NFL Owner's Meeting

Official Seahawks Forum, for the 12th man, by the 12th man.

NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby RiverDog » Sat Mar 25, 2017 6:28 am

The owners are slated to meet in Phoenix this coming Monday. On the docket are such items as:

The Raiders proposed move to Las Vegas. Not sure how this one is going to turn out. The owners supposedly have concerns as to whether or not LV can support a full time NFL franchise. I think that it's a no brainer, that the city is already a year round destination with plenty of infrastructure along with the fact that the Raiders are one of those handful of teams that have nation wide fan base, and to a certain degree, a world wide following that it really doesn't make a lot of difference how many locals show up. They may also take another look at the Chargers move to LA.

Changes to instant replay reviews. This seems more mechanical than anything else. They're trying to centralize the decision making, give refs something like a small tablet they can refer to instead of running to the sidelines and getting under a hood. The goal seems to be aimed at speeding up the process and take some of the decision making away from the refs on the field and send it back to their NYC location.

Some pace of play changes meant to speed up the game. These would include adding a play clock on XP attempts and the subsequent kickoff, also standardizing the length of halftime. Funny, I never noticed a difference and thought it already was regulated.

Safety-related rule changes. One of these is aimed directly at the Hawks, as they are proposing to eliminate leaping over the center on kick attempts ala Kam and Bobby. I guess I don't see where this play is any different than a ball carrier hurdling a potential tackler. It's an exciting play that I don't see the justification for eliminating.

Comments?
Last edited by RiverDog on Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby NorthHawk » Sat Mar 25, 2017 7:52 am

I think the Raiders will get the OK to move to LV. Just from what I'm reading and hearing on the radio, but who knows?

From what I understand, the calls on Instant Replay will be made in NY by Blandino or his people. It works pretty well for Hockey, but as a fan, I see some trends where particular teams often appear to get the calls going for them and others against.
I think it could speed up the game without the Ref running off the field to look under the hood at IR. By the time he gets there most of the TV coverage has shown the replay from more than a few angles.

Further Speeding up the game - there was some talk by Goodell to reduce the number of commercials or at least promo advertising for the networks upcoming shows. Fewer commercial breaks would definitely be better.

Leaping over the LoS. I think it's exciting, too but the Eagles lost 2 long snappers last year ( I don't think it was because of this, though) and I think they are concerned it will cause further injuries. It became popular by other teams, too so they might be right in the long run. Teams suspecting a player will jump might teach their linemen to stand up quickly which could in turn cause an injury by a Defensive lineman who powers forward hard and possibly injure the OL who is now far more vulnerable.
I like the excitement of the play, but I can see some of the risk as well.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 10617
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby c_hawkbob » Sat Mar 25, 2017 8:52 am

Vegas - Once the owners moved off caring about ties to gambling I see no issues with a move to Sin City.

Instant replay - having the replay decided remotely and not waiting till TV comes back from advertisement is a big plus. I think they could go farther, but this is a good step.

Pace of play - I like them. I like doing away with with the advertisement break after a Kick Off even better. Going to advertisement after a score, coming back for a kick off, then going to another advertisement has always been a pisser.

I always figured they'd regulate out jumping over the LOS at the snap, surprised it took this long. Too bad, brought some real excitement to the game. Awesome visual.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby RiverDog » Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:13 am

I remain unconvinced of the safety risk of jumping over a stationary player. I can understand landing on top of them when they are in an unprotected position, but the rule already states that they can't make anything more than incidental contact.

Supposedly Bruce Arians is the one that brought this up, and IMO he made an ass out of himself by showing everyone his ignorance of the rules when he was complaining about Bobby brushing his center when he leaped over him, and now he's trying to somehow vindicate his silly protests by having a rule implemented that would make his argument correct.

I have no problems with the replay or pace of game changes.

The Raiders seem to think the move to LV will be approved. They have a news conference planned at UNLV on Wednesday and sources in the bay area are saying that it's a cinch. Word is that the owners are pleased with the way Mark Davis responded when he was cut out of the LA deal by not raising hell about it as his father almost certainly would have and are in a more accommodating mood than they might otherwise be.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby jshawaii22 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:06 pm

from what I understand, the NFL will not reduce the number of commercials, but follow what NASCAR does on time outs for replays, XPoints and the kickoff, and run the commercials side-by-side with the game in a 'box' so you don't miss the action, and the play continues.
This is supposed to cut 7-10 minutes off the game time. I could live with that.

One of the NFL's studies on Las Vegas shows that they assume that 40% of each games tickets will be resold on the open marketplace and many of the season ticket buyers will be buying just to be able to resell the tix for a profit. Welcome to the new world order of the NFL. If the Seat Licences are really under 5k for up to 1/2 the seats, it would seem to be a good investment. If a decent tix in the new stadium goes online for $300 vs the face value of $75, which is what I paid the first time I saw the Seahawks play the 49ers at Levi's stadium, the investment is worth it. Of course last year, when I went, the same $300 tix cost $75 and there were more 'Hawk fans in the stadium, but this is not the 49ers and it's not Santa Clara. This is Vegas, baby and there will always be an inherent demand far more then other cities. My opinion is it's a done deal.

js
User avatar
jshawaii22
Legacy
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:32 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby RiverDog » Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:10 am

jshawaii22 wrote:from what I understand, the NFL will not reduce the number of commercials, but follow what NASCAR does on time outs for replays, XPoints and the kickoff, and run the commercials side-by-side with the game in a 'box' so you don't miss the action, and the play continues.
This is supposed to cut 7-10 minutes off the game time. I could live with that.

One of the NFL's studies on Las Vegas shows that they assume that 40% of each games tickets will be resold on the open marketplace and many of the season ticket buyers will be buying just to be able to resell the tix for a profit. Welcome to the new world order of the NFL. If the Seat Licences are really under 5k for up to 1/2 the seats, it would seem to be a good investment. If a decent tix in the new stadium goes online for $300 vs the face value of $75, which is what I paid the first time I saw the Seahawks play the 49ers at Levi's stadium, the investment is worth it. Of course last year, when I went, the same $300 tix cost $75 and there were more 'Hawk fans in the stadium, but this is not the 49ers and it's not Santa Clara. This is Vegas, baby and there will always be an inherent demand far more then other cities. My opinion is it's a done deal.

js


Most of you are probably too young to remember, but boxing had a problem when they first went to televise bouts. The problem was that the time between rounds was an exact 60 seconds, the same amount of time for a commercial, but they had a several second pause coming in and going out of commercials, so they didn't fit, and TV networks didn't wield nearly the amount of influence over sports as they do nowadays and the boxing gurus wouldn't budge on the 60 seconds. Their solution was to superimpose a commercial over the live feed, so you saw these stick characters and voice overs while still being able to see the ring in the background. I don't imagine that they could collect as much money for those types of commercials as they did standard ones, but something like it might be made to work so they could try to take advantage of some of the situations where you don't want to cut away from the live feed.

Just thinking outside the box.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby NorthHawk » Mon Mar 27, 2017 7:31 am

Maybe they should have fewer commercials but charge more for each so the advertisers pay the same amount but the interruptions are less.
But I can see them not doing that and instead put scrawls along the bottom or top somewhat like you see in European soccer.
Shrinking the screen during the commercials makes for a lesser experience - which isn't a stated goal.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 10617
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby c_hawkbob » Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:14 am

31-1 owners aprove Raiders move to Vegas.

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status ... 9047965696
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby NorthHawk » Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:38 pm

Wow. Slam dunk.
I didn't think there would be that much support for the move.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 10617
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby jshawaii22 » Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:16 pm

NorthHawk wrote:Wow. Slam dunk.
I didn't think there would be that much support for the move.


Las Vegas = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the owners

Oakland = 00000000000000000 for the owners

31-1 seems about right. Miami didn't want the competition for the "sun"
User avatar
jshawaii22
Legacy
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:32 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby RiverDog » Mon Mar 27, 2017 6:39 pm

I'm surprised at the number of 'yea' votes, too. But in retrospect, there wasn't really any other choice as staying in Oakland wasn't really an option, and there was a sense amongst the owners that they owed Davis this one because they cut him out of the LA deal.

Now the drama will be where do the Raiders spend the next 3-4 years. They are committed to Oakland this season, but in 2018-2020, they're going to need a home away from home. We play them on the road next season.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby jshawaii22 » Mon Mar 27, 2017 7:04 pm

RiverDog wrote:I'm surprised at the number of 'yea' votes, too. But in retrospect, there wasn't really any other choice as staying in Oakland wasn't really an option, and there was a sense amongst the owners that they owed Davis this one because they cut him out of the LA deal.

Now the drama will be where do the Raiders spend the next 3-4 years. They are committed to Oakland this season, but in 2018-2020, they're going to need a home away from home. We play them on the road next season.


Raiders have two, one year leases in Oakland and the owner said today they hope that the 'city' and their fans will allow them to stay the third.

The team that got F'ed in all this is San Diego. They will have no fan base in LA and may not last 5 years. If I were them, I'd stay in the soccer stadium so you could call it your "home" -- even at 30000 seats, it's better than the sharing with the Rams, as a tenant.
User avatar
jshawaii22
Legacy
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:32 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby RiverDog » Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:49 am

jshawaii22 wrote:Raiders have two, one year leases in Oakland and the owner said today they hope that the 'city' and their fans will allow them to stay the third.

The team that got F'ed in all this is San Diego. They will have no fan base in LA and may not last 5 years. If I were them, I'd stay in the soccer stadium so you could call it your "home" -- even at 30000 seats, it's better than the sharing with the Rams, as a tenant.


Supposedly at this week's meeting, the owners were going to review the Charger to LA situation to see if they could salvage the SD market. So we'll see.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby Feez » Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:18 am

I read something this morning that the owners stood to make 53 mill. each from the relocation of the Raiders, Rams and Chargers which to me seems like a conflict of interest and a sign that any time a team's relocation is up for a vote it will pass. whoever the 1 owner who voted no is has my respect because he voted against giving himself money
User avatar
Feez
Legacy
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:53 am

Re: NFL Owner's Meeting

Postby jshawaii22 » Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:27 pm

I'm not sure about the Rams, but the Chargers and Raiders are 'paying' their relocation fees over 10 years and it's coming from their TV revenue share... so it just means less money from the Pot 'O Gold for them, and not really more for the NFL, just those owners who didn't move.

I also heard that the Raiders get a share from the Rams and Chargers and those teams get it from the Raiders. Very odd, but this is a Billion $$$ club bus and this just isn't a lot to many of many of them, I'm sure that includes Jerry Jones and the very rich Seahawks owner.

Here's some more for everyone that I got today from a 'friend' in LV: Alelson wasn't rejected by the Raiders. It was pressure (Raider's wouldn't get the votes to move) from the NFL owners who wouldn't touch that slime ball with a 10' pole, that forced him out, of course not until after he got the State of Nevada to pass the 750m in public funding bill. Adelson does have a lot of 'public' influence. Jerry Jones is the mover and shaker for the NFL. He's moved into the position and the Raiders owner became a figurhead for the past 2 months.

When Adelson was told to take a hike or allowed to 'quit' the project, B.o.A. had already been 'asked' in by Jerry Jones to fund the move. The NFL ownership dictated that BoA come in to back the loan as BoA has interests and loans in the millions with the N.F.L.
User avatar
jshawaii22
Legacy
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:32 am


Return to Seahawks Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

cron