Thursday Night Football Could Be Safer

Thursday Night Football: Is it safe for NFL Players?

The NFL is currently trying to make the game of football safer for players. Lately, the big focus has been on cutting down injuries, especially long term injuries. This is why they continue to add new rules to the game that us fans think are ridiculous. No hitting a QB in the pocket below the knees. No leading with your helmet, no hitting a defenseless receiver. No leading with the crown of your helmet, etc... I understand the logic behind most of the new rules and agree with a lot of them. The game has gotten pretty violent this last decade or so with players getting faster and stronger. So I personally, am glad that they have decided to do something about it.

But it gets a little confusing when you hear about the NFL’s player safety stance and then watch them make players play on Thursday nights. Merely 4 days after going at it full speed, these guys are asked to hit the field again before fully recuperating from the last game.

I can understand the NFL’s position. Let’s give the fans as much football as we can. I for one, love watching NFL football on Thursday nights. In my opinion it’s a great idea. Sunday and Monday night isn't enough. It’s bad enough that we only get 6 months of football as it is. So I am grateful for the NFL’s position on giving us as much as possible. Although as a person that understands the game, I think it is a bit much on the players’ bodies to endure so much physical punishment in a game and then turn around and do it again just a few days later.

So how can the NFL continue to make the game safer without sacrificing Thursday Night?

Well, here’s an idea.

Right now, we currently have 9 weeks of bye weeks. Meaning, bye weeks don’t start until Week 4 and they end Week 12. So weeks 1-3 and 13-17 have no teams on bye. My thought is to shorten that; making it 8 weeks of bye weeks. So start the Bye weeks during week 5 and end them week 12. Now we would have weeks 1-4 and 13-17 no teams on bye. Well that didn't fix anything did it?

Here’s where Thursday Night Football comes into play.

4 teams would go on bye each week. Those 4 teams would come back from bye week and play on Thursday night. So we would now have 2 games on Thursday night. What’s going to happen is the Bye weeks are going to get shortened. Instead of having a full week off, teams would now have only a week and a half off.  Doesn't sound too cool for the players does it? Their losing time for themselves. True, but let’s not forget, after that Thursday night game, they don’t play again for at least another 10 days. So what we have is a team is actually playing 1 time in a 21 day period. The good thing is that they've still only managed to miss 1 week of football.

For example, let's use the Jets for instance. Let's say that the Jets' bye week is week 6. What would happen under this proposal is that the jets would play on Sunday or Monday Night during week 5. They won't play at all during week 6 but will return to action Thursday night for week 7. They won't play again until Sunday or Monday Night of week 8. So from week 5 to their next game during week 7, they wouldn't have played a game for 10 or 11 days depending on if their last game was Sunday or Monday Night. After their week 7's Thursday Night game, they won't play again for another 10 or 11 days depending on if they return to action Sunday or Monday Night.

It sounds like a lot of football being missed but I couldn't possibly see players having a problem with it. Especially if a team had a really important player that would need a good 3 weeks to heal. If that injury were to happen around your bye week time, you would only miss 1 game.

For players complaining about their extra 3 or 4 days off being taken away, explain to them that they are not being taken away, they are simply being shifted around for player safety.

The purpose for four teams taking the week off is to allow every team a chance to play on Thursday Night and to allow every team the opportunity to take advantage of this proposed schedule. Besides, having an option for Thursday Night really wouldn't be a bad thing. For example: This year's week 14 Thursday Night match-up on December 5 is between the Houston Texans and the Jacksonville Jaguars. I can honestly say that I would love to have a second option to this game.

Unfortunately, there is a down side to this proposal. Currently, there are Thursday Night Football games that run from week 1 through week 16 with week 17 being the only week with no Thursday Night game. Under this proposal, that would do away with half of the football season's Thursday Night Football. So there would a sacrifice.

If the NFL is indeed serious about player safety (And I do believe they are), then they should really look into a proposal like this. Maybe a tweak here or there wouldn't hurt. Because under there current structure, they are not doing everything they can for player safety...

And I for one, would hate to see the end of Thursday Night Football.

Nicknames On Player's Jerseys? Not A Good Idea

This team (Harlem Globetrotters) might fit in quite nicely with the new NBA.

With all of the in game antics and pre-game stories, the NBA is beginning to look more like the WWE (Pro Wrestling) than professional basketball.

Let me be clear about this; I for one am totally against the NBA allowing players to wear their nicknames on the back of their jerseys. I don’t think it adds any more fun to the game than the game itself. Who really cares that on the back of Kevin Durant’s jersey, you can see the word “Durantula”? In my opinion, this is nothing more than a marketing ploy; A way to drum up some more money through merchandising. Think about it, will you be able to relate to a player or enjoy his game more by seeing CP3 instead of Paul? How would that have worked when Shaq was playing? You’d have one jersey saying “The Big Aristotle”, another saying “Shaq Diesel” just to name a couple. With this move, it looks like the NBA is getting more about marketing and money than the game itself. Wasn't it just 2 years ago that Ron Artest had to legally change his name to "Metta World Peace" just so that “World Peace” would show up on the back of his jersey? We all thought he was trying too hard to get attention. He was talked about as if he were a real quack for the move. Now it looks like he was an innovator.

The biggest problem I have with this is the fact that the NBA is starting to look more and more like the WWF (or WWE as it is now referred to). Instead of it being about basketball, there’s a bunch of story lines that are being sold. You can’t watch a playoff series without the producers trying to figure out some way to make the match up look better. “In tonight’s match-up we have Blake Griffin and the Los Angeles Clippers vs. Z-Bo and the Memphis Grizzlies. These two teams genuinely hate each other as their games are always very physical. The last time Griffin and Z-Bo met, they had to be pulled off of one another”. Or how about last year’s story line of “Carmelo Anthony and the New York Knicks vs. K.G. and the Boston Celtics? The last time these two teams met, K.G. told Melo that Melo’s wife tasted like cheerios”. I mean, all we’re missing is Jimmy Hart with his bullhorn standing next to the scorer’s table. Right after the National Anthem, we can have Michael Buffer announce the teams. I understand marketing and selling a game, but there is a point that you should not go beyond. 

That’s not to mention the hypocrisy of it all. Players are supposed to dress up like businessmen when doing anything related to basketball. That includes coming to the arena, leaving the arena, doing interviews, even sitting on the bench when you’re not dressed for a game. If a player doesn't dress according to dress code, he’s hit with a fine. The NBA is selling itself as a business and they want their product (players) looking like businessmen. Now all of a sudden, their supposed to wear their nicknames on the back of their jerseys? Are Kevin Garnett’s checks made out to “The Big Ticket” or are they made out to Kevin Garnett? If it’s business, keep it business. Players are expected to do so, so I think the NBA should do so as an entire league. To discipline players for not abiding by the rules and then bend some of the rules that the league came up with purely for profit is nothing short of hypocrisy.

From a fan’s perspective, it’s unnecessary. A fan can go to the NBA store on line right now and get any customized jersey for any team. That means I can order a customized San Antonio Spurs jersey with the number 21 on it and have them print “The Big Fundamental” right on the back. I don’t need Tim Duncan to actually wear it in a game.

Now we have to look at the fire-storm this would cause. Blake Griffin is one of the biggest names in the NBA right now. He has no nickname and from what I can tell, he isn't looking for one. The same thing goes for Pau Gasol, Tony Parker, Russell Westbrook and a few other stars. Can you imagine guys not going out looking for nicknames just to have on the back of their jerseys if this happens? As a matter of fact, most guys have nicknames in their locker rooms. Listen to half the guys do an interview after a game and refer to some of their teammates and you’ll hear a bunch of nicknames thrown around. Half the time I can’t figure out who was being mentioned because I don’t know that player’s locker room nickname.

Dwight Howard tries to fit all his nicknames on one jersey.

On second thought, I think it would be quite interesting to see the outcome of this new nickname thing. Imagine after every team has adopted this new fad, you'd get almost every player in the league trying to get nicknames. Because hey, it would be unfair to allow LeBron James to wear "King James" on the back of his jersey and make Steve Blake wear "Blake" wouldn't it? Now that’s where the fun comes in. That’s when we get to see guys on the bench who never play with the name “Little C-Style” on the back of his jersey. Imagine my delight when the NBA finds out that “C-Style” is short for Crip Style. I can already see the NBA trying to put a spin on it saying it means "Crazy Style". Or how about some of those real heavy metal fans coming in with “Satan” on the back of his jersey? I think that’s something that’ll really make the fans root for that guy. I can just see it now, a 6’10” 260 pound Goliath with the name “Cupcake” or “Sweet Cheeks” on the back of his jersey. That might sound a little over the top but with the NBA's open support for the gay community, who knows?

While they’re at it, why don’t they invite the Harlem Globetrotters into the league? It’s become a circus of a game already with the biggest stars flopping around on the court and no defense allowed. With athleticism being everything and fundamentals being hard to come by, why shouldn't the Globetrotters get some of that money? They can invite one really good "And 1" street ball team and we’d have 32 teams of really athletic basketball players that can put the ball in the hole. Sounds like a good time to me. That's what the league has come to, how many points a guy can score and how many spectacular plays can be made.

We would now see hanging from the rafters of a stadium retired jerseys that say, “The Cannibal” and “The Princess” next to “Jordan” and “Rodman”. We could mark this as the day the kids took over. Quite a few of today's stars seem to be more worried about what market they play in as opposed to just being able to play. There's not the same level of loyalty to the fans and the cities. It's all about where I can sell the most jerseys and get more games televised.

The NBA’s greed is really starting to tear the league apart. With the rise of ticket prices and the ridiculous price for a hot dog, it's getting harder for a family to go to a game. The deal that Time Warner made with the Los Angeles Lakers was ridiculous especially since the fans have to pay for it (Yes I did notice that little $2.00 charge under "Regional Sports Fee" on my DirecTV bill... every month). But hey, the Lakers made billions.

I think there is always room to improve, but I think the NBA is looking in the wrong area on this one. Let the players play and let the fans wear the cool nicknames on the backs of their jerseys.

If the NBA determines that they really want to do this, why not leave it to the All-Star games? Those games are just for fans and haven't been competitive in years anyway.

My Top 10 NFL Running Backs

Will Chris Johnson crack My Top 10 RBs list? (AP Photo/Wade Payne)

Now that the 2013 season is one full week in the bag, I am fully in football mode. Fantasy leagues are the talk of the town. Who’s the best running back to get? Who’s the best QB to get? I’ll trade you Aaron Rogers for Drew Brees if you throw in Dez Bryant for Julio Jones. You know that sort of thing.

While trying to draft the perfect team, I couldn't help but notice how the running back position is often the most important position in standard fantasy football leagues. Drafting a good running back has to be done by the second round or you will have a tough time winning week to week.

When drafting running backs, it dawned on me how thin the running back position has gotten. With so many NFL teams taking the running back by committee approach, it goes to show how few quality running backs are out there. You have good backs, but not very many great backs. There are running backs that can run very well, but aren't very good pass catchers out of the back field. Good pass catchers out of the back field, but poor in pass protection. So what you have now are a bunch of situational backs. Goal line and short yardage backs. 3^rd down backs, passing situation backs, etc…

With that in mind, I've decided to take a look at the position and have put together my top 10 running backs in the league. Now my top 10 probably won’t look like everybody else’s. What I am looking for in a running back is more than just productivity. Sure you have to be productive, but on my top dog list, stats alone won’t cut it. Guys that are producing at a high rate running behind fantastic offensive lines and playing beside a bevy of play makers don’t impress me. For me, you have to show me the ability to be able to get it done even in the worst situations. I’m sure it’s a lot easier to get a bunch of yards and touchdowns when you have deep threat receivers and great QBs. A great offensive coordinator and a fantastic offensive line would do wonders as well.

But on my list, every guy listed has showed the ability to get it done without the ideal offensive unit. Every guy on my list I believe can still be productive on any team. No system backs. While I do feel as though there is some respect due to guys like Chris Johnson and Arian Foster, I just can't ignore the fact that most of the time they are making a big play, it is due to a huge hole being opened at the line of scrimmage.

So without further ado:

Reggie Bush Continues To Prove Doubters Wrong

Andrew Weber-USA Sports Today

Leaving New Orleans was a big mistake on Bush’s part they said. Without Sean Payton, Bush will be exposed for what he really is; an over-hyped  over-priced, under-performing bust... Oh really?

Reggie Bush had dreams of being a Hall of Fame player coming out of USC in 2006. He had visions of making the Pro Bowl every year and gaining numerous accolades. He thought he'd lead the league in rushing at least once in his career. After spending his first 5 years in New Orleans, that Hall of Fame seems highly unlikely. Making the Pro Bowl doesn't seem so far fetched now that he's out of New Orleans, but leading the league in rushing doesn't sound very realistic. His reputation as injury prone will most likely keep him from getting enough carries per year to compete for that title.

Since joining the NFL, Reggie Bush has never been considered an every down back. While playing with the New Orleans Saints under Sean Payton’s system, Bush has always been used as a utility player or situational back. In his first year, he averaged 10 rushes per game. In his second year he averaged 13 rushes per game. Only twice in his time with New Orleans did he rush the ball 20 times or more. In one of those two games did he enjoy his only 100 yard rushing performance with the Saints.

Raiders Should Consider Starting Terrelle Pryor This Year

Dennis Allen should have a real QB competition to see who would be the best fit for Raider's futre

Let’s get this straight; the Raiders have already chosen their starting QB. This "QB competition" is merely a formality.

Dennis Allen is saying that the Raiders have a QB competition but it doesn't look anything like one. It looks like he has chosen Matt Flynn as the starter and Terrelle Pryor as the backup. Dennis Allen has said that he is putting a package together for Pryor. To be clear, you don’t put package plays together for your starting QB; you give him the Playbook.

Allen’s approach to how he wants to use Pryor’s athletic abilities sounds very similar to how Denver used Tim Tebow and San Francisco used Collin Kaepernick before the two QBs eventually won their respective starting jobs.

When you have a franchise QB, you don’t use utility QBs for package plays; you trade that utility QB for another position player of need. This also says something as to how the organization views Flynn. Can you imagine taking Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees or Aaron Rogers out for a few package plays?

The Oakland Raiders are in a rebuilding mode. They have young players at most of their skilled positions. At wide receiver, they have youngsters Denarius Moore, Jacoby Ford and Rod Streater. At running back, they have Darren McFadden. They've brought in young corner backs in Mike Jenkins and DJ Hayden. So they are a young team. This is the perfect time to evaluate the QB situation. 

Terrelle Pryor is entering his 3^rd NFL season, Matt Flynn is entering his 6^th. Both players are young and have the time to grow with the rest of this young roster. It would be wise to invest the time in the player that gives you the most upside.

With that being said, I think Dennis Allen should have a real QB competition.

Let’s have a look at our two candidates:

Melo and LeBron Would Be Wise To Avoid Lakers

Hopefully, we'll see these two wearing these same jerseys in the 2014-2015 season.

Melo and LeBron to join Kobe in L.A. in 2014!

Yeah, that's what their saying. The Lakers organization is hoping to woo the two Forwards to help Kobe make the Lakers contenders again.

What a fantastic team that would make. We'd get to watch three of the top players of this era on the same court, wearing the purple and gold every night.

While this may be great for the Lakers organization and Lakers fans, I don't think it would be great for the NBA. While the NBA is better when the Lakers are contenders, I just don't think the NBA would be better with this move in particular. This move would only benefit the Lakers; here's why.

The Lakers with Melo, LeBron and Kobe would dominate. Even though playing the same style of basketball should hinder them a bit, they would find a way to make it work. Even if they couldn’t figure it out themselves, there would be no shortage of coaches that would be lined up for the Lakers to choose from. Not to mention all the “Ring Chasing” veterans that would take less money to play alongside them. (See 2011-2013 Miami Heat)

That would make the Lakers instant favorites to win a championship. That's while Kobe still has a couple years left in him. When he decides to retire, LeBron and Melo would take over the team and still be dominate.

That would mean the Lakers are contenders for years to come. Great for the NBA, right?

Wrong!

Here's why that trade would not benefit the NBA.

Blake Griffin; You're Gonna Have to Toughen Up




You can't wait for the refs to save you Blake. you're going to have to deal with this yourself

Recently, it has become topic of discussion whether or not Blake Griffin is soft. Soft? How can a guy who plays with so much energy and physicality be perceived as soft? I think that's a fair question.

In today’s NBA, you have lot of ball players from a wide range of backgrounds. Guys of all different shapes, sizes and colors. You have guys that were raised by ex NBA players. Guys that were raised in single family homes and guys that were raised by both parents. Some of these guys grew up in rough areas and others that were a bit sheltered. You get the idea. When you have that many different backgrounds, you are going to get different types of attitudes.

Some of the guys in today's NBA grew up with a chip on their shoulder and live with that chip every day. A lot of today’s NBA players grew up playing street ball. If you've ever played street ball, you know how tough that’ll make you. There is nothing soft about those guys. Respect is everything and sometimes that sentiment carries over to the NBA. You have a lot of guys that bring that rough and tough style of play over as it gives them an edge. Guys like Kevin Garnett, who spends an entire game cussing and swearing… at nobody in particular at times.

Blake Griffin is a "Big Man" in the NBA as he plays the Power Forward position. In the NBA, the Power Forward and Center positions are considered your "Big Men".

In the NBA, you have two different types of "Big Men"; you have your finesse players and your physical players. Then you have players with the right amount of both.

Tim Duncan, Pau Gasol, David Lee are a few of your finesse Bigs.

Kendrick Perkins, DeAndre Jordan, Dwight Howard are a few of your power Bigs.

Al Jefferson, Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph (Z-BO) are a few Bigs that fall under both.