FlabLoser's newer, safer NFL

[FlabLoser]

Mark my words, the NFL is going to have drastic player safety changes in the coming years. The only debate left on that topic is how to accomplish it. I'm not holding my breath on helmet technology, although any technology improvements would always be welcome. Rule changes like runners not lowering their head or DB's not hitting a "defenseless" player are ruining the sport.

FlabLoser has a better idea.

Simple, unchanging physics says that damage from collisions comes from a combination of mass and velocity. This isn't NASCAR, so we can't slow down the players. But we can change the mass by having weight classes to protect players just like a lot of other sports have.

Many sports have weight classes. I think every contact sport except ice hockey has weight classes. Weight classes exist to protect athletes and in some cases make competition more fair.

The NFL needs weight classes by position. Linemen should all be under 250 pounds. Skill positions - under 180 pounds. LB's - 200 pounds. Exactly where to draw the lines are debatable.

Having smaller players would not be a throwback to 1970's football. Modern athletes can do phenomenal things. Watch a 150 lb weight class UFC fight and tell me that those guys can't get after it. If gameplay changes at all with smaller players, it will be more Oregon Ducks Blur Offense and less 3 yards and a cloud of dust. And we all know the NFL prefers offense and dazzle to the later.

Make it so.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

Neat idea that I havn't heard before

I'd like to hear an argument against it. 250lb linemen would mix things up for sure.

 

[JackShephard]

discrimination for one. a 6'7" guy that can't get to 250 without starving himself can either not play, or be anorexic? I'm not saying this is my opinion, but i can guarantee you that this would be the biggest roadblock in today's society.

 

[tenureplan]

So what, you would have 3 teams for each teams. New Orleans Big Boy Saints, New Orleans Middleweight Saints, New Orleans Candy *** Saints...The Heavyweights would still have the same safety issues that exist today. I can't think of any team based sport that is classed by weight.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

How many huge hits are delivered by safeties and DBs already? I saw this weight idea on PTI I think, but two smaller players going faster can lead to the same force as two big ones going slower. Who is going to tell Calvin Johnson he's not allowed to play, because he's too big?

 

[JackShephard]

Cheer leading and dance squads**

 

[starkvegasdawg]

When does the NFL go to two hand touch and a 5 Mississippi count before you can rush the QB? I can see the call now by the referee, "We have off setting penalties. Number 55, defense, blitzing after 3 Mississippi. 84 offense, running after he was clearing touched by both hands of a defender. Replay the down...3rd and 5. Offense has called a kool-aid and potty break timeout. This will be a full timeout."

 

[tenureplan]

I said SPORT****

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Force = mass X velocity^2...

You don't have to be physicist or mathematician to realize that the effect of lowering mass is not nearly as substantial as the effect of lowering velocity. It's the same reason that in baseball people use lighter bats. Ideally, you'd swing the heaviest bat that doesn't slow down your maximum swing velocity.

It's also the reason that NASCAR lowered the speed and didn't just put everyone in balsa wood cars. I understand your premise, but in weight based sports it's more so you don't huge men vs small men fighting. It simply wouldn't be much of a sport.

 

[tenureplan]

Easy fix then...grow the grass 3" higher.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Easy fix then...grow the grass 3" higher.

I did not think of that. Problem solved!

 

[FlabLoser]

You don't have to be physicist or mathematician to realize that the effect of lowering mass is not nearly as substantial as the effect of lowering velocity. It's the same reason that in baseball people use lighter bats. Ideally, you'd swing the heaviest bat that doesn't slow down your maximum swing velocity.

It's also the reason that NASCAR lowered the speed and didn't just put everyone in balsa wood cars. I understand your premise, but in weight based sports it's more so you don't huge men vs small men fighting. It simply wouldn't be much of a sport.

OK, Bill Nye, tell NFL players to run slower.**

The only parameter left is mass. That's the point.

EDIT: Point of order - Force = mass x acceleration. Fixed velocity is not in the equation. It's all about impulse (mass x velocity). Mass matters just as much as velocity.

Don't say a small guy running faster is going to be just as bad. You can subtract 25% of a player's weight but that guy is not going to run 25% faster. You think a 5.0 lineman is going to run 4.5 when you subtract 60 pounds? No.

 

[tenureplan]

It's not the only one left

Like I said, grow the grass longer to slow them down. Or change the surface to sand.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

OK, Bill Nye, tell NFL players to run slower.**

The only parameter left is mass. That's the point.

EDIT: Point of order - Force = mass x acceleration. Fixed velocity is not in the equation. It's all about impulse (mass x velocity). Mass matters just as much as velocity.

Don't say a small guy running faster is going to be just as bad. You can subtract 25% of a player's weight but that guy is not going to run 25% faster. You think a 5.0 lineman is going to run 4.5 when you subtract 60 pounds? No.

The v is squared, the m ain't. I'm not arguing that you can reduce the velocity, just doubt that the mass reduction would make much of a difference. It's a message board, I don't have to bring solutions, just question everyone else's position, right?

 

[Bulldog from Birth]

Correction

v is not squared in relationship to force. Force = mass * acceleration where acceleration is velocity change per unit time. The velocity term IS squared when talking about kinetic energy. Kinetic energy = 0.5 x mass x velocity^2.

The v is squared, the m ain't. I'm not arguing that you can reduce the velocity, just doubt that the mass reduction would make much of a difference. It's a message board, I don't have to bring solutions, just question everyone else's position, right?

 

[horshack.sixpack]

v is not squared in relationship to force. Force = mass * acceleration where acceleration is velocity change per unit time. The velocity term IS squared when talking about kinetic energy. Kinetic energy = 0.5 x mass x velocity^2.

Completely correct. Lazy Spring Break Friday afternoon physics kicked in. Point still stands that one component in any "hit" is linear and the other is not. My bet will always be on changing the one that is squared having a bigger impact.

 

[PBRME]

Boxing would make a come back in a big way.

 

[THE Bruce Dickinson]

NERD ALERT!

 

[RocketDawg]

Uh ... no. Force = ma (where m is mass; and a is acceleration, a vector quantity)

You were close to the equation for kinetic energy, which is E = (0.5)mv**2 (where E = kinetic energy; m = mass; and v = speed, which is NOT a vector quantity).

speed has magnitude only; velocity has both magnitude and direction, which makes it a vector

So when you hear an announcer say "the pitcher has good velocity but he's missing the plate", he's wrong. He has good SPEED. If he had good velocity every pitch would be exactly what he intended.

 

[RocketDawg]

But neither term is squared if you're talking about force. Kinetic energy is important in your argument too, which means that you are correct in your statement that speed is the dominant component.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

Felt like I should post in this thread to look smarter **

 

[RocketDawg]

I'm pretty sure UK did that very thing a few years ago. And they may still do it. The result was a pretty slick playing surface, but their players got to practice on it so were a little more accustomed to it.