PDA

View Full Version : Roger Goodell's Contract Extended through 2018


eeth
01-25-2012, 11:19 AM
According to Adam Schefter, no link yet. Let the carnage begin!

A Perfect Score
01-25-2012, 11:24 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Damn you NFL, damn you.

SuperPacker
01-25-2012, 11:26 AM
How much would a new commish actually change things? Not much IMO so i dont see it as a massive deal.

Jvig43
01-25-2012, 11:26 AM
nF_lJTGKFP0

BeerBaron
01-25-2012, 12:01 PM
Goodell was never really the villain. Now that the Polian influence is gone, hopefully for good, I'm meh on Goodell.

And it's no surprise really. He's been fantastic for the owners. So what if the fans hate him?

"Let them have us so long as they pay us." - NFL Motto. And the fans comply.

Trogdor
01-25-2012, 12:10 PM
Pretty sure it's the motto of every professional sports commish. If they are likeable while alive and in term they aren't doing their job (serving the owners).

I mean "his" policies are a league-wide initiative and not solely attributed to him. If the owners weren't a fan of his actions he wouldn't be commish. So if you want to hate someone hate the owners for wanting this type of agenda to begin with.

Sloopy
01-25-2012, 01:15 PM
Why we even have a commissioner is beyond me. His title should really be "collective owners spokesperson/draft day pick announcer."

Dude is just a puppet for the owners

Ness
01-25-2012, 01:22 PM
Terrible news. Just terrible. Now I have to hear his BS excuses for the incompetence of regulating late hitting for another six years every time that issue comes up.

Prowler
01-25-2012, 01:25 PM
There will be no fun until at least 2019.

vidae
01-25-2012, 01:43 PM
People go way overboard when it comes to Goodell. It's annoying to read.

Iamcanadian
01-25-2012, 01:54 PM
Why we even have a commissioner is beyond me. His title should really be "collective owners spokesperson/draft day pick announcer."

Dude is just a puppet for the owners

That's what a commish is. He does what he is told and must keep the revenue rolling in or he'd be gone.

DraftSavant
01-25-2012, 01:59 PM
People go way overboard when it comes to Goodell. It's annoying to read.

The only thing I ever really cared about was the stupid personal conduct policy (hastily put together, inconsistent process, enacted because of slapdick media coverage).

The "ruining the game" stuff, I've come to terms with - they're trying to minimize liability in a time where a ton of research is coming out about the head trauma associated with football (research that the NFL spent a lot of money throughout the 90s and 00s to try and dispute with their own studies). That was coming no matter who the commissioner was.

Jvig43
01-25-2012, 02:04 PM
The only thing I ever really cared about was the stupid personal conduct policy (hastily put together, inconsistent process, enacted because of slapdick media coverage).

The "ruining the game" stuff, I've come to terms with - they're trying to minimize liability in a time where a ton of research is coming out about the head trauma associated with football (research that the NFL spent a lot of money throughout the 90s and 00s to try and dispute with their own studies). That was coming no matter who the commissioner was.

I think this is how I feel about most of the policies or rule changes put in place (not just by Goodell obviously). Theres just such a vagueness about them which seems to come down to how Goodell wishes to punish people on a particular day. Idk I'll go more into this when I have a bit more time so summarize my thoughts.

Giantsfan1080
01-25-2012, 02:12 PM
I don't like what he did to the draft either.

Prowler
01-25-2012, 02:17 PM
Inconsistent rules, refs aren't even full time, stupid fines, $15k+ for TD celebrations?, sideline rules, but mostly I'm upset because he works for "the man" and I mistrust that. I do realize that most of that stuff was put in place by different committees or previous regimes, but I don't care.

A Perfect Score
01-25-2012, 02:17 PM
I'm not huge on his haircut, personally.

Jvig43
01-25-2012, 02:18 PM
I'm not a huge fan of the hair color.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
01-30-2012, 01:03 PM
I'm a fan of the fact that his name is easy to turn into Roger Badell.

Babylon
01-30-2012, 01:20 PM
Not sure if i care that much for the guy but for some reason i had to shut 60 minutes off when he came on last night.

WCH
01-30-2012, 01:29 PM
I don't like what he did to the draft either.

I hate it, but under the new format I actually know people who watch the first day of the Draft even though they only barely follow football. It's in primetime and the players always look so excited, so they enjoy watching it.

Hurricanes25
01-30-2012, 01:49 PM
I know most of us fans hate him and rightfully so. But we all have to remember that the NFL is a business and he's making a lot of money for the league.

Grizzlegom
02-03-2012, 09:29 AM
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2012/02/commissioner-roger-goodell-nfl-might-expand-to-34-teams-to-include-los-angeles/1

Goodell hints at expansion of two new teams. Not sure how I feel about it. I like the idea of more players in the NFL but I don't think the NFL really needs it. Where would the second team be? Vegas? I think Oklahoma City would be a nice fit. I'm sure the NFL would love for London or Toronto to permanently get a team...

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 09:49 AM
Ah man, our nice divisional structure would be all thrown off.

Prowler
02-03-2012, 10:03 AM
I'm guessing the Chargers will move to LA and then Vegas will get a team. I thought I heard something about moving the Chargers to the NFC West, which means that Vegas would move into the AFC West hole. I'm not sure why the Chargers would be moved, but I thought I remember hearing that in an article a few months back.

CDCB14
02-03-2012, 10:16 AM
34 teams is ridiculously stupid. The NFL already has the most teams and is the hardest league to win in. There is only 1 super bowl a year. Adding 2 teams would just add two losers every year and diminish the talent pool. Obviously there are enough players to add 2 teams, but it's still stupid. This isn't college football where there are 50 bowl games. This isn't golf or tennis.

By 2050 will we have 40 teams? The NFL is headed in a terrible direction and it's starting to really bother me. I wish there was something I could do about it. The illegal hits, the rules that ridiculously favor the offense, etc. Fans, players, and owners need to start voicing opinions against these movements.

An 18 game season would have been dumb as hell, and so would 34 teams. Stop before the NFL is ruined.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 10:18 AM
great, yeah, let's put a ******* expansion team in LA. hell, the city is completely incapable of supporting a winning team, let's give them a guaranteed non-winner. it's unbelieveable to me how stupid some of these people are. la should never, ever have a team unless you can guarantee that they'll win the super bowl every single year.

-______________-

K, we'll keep these teams in San Diego, or Oakland, or Tampa where the fan support is just freakin' awesome and they regularly sell out their games and wouldn't dare need an extension to not have a playoff game blacked out or anything.

The owners were Al ******* Davis and Georgia ******* Frontiere. I can't imagine why fans lost interest.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 10:18 AM
-______________-

You make this face because you know it to be true.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 10:34 AM
I don't want expansion, either, but I'm very much looking forward to stealing some other worthless city's team.

LA's real value to the NFL, though, has mostly passed. I'm pretty sure Tagliabue used the LA threat to every city that built a new stadium during his reign as commish (I think it was like 60% of the teams got new stadiums or something ridiculous).

I still have doubts as to whether a stadium will ever even get built here. They can't even ******* figure out which site to use yet. :shrug:

Prowler
02-03-2012, 10:39 AM
They just need cooler mascots. They need to set fashion trends. People are finally warming up to the Clippers because they are good, but seriously...wtf is a clipper? Hairstylists? The Rams were just too tacky with the blue and yellow and not stylish enough with their overall presentation. The new LA team(s) can at least appeal to their city more and be the LA Boarders or the Beckhams or something. I would personally go religious with it so I could appeal to the Latinos without pissing off the rich white people. I would go with the Archangels or something similar.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 10:39 AM
I feel like we have just the right amount of teams in the NFL, so no thanks to expansion or contraction.

I mean hell, the NFL has only a small handful of teams that struggle to sell out and nearly every team can be competitive.

For comparison, half of the NBA teams would need to be contracted in order to ensure that every team is reasonably competitive.

ElectricEye
02-03-2012, 10:42 AM
I'm completely against expansion. 32 teams is a whole lot already and the talent distribution is perfect right now. The NFL team in LA thing is an eventuality at this point(provided they're able to finish one of those stadium plans) and I really don't mind them moving a team there, but expanding is not the way to do that.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:01 AM
Damage control:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/03/goodell-we-havent-talked-about-expansion-at-all/

“We haven’t talked about expansion at all,” Goodell said. “I don’t see that in foreseeable future.”

Also:



Because damage control was mentioned:

v8pUqln36po

Yes, it's 9+ minutes of a guy on guitar who will be better than anyone else will ever be.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:04 AM
Also:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/03/nfl-network-plans-13-thursday-night-games-in-2012/

“We’re going to be playing Thursday night games from Week 2 to Week 15,” Goodell said.

All of them Jaguars games I assume. In fact, all prime time games will be Jaguars games. They will play multiple times a week.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 11:13 AM
Also:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/03/nfl-network-plans-13-thursday-night-games-in-2012/



All of them Jaguars games I assume. In fact, all prime time games will be Jaguars games. They will play multiple times a week.

I don't want to watch them play, and they're my favorite team.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:19 AM
I don't want to watch them play, and they're my favorite team.

So many awful primetime games last season...and the worst all involved them.

Even if they had a healthy Garrard starting, they did not deserve 3 primetime games.

Watching Gabbert play reminded me of "When Animals Attack."

I mean...I mean...he spiked a ball two feet in front of him to avoid getting hit and drew an intentional grounding.

I don't even...I mean...I don't even...Ah...what!?

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/epic-jackie-chan-template.png

ElectricEye
02-03-2012, 11:24 AM
Jaguars or no Jaguars, I'm never opposed to more football on TV. I'm not sure I'm in love with the idea of Thursday games every week though, for a few reasons. Chiefly among being teams having the flip and be ready to go on an ultra short week. The quality of football could possibly suffer as a result of that. It also seems rather counter intuitive if injuries are supposedly the NFL's main concern, as more games in a shorter time frame certainly isn't going to help with that.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:24 AM
you know, this could work out well. just let denver play jax every week. i'd never have to see either team ever again, since i refuse to get nfln. and they're both mediocre enough that they'd probably fight to an 8-8 record every season, meaning that the rest of the nfl would stay in balance.

Ah ****, the Broncos are going to have so many prime time games this year. Oh dear god no.

http://danawesome.netau.net/images/Sad/Numb.png

My day just went from average to extremely ****** at this revelation.

Are the Broncos actually scheduled to play the Jags next year? Because I need to avoid that game at all costs. The, uh, "quarterback" play would set football back decades.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
02-03-2012, 11:25 AM
Goodell was never really the villain. Now that the Polian influence is gone, hopefully for good, I'm meh on Goodell.

And it's no surprise really. He's been fantastic for the owners. So what if the fans hate him?

"Let them have us so long as they pay us." - NFL Motto. And the fans comply.

You are such an insufferable douche. It was all Polians fault you can't touch the QB? It was all his fault any roughhousing gets a huge fine? Get real. he is gone now so let it go.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 11:26 AM
You are such an insufferable douche. It was all Polians fault you can't touch the QB? It was all his fault any roughhousing gets a huge fine? Get real. he is gone now so let it go.

#BlamePolian2012

Really, though, that cuntrag ginger duo of Goodell and Polian created the NFL we watch today.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:31 AM
You are such an insufferable douche. It was all Polians fault you can't touch the QB? It was all his fault any roughhousing gets a huge fine? Get real. he is gone now so let it go.

The rule changes of the past decade haven't benefited any team more directly than the Colts. Untouchable franchise QB? Check. Tiny finesse WRs? Check. Tiny defense than can't stop the run? Check.

Plus that post was like a month ago and I haven't talked about it since. I truly hope he never gets another job in the NFL.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
02-03-2012, 11:40 AM
The rule changes of the past decade haven't benefited any team more directly than the Colts. Untouchable franchise QB? Check. Tiny finesse WRs? Check. Tiny defense than can't stop the run? Check.

Plus that post was like a month ago and I haven't talked about it since. I truly hope he never gets another job in the NFL.

Take note of the Brady Rule. What teams QB was that? Oh ya are rival the NE Patriots.

Jughead10
02-03-2012, 11:40 AM
Not sure how I feel about more Thursday. It's such a disadvantage to the teams playing the game and an advantage the week after.

However, I do like the fact every team will be guaranteed one prime time game. Especially with the added Thursday games.

ElectricEye
02-03-2012, 11:42 AM
Take note of the Brady Rule. What teams QB was that? Oh ya are rival the NE Patriots.

I'm not even going to go into the facts here and I could care less about the Brady rule(I thought the Pollard play was a clean hit), but you sir sound massively butthurt. If you want to have a cohesive argument, I would recommend against asking a question you are going to answer in the next sentence, especially if you're letting it stand on it's own.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 11:43 AM
LEAVE GINGERBILL ALONE!!! sdf

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:45 AM
Not to mention that you could call the no-contact rule the "Anti-Ty Law Rule."

http://www2.indystar.com/library/factfiles/sports/football/indpls_colts/2003_season/tylaw.jpg

I loved it. LOVED IT and I wasn't even a Pats fan. Law stopped just short of a literal anal raping of Harrison in those playoff games.

And all of the things Belichick threw at Peyton...SO EPIC.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:55 AM
wtf is the brady rule? did you mean the tuck rule? the one introduced in 1999?

I think he meant the "no sliding legally into the legs of the QB!" rule.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 11:56 AM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/03/nfl-may-expand-replay-automatically-review-all-end-zone-plays/

Automatic replay may be expanded to "all end zone plays" regardless of whether it counted as a score or not.

More time to cram in commercials I say.

Jughead10
02-03-2012, 11:58 AM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/03/nfl-may-expand-replay-automatically-review-all-end-zone-plays/

Automatic replay may be expanded to "all end zone plays" regardless of whether it counted as a score or not.

More time to cram in commercials I say.

That's a good move. Either you do it this way or don't do it at all. I would rather not do it at all, but that doesn't seem like an option.

ElectricEye
02-03-2012, 11:59 AM
Yeah, that makes a lot more sense than the current rule. It also stops the referees from ruling borderline calls scores, thus making them tougher to overturn.

boknows34
02-03-2012, 12:00 PM
Goodell has just announced the NFL Network will broadcast 13 Thursday night Games between Weeks 2-15 and every team will have a primetime game in 2012. Ugh!

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82692011/article/goodell-nfl-network-to-air-games-in-weeks-215-next-season?module=HP11_breaking_news

Grizzlegom
02-03-2012, 12:00 PM
Just saying but I think that one can still be the "Brady" Rule. It happened to Carson Palmer in a playoff game in 2005. No rule change. Happens to Brady in 2008 and he misses the whole season? Immediate rule change.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 12:01 PM
I guarantee that, at least once next year, we get a series of at least 3 red zone plays that all get reviewed.

Goal line dive doesn't make it, reviewed, confirmed.

Player bobbles the ball catching it near the side of the end zone, reviewed, confirmed.

Guy finally just barely punches it in, reviewed, confirmed.

And of course, commercials between them all!!

ElectricEye
02-03-2012, 12:05 PM
Just saying but I think that one can still be the "Brady" Rule. It happened to Carson Palmer in a playoff game in 2005. No rule change. Happens to Brady in 2008 and he misses the whole season? Immediate rule change.

Well, in fairness, there was some questioning that kind of play with the Palmer thing. I think that was actually a worse example of the two hits, even. There's no question whatsoever star power played into it, but that's just the way it is sometimes. It's bad for the NFL to have guys coming off record seasons to go down for an entire season. That kind of play has always been fairly borderline(I tend to side with the defense on that issue though, Pollard couldn't have really done anything else to tackle Brady) anyway.


....besides, how many times have you seen that called? I think I can count on my hands the amount of times I have. The liberal interpretation of roughing the passer is a much bigger issue.

SuperPacker
02-03-2012, 12:05 PM
I guarantee that, at least once next year, we get a series of at least 3 red zone plays that all get reviewed.

Goal line dive doesn't make it, reviewed, confirmed.

Player bobbles the ball catching it near the side of the end zone, reviewed, confirmed.

Guy finally just barely punches it in, reviewed, confirmed.

And of course, commercials between them all!!

Thats my only problem with Football.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 12:31 PM
Thats my only problem with Football.

PPV Football (NFL Redzone)=no stopping for ads EVAR

MetSox17
02-03-2012, 12:31 PM
This brings me many sads.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 12:33 PM
PPV Football (NFL Redzone)=no stopping for ads EVAR

Except for the whole "pay" part of ppv and the fact you need DirectTV.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 12:33 PM
i dunno. it's the 'protect your biggest money makers' rule. if the bengals had been as insanely popular as the pats, and if palmer had been as marketable as brady, i'm sure the rule would've been changed in 2005. if the hit had happened to peyton, i'm sure the rule would've been changed just the same. *shrug*

Pretty much like nobody cared about Roy Williams horsecollaring the **** out of people until he did it to TO right in the middle of McChoker's only realistic window of winning a Superbowl.

Way off topic, but I thought it was horseshit that the NFL even let TO play for Philly after his agent ****** up and missed the deadline filing for FA. Shoulda made his ass play in SF/BAL for that season.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 12:37 PM
Except for the whole "pay" part of ppv and the fact you need DirectTV.

You don't need DTV to just get Redzone.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 12:39 PM
Also, how many times did the Rodney Harrison and Donovan Darius types nearly kill people? I think Harrison was suspended for one game through it all. Darius damn near decapitated Robert Ferguson and got a fine.

NOW though, that the league is being sued for concussion and all that, YOU DARE NOT touch a making a catch. God help you if you do.

The NFL is entirely reactionary. They'll put up with something indefinitely until it happens it winds up reaching a level where it could cost them money. (Star player missing time, law suits...)

Jughead10
02-03-2012, 12:43 PM
You don't need DTV to just get Redzone.

RedZone is awesome. I bought a sports package through cable for other reasons and gaining the RedZone was just a huge bonus.

DraftSavant
02-03-2012, 12:45 PM
RedZone is awesome. I bought a sports package through cable for other reasons and gaining the RedZone was just a huge bonus.

^^^ kdsfjasdl;fj

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 12:46 PM
I don't need anything else in any sports package. Plus, my cable is included in my rent.

Jughead10
02-03-2012, 01:03 PM
I don't need anything else in any sports package. Plus, my cable is included in my rent.

Oh I do. I need MLB Network, NHL Net, Fox Soccer, Big 10 Net, etc. For 10.99 a month it's worth it to me.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 01:04 PM
I would watch....none...of those things other than maybe the Big 10 network during college football season.

gpngc
02-03-2012, 01:05 PM
Thursday night games every week is ******* awesome unless you work nights. As fans, we'll see more teams so many people can comment with some accuracy rather than basing everything off of stats and the same three highlights from each game.

BeerBaron
02-03-2012, 01:07 PM
Hey, don't lump me in there. I go to great lengths to see as wide of variety of teams as I can. I even sat through some Jimmy Clausen Panthers games 2 years ago because I wanted to see the worst QB ever.

Then Blaine Gabbert happened 3 times in prime time...

Bulldogs
02-03-2012, 01:10 PM
Thursday night games every week is ******* awesome unless you work nights. As fans, we'll see more teams so many people can comment with some accuracy rather than basing everything off of stats and the same three highlights from each game.

I'm a fan of this as well. Probably because I have NFL Network though. I can see how it sucks for people that don't have it.

Vox Populi
02-03-2012, 01:59 PM
except that we won't because they're on nfln, not network tv. i'd be willing to bet the comparative subscriber base is tiny.


It basically just depends on what region you live in and who the major cable provider in the area is. Some places, everyone has it, others, no one has it.