Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Basically. You could just as easily say the Bills beat the Dolphins 4-0. But say "28-0" and it sounds like it's higher scoring. I've never understood this criticism of soccer since American football doesn't feature much scoring at all.
Don't get me wrong. I love football. I post in the football forum regularly during football season. I just don't find it to be as entertaining as the NBA because there's too much down time. Even NBA games are starting to wear my patience thin, so you can only imagine how difficult it can be for me to watch an entire football game. If I'm spending 70% of my time flipping back and forth between FOX, CBS and different games on the RedZone, then just how truly entertaining can one game really be? I feel like the remote control stays in my hand the entire time while I search for a close game that actually has some action as opposed to one that's on commercial break, shows the refs adjudicating a challenge, shows a play that just finished with the linemen getting up off the ground, etc.
Keep in mind that only 5.8% of an NFL broadcast has live action. So that means you need to flip between many different games to see anything.
Any sport with refereeing is going to be frustrating. I don't think it's any worse or better in football since there are plenty of bogus pass interference calls, missed holding calls, missed offsides calls, etc. Don't even get me started on Troy Polamalu's interception of Peyton Manning in the playoffs that was called back because he didn't make a "football move." The man caught the ball, rolled around twice, and then fumbled while trying to get up! If that's not a "football move," then what is? The "football move" was even more subjective than a charging/blocking call in the NBA. Now there's this "completing the process of the catch" rule that might be worse than the rule it replaced.
It's funny to hear people complain about how you can't touch a guy in the NBA when it's so easy for wide receivers in the NFL to get flags today. Forget asking about how Jordan would do under today's "soft" rules. How would Jerry Rice or Lynn Swann do in an NFL where they had a 70% chance of getting the ref to throw a flag?
My response to the rules was more of reminder that you forgot that basketball has the same challenges. NFL hasn't had corrupt officiating either.
And 28 points is not high octane offense in the NFL. There aren plenty of 34-28 type games
My response to the rules was more of reminder that you forgot that basketball has the same challenges.
But it doesn't have the same challenges. Missing a call is not the same as having a rule that is totally confusing. Everyone knows three steps is a travel; refs simply miss it. The NFL, on the other hand, still hasn't sorted out what exactly constitutes a "catch." And that's a fundamental part of the game, don't you think?
Quote:
And that's it. That's all you ever need know about the NFL's rules on what defines a catch. If it looks like a catch, smells like a catch and sounds like a catch, well, there's only about a 40 percent chance we'll call it a catch. Imagine saying this in other sports, or just in life: "We're going to have home runs where it looks like a home run but it isn't." "We're going to give you what looks like tickets to Hamilton but are just bet slips from Saratoga." "We're going to have what appears to be a wedding but it isn't, and, oh, I have a date with your best friend the Tuesday we get back from our honeymoon."
Besides, my initial point was the rules are more confusing because there are so many damned rules. Americans talk about how difficult it is to understand offside in soccer when it's only one of a few rules. The NFL has 100 arcane rules yet we don't hear Americans complaining about how ridiculously complicated the rules are. How many people really know what an illegal formation is? Or understand the ineligible receiver rule? Or know an illegal shift when they see one? You can watch football for 30 years and still not fully understand some of the rules.
The Cubs beat the Phillies 8-1 this afternoon. Maybe they should call that 56-7. The Blue Jays beat the Tigers 7-2. Shall we call that 49-14 instead?
Again your tossing other things into the argument. Can I bring the exciting sport of volleyball that you tossed into the equation where the winner scores 21 points (I think) and the ball can go back and forth five or six times before 1 point is scored and they have random breaks.
We are comparing Soccer v. American Football. There isn't soul in this forum or World that could convince me that Soccer and American Football have the same level of offensive firepower.
But it doesn't have the same challenges. Missing a call is not the same as having a rule that is totally confusing. Everyone knows three steps is a travel; refs simply miss it. The NFL, on the other hand, still hasn't sorted out what exactly constitutes a "catch." And that's a fundamental part of the game, don't you think?
Besides, my initial point was the rules are more confusing because there are so many damned rules. Americans talk about how difficult it is to understand offside in soccer when it's only one of a few rules. The NFL has 100 arcane rules yet we don't hear Americans complaining about how ridiculously complicated the rules are. How many people really know what an illegal formation is? Or understand the ineligible receiver rule? Or know an illegal shift when they see one? You can watch football for 30 years and still not fully understand some of the rules.
Point taken....And trust me what constitutes a "foul" is just as ambiguous
Again your tossing other things into the argument. Can I bring the exciting sport of volleyball that you tossed into the equation where the winner scores 21 points (I think) and the ball can go back and forth five or six times before a 1 point is scored and they have random breaks.
We are comparing Soccer v. American Football. There isn't soul in this forum or World that could convince me that Soccer and American Football have the same level of offensive firepower.
You can bring in whatever sport you want. The fact remains that football doesn't have much scoring. It has roughly the same amount of scoring as sports that are often criticized for not having enough scoring.
You can bring in whatever sport you want. The fact remains that football doesn't have much scoring. It has roughly the same amount of scoring as sports that are often criticized for not having enough scoring.
And you brought Soccer into the equation??? Odd to me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.