Anyone Else Come Across This?

[Mojouw]

So I was listening to the Ringer's NFL Podcast this week (https://www.theringer.com/2017/10/17/16492026/ringer-nfl-show-aaron-rodgers-injury-carson-wentz). Mostly just the usual ideas and opinions. But they got around to talking about parity across the league and they mentioned this article -- https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/10/17/16488320/parity-myth-dynasty-roger-goodell-collective-bargaining-agreement

One of the more interesting ideas in it is that the league has so many crap and underperforming teams in it right now because teams can not practice how they used to. So that gives us this quote:

"In 2011, the league struck a collective bargaining agreement that limited practice time and banned two-a-days from NFL training camp. Schwartz said most of the NFL’s on-field problems—lack of offensive line cohesion and tackling issues—can be traced back to this. It also created an environment where teams had less time to differentiate themselves on the practice field. Part of what makes a great team great is what it does during preparation time, so when there’s less prep time, there’s less time for the wheat to separate itself from the chaff. This has led to some teams, understanding that there’s no way to be ready for the season under the current rules, taking things much more slowly."

Apparently, recently, Belichick has spoken at length on the same issue. He basically argued that there is no way to be ready or good at the start of a season so he focuses on getting better during the course of the year and hoping to ready come playoff time. I couldn't find the quote - but I know it exists.

To bring this back to the Steelers, maybe this is the simple and understandable explanation for the following:
1. Poor tackling
2. Confused play-calling and execution
3. Unforced mental errors
4. Starting "slow"

Basically, every major and repeated criticism of the team by most long-standing posters around here. Couple the reduced practice time with the other phenomena the posted article details - young rosters. To make the cap work, teams pay veteran "star players" and then fill in with cheap young and very young players across the roster. These inexperienced players have far too little prep time and no time for remedial fundamentals. We can see the results on Sundays.

Things that used to keep guys on the bench until they were "ready" (basically everything that Steeldude hates about the linebackers) are no longer cardinal sins. Young (CHEAP) players must get on the field and play through their issues in the hope that come "Crunch time" they will finally be "ready".

I don't know if anyone else would agree, but I see this kind of explaining almost (not the playcalling, odd roster choices, and a couple of other things) every single issue that we talk about during the Tomlin era Steelers. I never thought about it this way before. But it makes sense - at least to me.

[86WARD]

Makes sense to me. Gone are the “two-a-days” in full pads and the physical/mental preparation for live hitting.

[Steeldude]

But the Steelers suffer from the first 3 the entire season.

[AtlantaDan]

Apparently, recently, Belichick has spoken at length on the same issue. He basically argued that there is no way to be ready or good at the
start of a season so he focuses on getting better during the course of the year and hoping to ready come playoff time. I couldn't find the quote - but I know it exists.

This might be the quote you are looking for, which Belichick gave earlier this week

I guess the Pats' success might be due to more than having Brady

Bill Belichick has a well-deserved reputation for being short with the media. But the Patriots head coach has proven multiple times that if a reporter asks him
the right question, you can’t get the guy to shut up.

That happened on Monday when Belichick was asked about how a team evolves over the course of the season and he responded with a 791-word answer

Well, I’ll just say that when you start the season, you have, let’s call it 20 practices, not including the spring. So let’s call it 20 practices and some preseason games,
and during that time you’re trying to evaluate your team, work on a lot of basic and fundamental things and I’ll say basically get your team ready to play not only
on the opening day, but for getting conditioned and build your fundamentals and all that so that you can compete in the 16-game regular season. In those 20
practices and however many preseason games certain players play in – two, three, four, whatever it is – against other teams that are doing the same thing, so
you’re not getting some of the more sophisticated and the higher degree of difficulty things in any phase of the game. You’re in more of an evaluation mode and
a fundamental mode. That’s where you’re at, and then as you get into the season, you build on that and you have things that attack certain schemes or you
have to use to address certain issues that your opponent is trying to pressure you with. Maybe you just sit in your base, whatever it is, to handle it. Maybe your
basics handle it, but maybe you need to go a little bit beyond that or maybe you see opportunities to create a play that you might install on a weekly game plan basis,
and then all that accumulates. So, when you go from 20 practices to, let’s call it 60 practices over halfway through the season, maybe 80 practices at the end of
the season, you’re going to have a lot more in with 80 practices and you could probably triple the number of meetings on that and everything else then where
you’re going to have after a relatively short period in training camp. So, along those same lines, I mean, if we keep running the same play all year, the same
ones that you put in in training camp and keep running those same plays all year, it’s not that difficult in this league to figure out what those few things are
and game plan accordingly. So, if you don’t increase the volume of your scheme on offense, defense and special teams, then every week, your opponent’s
just looking at a handful of things and probably most of them they’ve seen before. So, I don’t know how much problem, how much stress you’re really putting
on your opponent if that’s the way that you do it. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing because you can play your basic stuff, and if it’s working well and if you’re
doing well with it and people can’t handle it, then there’s no reason to change it. But I don’t know how many teams in the league fall into that category.
I wouldn’t say it’s an exceedingly high number and it never really has been, based on my experience in the league. Although, I’m not saying that can’t happen,
but I would certainly say that’s not the most common way that teams evolve throughout the course of the year. So, you do what you need to do each week
to try to win. You put in the plays, make the adjustments, you don’t want to overload things – I mean, nobody’s talking about putting in a new offense every week.
That’s not it at all, but are there some modifications you can make? Sure, and as you rep those and you use them and if those situations come up again, then
maybe you can fall back to that same type of scheme. But to think realistically, which it’s incomprehensible to me, but, I mean, I don’t know.
Maybe I just can’t figure it out, but it’s incomprehensible to me how anybody could think that a team that’s practiced for six months and played 19 regular
season and postseason games and had triple-digit practices, five months later, after not playing a game, after having a fraction of that type of experience,
could be anywhere close to the level of execution that they were five months before that after all of the things that I just listed. I mean, it’s impossible in my view.
So, each year, you start all over again. You start that process all over again. You build your team over the course of the year though practice repetitions, through preseason
to regular season games, through the evolving of your scheme, and that’s why each year is different and unique. But, I understand I’m in the minority and most other people
don’t see it that way, which is OK, but that’s the way I see it.


http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/10/nfl-patriots-bill-belichick-press-conference-answer-defense

[SteelMayhem72]

So I was listening to the Ringer's NFL Podcast this week (https://www.theringer.com/2017/10/17/16492026/ringer-nfl-show-aaron-rodgers-injury-carson-wentz). Mostly just the usual ideas and opinions. But they got around to talking about parity across the league and they mentioned this article -- https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/10/17/16488320/parity-myth-dynasty-roger-goodell-collective-bargaining-agreement

One of the more interesting ideas in it is that the league has so many crap and underperforming teams in it right now because teams can not practice how they used to. So that gives us this quote:

"In 2011, the league struck a collective bargaining agreement that limited practice time and banned two-a-days from NFL training camp. Schwartz said most of the NFL’s on-field problems—lack of offensive line cohesion and tackling issues—can be traced back to this. It also created an environment where teams had less time to differentiate themselves on the practice field. Part of what makes a great team great is what it does during preparation time, so when there’s less prep time, there’s less time for the wheat to separate itself from the chaff. This has led to some teams, understanding that there’s no way to be ready for the season under the current rules, taking things much more slowly."

Apparently, recently, Belichick has spoken at length on the same issue. He basically argued that there is no way to be ready or good at the start of a season so he focuses on getting better during the course of the year and hoping to ready come playoff time. I couldn't find the quote - but I know it exists.

To bring this back to the Steelers, maybe this is the simple and understandable explanation for the following:
1. Poor tackling
2. Confused play-calling and execution
3. Unforced mental errors
4. Starting "slow"

Basically, every major and repeated criticism of the team by most long-standing posters around here. Couple the reduced practice time with the other phenomena the posted article details - young rosters. To make the cap work, teams pay veteran "star players" and then fill in with cheap young and very young players across the roster. These inexperienced players have far too little prep time and no time for remedial fundamentals. We can see the results on Sundays.

Things that used to keep guys on the bench until they were "ready" (basically everything that Steeldude hates about the linebackers) are no longer cardinal sins. Young (CHEAP) players must get on the field and play through their issues in the hope that come "Crunch time" they will finally be "ready".

I don't know if anyone else would agree, but I see this kind of explaining almost (not the playcalling, odd roster choices, and a couple of other things) every single issue that we talk about during the Tomlin era Steelers. I never thought about it this way before. But it makes sense - at least to me.I totally agree with this...im as hard as anybody on our team but this is the exact reason why there is parity (what the nfl wants) and another reason why the steelers voted against the CBA. Pro football is lot like syncronized swimming...not enough practice and not enough of being in sync and cohesion if your not able to practice the right way. Some other posters in here basically said the first 4 games of the regular season is basically the pre season and they are correct.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

[steelreserve]

This is not new, it's been going on for years; there have been various articles that hinted at one part or another of it but few that showed a full-picture understanding of the problem like this one.

The NFL has twin problems - the "protect your investment" syndrome that's common to all pro sports because of the amount players are being paid, as well as the "player safety" bogeyman for which they have to keep up a certain public appearance. So ironically, in the most physical of all sports, they do the most to limit the amount of physicality the players are exposed to. The CBA-limited practices are one part of it, the first-stringers playing one series in the last two preseason games is another, the salary-cap turnover (the only element of it that's designed for "parity," one mistake the author makes) is another part, and the list goes on. It's a fundamental incompatibility with the nature of the sport.

I think Belichick is absolutely right in that respect; while I hate that franchise and everything about it, he probably has more current and historical knowledge about the game of football than anyone on the planet. If he's having the same problems with it, there's an issue.

I still firmly believe that the high point of professional football in terms of overall skill and competitiveness was in the '80s and '90s, and the steps over the next 25-30 years have watered down or at least transformed the game to the point where it's in trouble. You can't be a super-solid team that executes all aspects of the game perfectly - that's impossible for the reasons mentioned above - so the focus of those watching has shifted toward having the most "splash plays" and going "OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH" like it's a rap video. (I think the sports media have, for their own benefit, put in an incredible amount of work in steering public interest toward that direction, but that's a separate discussion.)

While you see records being broken left and right, and players making individual plays that are some of the best ever, I don't think most teams of today would even be competitive with the ones from the '80s and '90s; they simply don't have the organization and they aren't even allowed to. Even the ones that do it the best today are still far from the best of that era. Sad.

[SteelerFanInStl]

This is not new, it's been going on for years; there have been various articles that hinted at one part or another of it but few that showed a full-picture understanding of the problem like this one.

Yep, this has been talked about for years. I believe that it's the major reason for the inferior product that's now being put on the field.

[AtlantaDan]

As well as the "player safety" bogeyman for which they have to keep up a certain public appearance. So ironically, in the most physical of all sports, they do the most to limit the amount of physicality the players are exposed to.... It's a fundamental incompatibility with the nature of the sport.

It is more than a bogeyman - after decades of denial the NFL has conceded the fact that playing football leads to a significantly increased long term risk of permanent brain damage.

The NFL has other major issues, but CTE is an existential threat. The attempts to limit physical contact are tied to that for reasons of safety and liability (at the pro level), as well as figuring out how to continue to have parents allow their sons to play the game.

Although players are now coached to avoid it when possible, eliminating hits to the head is fundamentally incompatible with how the game is played, as shown by this photo of a high school game that ran in the Post-Gazette several weeks ago in which two teenage boys butted heads

http://www.post-gazette.com/image/2017/10/07/570x_q90_a10-7_cTC_ca11,0,2000,1501/20171006scUSCWestA21-2.jpg

If an accurate test is developed to detect the presence of CTE in living players the bottom is going to fall out.

[ALLD]

Lack of discipline is the problem. On the rare occasion I take 4 or 5 days off from work it takes me a couple of days to get back into the groove. It should not take 4 or 5 weeks to get on board especially if one maintains proper conditioning and mental discipline throughout the year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyRSV9eqTUY

[teegre]

Lack of discipline is the problem. On the rare occasion I take 4 or 5 days off from work it takes me a couple of days to get back into the groove. It should not take 4 or 5 weeks to get on board especially if one maintains proper conditioning and mental discipline throughout the year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyRSV9eqTUY

1) Tomlin's teams are one of the least penalized in the league.

2) Apples & oranges: four or five days off of work versus four or five months off of work.

2-a) Apples & cucumbers: the "normal guy" type of occupation versus a job requiring a highly precise set of skills

[Born2Steel]

1) Tomlin's teams are one of the least penalized in the league.

2) Apples & oranges: four or five days off of work versus four or five months off of work.

2-a) Apples & cucumbers: the "normal guy" type of occupation versus a job requiring a highly precise set of skills


Just to pile on with this, there are 11 guys performing 11 jobs for an entire playbook that they have to all be together on. Apples and oranges/cucumbers? More like apples and space exploration. They're not even both on the same planet.

[steelreserve]

It is more than a bogeyman - after decades of denial the NFL has conceded the fact that playing football leads to a significantly increased long term risk of permanent brain damage.

The NFL has other major issues, but CTE is an existential threat. The attempts to limit physical contact are tied to that for reasons of safety and liability (at the pro level), as well as figuring out how to continue to have parents allow their sons to play the game.

Although players are now coached to avoid it when possible, eliminating hits to the head is fundamentally incompatible with how the game is played, as shown by this photo of a high school game that ran in the Post-Gazette several weeks ago in which two teenage boys butted heads

http://www.post-gazette.com/image/2017/10/07/570x_q90_a10-7_cTC_ca11,0,2000,1501/20171006scUSCWestA21-2.jpg

If an accurate test is developed to detect the presence of CTE in living players the bottom is going to fall out.


I'm not arguing that the threat of CTE is bogus, but ... really, is putting a limit of 20 padded practices in the pros going to do a damn thing about it? No, it's not going to change anything; if a player is developing CTE it's happened over a lifetime of playing football, with who knows what kind of practice and playstyle before they ever got to the pros.

It's all a show for the lawyers and the media so they can say "look, we're trying!" But even that is misguided and useless. The legal aspect of it is settled - they were sued because of all these cases that happened before players knew the risks. Now the risks are public and you can make an informed decision about when to sit out or when to stop playing entirely (which you see happen). Remember how you used to see all those multimillion-dollar court rulings for people who got lung cancer from smoking? Now you don't see that anymore, because everyone knows the risks and if you ignore them, that's your fault for being an idiot. After all this, football is very much an "at your own risk" activity.

As for the other part, the bottom falling out, stupid preseason and practice rules aren't going to stop that either. You're fighting public perception, and the cat's out of the bag. To a parent deciding whether to let his kid play youth football, the number of padded practices in the NFL doesn't make a bit of difference. Football is well on its way to a boxing situation; less participation because of the known risks; therefore smaller talent pool and smaller audience who can relate; therefore less money; therefore the risk-reward equation is even more out of balance; therefore even less participation; therefore a lower-quality product and a smaller sport. Messing up the quality of the game at the highest level right now is only going to hasten the decline.

[86WARD]

To add that way back when, starters would play a series or so in the first preseason game, a quarter in the second, a half or so in the third and then take the fourth game off. It’s no where near that playing time in the preseason now.

[steelreserve]

To add that way back when, starters would play a series or so in the first preseason game, a quarter in the second, a half or so in the third and then take the fourth game off. It’s no where near that playing time in the preseason now.

It was even more than that. I remember a good number of them playing in the fourth game for varying amounts of time up to a full half, and that a lot of players wanted to see some action in that last game, "to be sharp" for the real games.

I may be mistaken about this, but I think the roster-cutdown rules were drastically different back then also, so you had a series of several cuts throughout the preseason. The first game was the real free-for-all where you saw if any of the longshots were worth it, and as you went on, the roster situation became clearer and the games were more about getting the players who were going to be on the team prepared. Then they changed it to many fewer cutdowns, and now recently to only one - so now the entire preseason is about weeding people out and giving Landry Jones 10,000 chances to show us what we already know. Not smart if you ask me.

I also distinctly remember on the 49ers one year, they had clinched the division and homefield advantage with a couple weeks remaining, and Steve Young insisted on playing the first half of the remaining games so he stayed in sync with the offense heading into the playoffs. Now it's all about relaxing down the stretch and mailing in games if you're able to - "protecting your investment" by letting it sit there getting rusty.

More recently you had the Colts one year go 13-0 or something and clinch their terrible division with like a month to go, and then they played the scrubs for 2 or 3 games, which I remember messed up some betting things for me. Then they got to the playoffs and Peyton Manning hadn't played for a month and they looked like shit and lost in the first round. Actually, that might have been the year we beat them and went to the Super Bowl. I'd look it up but I'm too lazy. It sounds right.

[AtlantaDan]

To add that way back when, starters would play a series or so in the first preseason game, a quarter in the second, a half or so in the third and then take the fourth game off. It’s no where near that playing time in the preseason now.


It was even more than that. I remember a good number of them playing in the fourth game for varying amounts of time up to a full half, and that a lot of players wanted to see some action in that last game, "to be sharp" for the real games.

Yep - In the mid to late 70s the Steelers would finish up preseason playing in Dallas on a Saturday night in a game that usually was nationally televised - starters including Bradshaw would play at least a half

[tube517]

You are younger than me

In the mid to late 70s the Steelers would finish up preseason playing in Dallas on a Saturday night in a game that usually was nationally televised - starters including Bradshaw would play at least a half

Remember the college all stars vs SB Champions from the previous year game? They had starters playing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mxpOUo1euw&feature=youtu.be&t=167

[AtlantaDan]

Remember the college all stars vs SB Champions from the previous year game? They had starters playing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mxpOUo1euw&feature=youtu.be&t=167

NFL was glad for that to end :chuckle:

"We are going to keep your top draft choices out of camp to prepare for an exhibition game in which they might get injured or try to make a name for themselves by injuring starters on the defending Super Bowl champs"

I recall the last of those was againt the 76 Steelers

[Craic]

I'm not arguing that the threat of CTE is bogus, but ... really, is putting a limit of 20 padded practices in the pros going to do a damn thing about it? No, it's not going to change anything; if a player is developing CTE it's happened over a lifetime of playing football, with who knows what kind of practice and playstyle before they ever got to the pros.

In one season? No. However, cutting from two-a-days to one practice a day saves 20 practices a summer. Cutting padded practices during the year to 14 total might save another 5 practices. So, a total of 25 padded practices per year. Doesn't sound like much, right?

However, if a player plays 4 years, that's 100 practices. If a player plays 8 years, that's 200 practices, and that will do quite a bit. That being said, you are also right that there could be several years of blows to the head before they even get to the NFL. That type of momentum hitting another player causes serious problems. Of course, that's where I put the blame completely on the NFL.

They have worked for years to speed up the game so it was more exciting. Players run free in the secondary now and the offensive lineman are able to almost mug defensive players to give the QB time to wait for WRs to run as fast as they can 20 yards down the field. Then, we wonder why head injuries occur when two players running 20+ miles an hour and weigh 185+ pounds each hit each other. Wanna fix that? Stop with the stupid passing interference rules. Go back to the 1970s rules on wide receivers, but keep the rules on targeting the head.

Of course, scoring will go down and that might mean less money so the NFL will NEVER do it. And that, of course, is just another example of the hypocrisy of the NFL.

[steelreserve]

NFL was glad for that to end :chuckle:

"We are going to keep your top draft choices out of camp to prepare for an exhibition game in which they might get injured or try to make a name for themselves by injuring starters on the defending Super Bowl champs"

I recall the last of those was againt the 76 Steelers


And a hell of a game it was, ending in a thunderstorm that left the field unplayable, with fans tearing down the goalposts and culminating in a brawl as the announcers politely signed off and thanked their sponsors ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0lkHGKV44U




In one season? No. However, cutting from two-a-days to one practice a day saves 20 practices a summer. Cutting padded practices during the year to 14 total might save another 5 practices. So, a total of 25 padded practices per year. Doesn't sound like much, right?

However, if a player plays 4 years, that's 100 practices. If a player plays 8 years, that's 200 practices, and that will do quite a bit. That being said, you are also right that there could be several years of blows to the head before they even get to the NFL. That type of momentum hitting another player causes serious problems. Of course, that's where I put the blame completely on the NFL.

They have worked for years to speed up the game so it was more exciting. Players run free in the secondary now and the offensive lineman are able to almost mug defensive players to give the QB time to wait for WRs to run as fast as they can 20 yards down the field. Then, we wonder why head injuries occur when two players running 20+ miles an hour and weigh 185+ pounds each hit each other. Wanna fix that? Stop with the stupid passing interference rules. Go back to the 1970s rules on wide receivers, but keep the rules on targeting the head.

Of course, scoring will go down and that might mean less money so the NFL will NEVER do it. And that, of course, is just another example of the hypocrisy of the NFL.


In my opinion, they need exactly one rule for player safety: "No deliberately hitting opponents in the head." That's it. The totality of it. Anything beyond that and you are just going to mess it all up without improving safety a bit.

I mean, keep all the sideline medical stuff and the testing to make sure people have recovered, because that actually makes a difference. But eliminate 90% of the helmet-to-helmet penalties, because they are just an unfortunate byproduct of tackling.

I don't think it's the one big hit that makes any difference in the long run either. It's the accumulation of tens of thousands. NFL's stricter practice rules eliminate maybe a couple percent of the practices a player will go through in his life, and I just don't see it making any difference except in terms of PR. But that comes at a very significant cost to the quality of the game.

[Psycho Ward 86]

its easy to point to practice limitations as a culprit for this underwhelming offense but theres only so much blame that can we assigned to that when theres 21 other teams in the league scoring more points per game than us. None of those teams have more offensive talent. theres no way in hell we should be scoring less points than teams led by Jared Goff, Alex Smith, Deshaun Watson, Trevor Siemian, Case Keenum, or even Jacoby Brissett (yup you read correctly). After 6 games, you have a big enough body of work to know if you're going to be a real PPG machine or not, and sadly im gonna have to go with a resounding not gonna happen on that one still

[steelreserve]

its easy to point to practice limitations as a culprit for this underwhelming offense but theres only so much blame that can we assigned to that when theres 21 other teams in the league scoring more points per game than us. None of those teams have more offensive talent. theres no way in hell we should be scoring less points than teams led by Jared Goff, Alex Smith, Deshaun Watson, Trevor Siemian, Case Keenum, or even Jacoby Brissett (yup you read correctly). After 6 games, you have a big enough body of work to know if you're going to be a real PPG machine or not, and sadly im gonna have to go with a resounding not gonna happen on that one still

Thing is, I can look across the entire league after 6 games, and not find one single team where I go "these guys really have their shit together." Even the winning teams have blatantly obvious shortcomings. It's leaguewide mediocrity.

I think that the idea behind "parity" was that every team would be good enough to compete, so it would be exciting. This is more like, every team is bad enough that they might fuck up and lose to anybody, which is much less exciting.

[AtlantaDan]

And a hell of a game it was, ending in a thunderstorm that left the field unplayable, with fans tearing down the goalposts and culminating in a brawl as the announcers politely signed off and thanked their sponsors ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0lkHGKV44U

That's right!!

Great find :drink: :thumbsup:

Crowd storming the field was typical out of control 70s behavior :sofunny: