He got two tight ends but one turned out to be Jonnu and neither guy is a blocker. Neither is an elite receiving talent either. See the Ravens, 49ers, Eagles, Browns (I think but could be wrong), Vikings, etc.
I'm not suggesting you're wrong....but wouldn't defenses also suffer from these circumstances?
They even switched to a 3-4 from the 4-3 Pete ran forever. It was a big adjustment period, as they were fucking awful last year. Guys were blowing assignments left and right. They completely overhauled the DL and the secondary has gotten a lot better. Getting Bobby Wagner back has helped some as well. Overall the defense is above average at this point, with their biggest weaknesses being the pass rush (especially after losing Nwosu for the year), and none of the LBs able to cover anyone, especially TEs.
I think defenses can struggle with tackling in this instance. However, you can drill and install a lot of defensive schemes and techniques well enough within the current structure. DL not as much because you need to have a good amount of contact in order to work on pass rush live against an OL What offenses struggle with is the OL play. You need to be able to put the pads on and hit for the lineman to get better. There's only so much that can be done in shells and shorts.
This is a good post. One way to attack teams playing a lot more 2-high is to run over them, since they don't have numbers in the box. But the lack of practice time hurts the run game perhaps even more than pass protection. It takes a lot of practice work to get an offensive line functioning well as a unit in the run game and being prepared for all the adjustments to different fronts. O-line injuries are a big problem here too.
I much prefer CFL rules too. The NFL will never consider adding most of their rules, and they don't need to. But they do have a few rules that I would love to see in the NFL:
CFL games are much faster-paced, with far less standing around. And there's less time wasting and kneel-downs, since a team losing late can get the ball back really quickly with a stop.
I don't love the CFL replay system but it's better than the NFL's because it leads to far fewer challenges, which is way better for fans, especially neutrals:
Fewer replays is much better for viewers, especially neutrals.
Other issues with watching NFL games, some of which have been mentioned:
More bad games on TV. There have been a lot of changes that have led to more games on national TV: the international games, the second bye week, Thursday night games, Red Zone. 20 years ago, many bad games were only watched by fans in 2 markets. Now many more fans are seeing them. Back then, fans would see the highlights from those games on ESPN or post-game, etc. but miss all the lowlights. Now the bad plays and boring football are everywhere.
Replays and refereeing: refereeing is bad, but it's always been bad. But now every bad call is seen everywhere in the world from multiple angles, magnifying every mistake. So there needs to be a review system. But there are way too many reviews and they take way too long, and kill the joy of scoring a TD or making a big play, because it might always be overturned. That's why I prefer the CFL replay system, which isn't great but is better.
All teams playing the same way when it comes to quarterbacks: there are only like maybe 10 people in the universe who can make all the plays that every teams asks their QB to make. Teams with mediocre or bad QBs still ask them to play the same way as teams with great QBs. That strategy is doomed to fail and means bad football, but no one tries anything different. No coach wants to experiment with anything new because if it fails, they will get all the blame.
IMO if a team is tanking anyway, they should try some radical strategies that might help them learn things that could be beneficial in the long run. Maybe you try running the ball like 50 times per game and going for every 4th down under 4 yards. All the running plays wouldn't make for more exciting football, but actually going for 4th downs all the time would be more interesting than what we see now from bad teams.
What 2nd bye week? The only time that ever happened was 1993 and abandoned quickly.
If anything, Red Zone minimizes the amount of bad Sunday football someone is exposed to. The early window has enough games where bad/boring games aren’t covered much and the late window is always going to work out better than the National game (since RZ will largely stay with the best game, which if national works out even, if it’s not the national game it’s a plus for RZ viewers). Plus if you live in a market with a terrible team, you’re not subjected to watching 17 games of bad football.
The Thursday and international games are definitely an issue as many (most) of those games end up being bad, usually with predictably bad teams.
I think the biggest issue with NFL TV coverage is that teams aren’t consistently really good year to year. And good teams can look bad very quickly if their QB gets hurt (Jets this year for example). There aren’t teams other than KC and maybe now Philly/San Francisco that you can just pencil in as a good prime time game if you’re building the TV schedule months before the first week. Flexing has helped to some degree but the league is limited because a lot of the best games get protected by the networks.
the other issue is the major media market teams are largely boring and bad - Washington, New England, Jets, Giants but we inevitably get endless NFC east borefests in prime time because they’re ratings draws.
This is too true and something that's been hurting the game for a while now. Making these guys play on Thursday makes for some half hearted efforts. Couple that with the lack of continuity in the pre-season and the product is going to continue to suffer.
I have half a suspicion that the issue with OLs is more a function of lack of reps/practice time/coordination than talent dropoff and that OLs would benefit more than most other units from a larger roster.
I think an important question is to define what we mean by "bad football". Is "bad football" less scoring, less entertaining play, more penalties, more stupid mistakes? Overall scoring can be down in a year, and that could be the result of bad football, or it could be the result of defenses getting better or rules being interpreted differently that gives more of an edge to defenses vs. offenses.
I think truly, objective "bad football" is dumb stuff like too many men on the field, delay of game penalties, just generally things that disrupt the flow of the game and are not entertaining in any way. I guess with the caveat that missing a field goal and then having another try at it because of a penalty is actually kind of exciting - but probably would be an example of 'bad football'.
I think there's another compounding issue is a bit the trade-off between steady, low risk approach to offense (or defense) vs. a more high risk strategy. Is it more fun to watch an offense that is grinding out 4 years per carry on the ground, leading to long drives but little excitement vs. an offense that is taking big shots down the field, but consequently leads to more punts? Similar on defense. Is the bend but don't break style more or less fun to watch than very aggressive approaches to defense that result in more exciting plays (interceptions, sacks) but also more exciting plays the other way?
I think truly, objective "bad football" is dumb stuff like too many men on the field, delay of game penalties, just generally things that disrupt the flow of the game and are not entertaining in any way. I guess with the caveat that missing a field goal and then having another try at it because of a penalty is actually kind of exciting - but probably would be an example of 'bad football'.
I think there's another compounding issue is a bit the trade-off between steady, low risk approach to offense (or defense) vs. a more high risk strategy. Is it more fun to watch an offense that is grinding out 4 years per carry on the ground, leading to long drives but little excitement vs. an offense that is taking big shots down the field, but consequently leads to more punts? Similar on defense. Is the bend but don't break style more or less fun to watch than very aggressive approaches to defense that result in more exciting plays (interceptions, sacks) but also more exciting plays the other way?
Bad football to me is mistake marred games. I want to see these amazing athletes compete and show their skills and have a team win, rather than one team give it away. If the defense wins it's because they made a play, not because the opposing QB shit himself, or the offense committed a bunch of sloppy penalties etc. I don't really care about high scoring games as long as the play is at a high level. I also want the refs to enforce the rules without taking over the game. Call penalties that affect the outcome of plays, not like you're taking a test on the rulebook.
I'm more in-line with the "perception" posts. Are other team's boards having this conversation or is it a spoiled Pats fan take? We've been bitching about officiating since the birth of organized sports so I don't think it's that.
I suppose we could watch some "random" (i.e. not 90's Dallas v San Francisco) games from the last 3 decades since the QB took over the game and determine whether the play has gone down or we are just over-exposed to mediocre teams. Even thinking about the Pats games I watched in the early 1990's gives me the shivers.
I also think there's some merit to the bigger / stronger / faster defenses are forcing more errors even if the offenses are bigger / stronger / faster (but are they?). When you heat something up you are going to have more volatility.
I suppose we could watch some "random" (i.e. not 90's Dallas v San Francisco) games from the last 3 decades since the QB took over the game and determine whether the play has gone down or we are just over-exposed to mediocre teams. Even thinking about the Pats games I watched in the early 1990's gives me the shivers.
I also think there's some merit to the bigger / stronger / faster defenses are forcing more errors even if the offenses are bigger / stronger / faster (but are they?). When you heat something up you are going to have more volatility.
This is exactly how I feel as well. The true pocket passer is a dying breed and much of what we’re seeing now is whoever has the more athletic team, especially at QB, as you mentioned, usually wins.
Methodical QBing isn’t in the game anymore. It feels like the “chess game” style of playcalling is dying. It sometimes feels like teams are just trying to outdraft each other on speed. It makes the game boring to watch when ~100% of the practical thinking on game day is done on the sidelines and hardly at the LOS.
I mean didn’t Mahomes admit he won a SB without even knowing how to read defenses? Thats just where we are now.
Good points all. To me "bad football" is the "dumb stuff" that affects the flow of the game, but also things like missing open receivers, dropped balls and bad tackling. (FWIW--I think a 15-play 10 minute drive is pretty cool.)
This is a bit extreme and a lot of hot takez. It also could be seen as a bit racist by some. I don’t think you meant it that way but pointing out it all about athleticism, lack of strategy, not needing to even know how to read a defense sounds like a giant dog whistle. I don’t think you mean it that way but need to be aware others might.
Mahomes is a freak and he’s amazing. There’s not a whole lot of pure athletes at QB who win Super Bowls. Burrow is a more classic pocket QB and he’s not a dying breed. To be honest a lot of these mobile QBs suck and the ones that don’t are read coverage, throw first and run if you have to.
I don’t think you can be successful in the NFL without at least a good football IQ. Patriots rosters have been full of fast guys who can’t play. They have a super power in drafting them.
They may buy time differently but Brady was so effective in the pocket moving he didn’t have to scramble but it was the same impact. How many times did Brady buy 2-3 seconds in the pocket? It’s an even more efficient way that scrambling outside the pocket as these athletic QBs do
It's super interesting to see what Buffalo has done with Allen.
Here's his passing attempts, sacks, and rush attempts each year in the NFL.
2018: 320 passes, 28 sacks, 89 rushes = 437 plays = 73.2% pass, 6.4% sack, 20.4% rush
2019: 461 passes, 38 sacks, 109 rushes = 608 plays = 75.8% pass, 6.3% sack, 17.9% rush
2020: 572 passes, 26 sacks, 102 rushes = 700 plays = 81.7% pass, 3.7% sack, 15.6% rush
2021: 646 passes, 26 sacks, 122 rushes = 794 plays = 81.4% pass, 3.3% sack, 15.4% rush
2022: 567 passes, 33 sacks, 124 rushes = 724 plays = 78.3% pass, 4.6% sack, 17.1% rush
2023: 350 passes, 13 sacks, 48 rushes = 411 plays = 85.2% pass, 3.2% sack, 11.7% rush
Yards accounted for by Allen (pass + rush - sack)
2018: 2,074 pass, -213 sack, 631 rush = 2,492 yds = 83.2% pass, 25.3% rush (it's going to come to more than 100% because of the sacks)
2019: 3,089 pass, -237 sack, 510 rush = 3,362 yds = 91.9% pass, 15.2% rush
2020: 4,544 pass, -159 sack, 421 rush = 4,806 yds = 94.5% pass, 8.8% rush
2021: 4,407 pass, -164 sack, 763 rush = 5,006 yds = 88.0% pass, 15.2% rush
2022: 4,283 pass, -162 sack, 762 rush = 4,883 yds = 87.8% pass, 15.6% rush
2023: 2,600 pass, -64 sack, 246 rush = 2,782 yds = 93.5% pass, 8.8% rush
He's running less as a percentage of times he touches the ball than he ever has before. I'm sure some of that is to protect him from injury. His rushing is accounting for a much lower percentage of his yardage output than the previous two seasons. I'm sure they're protecting him but it's hurting the team.
If you look at his career regular season game log, here's what you'll see, when it's sorted by Allen's rushing attempts.
He has rushed 10 or more times in 18 games in his career (regular season). In those 18 games, Buffalo is 17-1 (.944). The only loss is when the team still scored 27 points and they easily could have won that game.
So Buffalo's best game plan is for Allen to have a major role in the rushing attack, but this year he's averaging just 4.8 rushes per game. For his career he averages 6.8 rushes per game. Before this season he averaged 7.1 rushes per game, but this year it's down to 4.8. May not seem like a big deal but when he rushes 10+ times, their success is off the charts.
Here's his passing attempts, sacks, and rush attempts each year in the NFL.
2018: 320 passes, 28 sacks, 89 rushes = 437 plays = 73.2% pass, 6.4% sack, 20.4% rush
2019: 461 passes, 38 sacks, 109 rushes = 608 plays = 75.8% pass, 6.3% sack, 17.9% rush
2020: 572 passes, 26 sacks, 102 rushes = 700 plays = 81.7% pass, 3.7% sack, 15.6% rush
2021: 646 passes, 26 sacks, 122 rushes = 794 plays = 81.4% pass, 3.3% sack, 15.4% rush
2022: 567 passes, 33 sacks, 124 rushes = 724 plays = 78.3% pass, 4.6% sack, 17.1% rush
2023: 350 passes, 13 sacks, 48 rushes = 411 plays = 85.2% pass, 3.2% sack, 11.7% rush
Yards accounted for by Allen (pass + rush - sack)
2018: 2,074 pass, -213 sack, 631 rush = 2,492 yds = 83.2% pass, 25.3% rush (it's going to come to more than 100% because of the sacks)
2019: 3,089 pass, -237 sack, 510 rush = 3,362 yds = 91.9% pass, 15.2% rush
2020: 4,544 pass, -159 sack, 421 rush = 4,806 yds = 94.5% pass, 8.8% rush
2021: 4,407 pass, -164 sack, 763 rush = 5,006 yds = 88.0% pass, 15.2% rush
2022: 4,283 pass, -162 sack, 762 rush = 4,883 yds = 87.8% pass, 15.6% rush
2023: 2,600 pass, -64 sack, 246 rush = 2,782 yds = 93.5% pass, 8.8% rush
He's running less as a percentage of times he touches the ball than he ever has before. I'm sure some of that is to protect him from injury. His rushing is accounting for a much lower percentage of his yardage output than the previous two seasons. I'm sure they're protecting him but it's hurting the team.
If you look at his career regular season game log, here's what you'll see, when it's sorted by Allen's rushing attempts.
He has rushed 10 or more times in 18 games in his career (regular season). In those 18 games, Buffalo is 17-1 (.944). The only loss is when the team still scored 27 points and they easily could have won that game.
So Buffalo's best game plan is for Allen to have a major role in the rushing attack, but this year he's averaging just 4.8 rushes per game. For his career he averages 6.8 rushes per game. Before this season he averaged 7.1 rushes per game, but this year it's down to 4.8. May not seem like a big deal but when he rushes 10+ times, their success is off the charts.
This is what I don't get about Allen. They're better when he rushes, but he's also prone to taking huge contact when he doesn't have to. I"d rather let him run more and tell him not to be a tough guy and just slide. The stupid play earlier this year where he tried to plow through when he wasn't ever going to make it was awful and dumb.
Yes he's not like Lamar Jackson, who almost always manages to avoid big hits. Allen happily takes them on. Not wise.
IIRC Allen got injured and had to leave the game early in his career against the Pats, and it came on a run. Maybe this was the reason Dorsey got fired, because he tried to rein Allen in. Or maybe Allen is a big dummy who won't avoid big hits.
Do we know what Allen’s relationship was like with Dorsey? We’ve been assuming Hardo canned him to cover his ass but are we sure it wasn’t Allen throwing him to the wolves?
I believe he got the job over Davis Webb because of Allen's support (I'm just repeating something I heard on a podcast).
Hardo insisted that it was his call alone to fire Dorsey. He claims he did not consult or warn Allen beforehand.
Again, who knows. Hardo is a faux tough guy so this could well be another attempt to look tough, even though it's a transparent attempt to save his ass.
You can’t be serious?
Mac Jones can’t read defenses.
My point is most millennial QB’s are not being coached to read defenses. They’re just being drafted for their athleticism. Otherwise why would a SB-winning QB, several years into his career, admit he didn’t know how to read defenses?
It’s not a racist comment, it’s a “younger millennials don’t seem to be coached as well in the nuances of the game as much anymore” argument.
Dog whistle. Dear God objective conversations are dead in America. You’re saying that to the loudest advocate of drafting Penix (because of his ability to work through reads so well) on probably all of SoSH.
Eh, it was a fair point, even if you didn’t mean it that way. @NortheasternPJ went out of his way to give you the benefit of the doubt so maybe don’t get so defensive and say “understood”?
I confess, I am confused I have no idea what you're talking about.
Where is the dog whistle in the post?
On this day when Joe Burrow goes down, how much of the answer to this question is to injuries? I know they've always been part of the game but it seems like the battle of attrition is worse than ever. Rodgers, Watson, Burrow, Cousins, Jones, Richardson - and that's just the QBs.
And you've skipped over other QBs who have been hurt this year.
Fields. Tannehill. Josh Allen has been nicked up. Herbert broke a finger. Purdy concussion. Carr a bunch of things. Mayfield and his knee and finger. Trevor and his knee. Stafford hand.
Amazingly, Mac Jones is an iron man. Which is funny. And useless for winning games.
From everything reported at the time, Dorsey was Josh Allen's hand picked choice for OC. I was totally behind it because of the continuity factor. I spoke about it in the NFL news thread, that it was pretty obvious about halfway into last year, that Dorsey (either on his own or by having his hand forced by McDermott) was trying to change the way the offense was run, and not for the better. The team has been harping on Allen being smarter with taking hits, and I support that, but he's like a deer in the headlights this year when it comes to taking off for the runs that he kills teams with.
Mac Jones apparently cannot read defenses at all, despite the thoughts when he was drafted. No disagreements around that, I don't think anyone coached Mac Jones that way because of his athleticism though.
I said twice in my post that I didn't think you meant it that way, but it could be read that way. Obviously others don't agree, so I'll drop it.
It’s all good.
If you called me an old curmudgeon screaming at clouds for accusing 90’s millennials of not being the pre-and-post snap assassins that their predecessors were (probably mostly due to a whole lot of helicopter coaching snap-to-snap), I’d 100% own it.
The game evolves the way the game evolves, where my foolishness really lies is complaining about it on the internet as if it’ll make it better.
If you called me an old curmudgeon screaming at clouds for accusing 90’s millennials of not being the pre-and-post snap assassins that their predecessors were (probably mostly due to a whole lot of helicopter coaching snap-to-snap), I’d 100% own it.
The game evolves the way the game evolves, where my foolishness really lies is complaining about it on the internet as if it’ll make it better.
I don't think this is right at all. There was a feeling the league was headed this way about ten years ago with Cam Newton, RG3, Kaepernick, Russell Wilson, etc. but it hasn't really born out.
The Shanahan-tree coaches (Shanahan, McVay, Lafleur, McDaniel, Taylor, Staley), which is probably the most popular style of offense in the league today, all run "chess-game" style offenses where they use a wide range of formations, motions, personnel groups, etc. in a designed sequence to trigger specific defensive reactions and set up successful plays. The only top QBs who are designed run threats right now are Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen, and Jalen Hurts. There are a few others who are good scramblers (Mahomes, Prescott), but there have always been guys like that, going back to Fran Tarkenton and Roger Staubach.
The actual quote from Mahomes is:
This was in 2020, after Mahomes had been a starter for two years. Of course, Brady hadn't mastered all this stuff back in 2003 either. And not because he hadn't been coached to do it; it just takes a lot of experience and reps.
I remember watching ESPN quite a few years ago and one of the talking heads was talking about how Ohio State’s Dwayne Haskins was not really a pocket passer but was more of an athletic, scrambling QB. I couldn’t believe it as Haskins was about as immobile a QB as they come. It was clear he had never seen Haskins play and had only seen his profile picture.