Brickyard 400 Rebounds From Low '15 Audience Bettman Denies CTE-Concussions Link Big Ten's Delany Hints At Retirement SMU Spending $150M On New Football Facilities HBO's "Real Sports" Hones In On IOC MLS Execs Hosting Technology Event In San Jose Jordan Breaks Silence On Recent Social Unrest Sale Says White Sox Put Business Ahead Of Winning Borders Addresses WNBA Fines Yahoo Sports To Use Current Name For Now
SBD/February 12, 2013/Leagues and Governing BodiesPrint All
The NFL Competition Committee, as recently as a year ago, "kicked around the idea of a bigger field, CFL style," and the committee could "broach the subject again when it meets in Indianapolis in advance of the combine" next week, according to Dan Pompei of the NATIONAL FOOTBALL POST. ESPN's Bill Polian, a former member of the committee, said, "I’m not so sure we shouldn’t think about widening the field. It’s a radical idea, but I think it’s worth thinking about. You would have more space and perhaps a safer game. I say that based on my CFL experience. There are less collisions of that type in the Canadian game." Pompei noted the "thinking is a wider field would spread out bodies over more space, reducing hits in the middle of the field." The down the field game "wouldn’t change much, but box play could be considerably different." Pro Football HOFer Warren Moon, who played in the CFL for six years before coming to the NFL, said that there were "fewer head to head collisions by big men in the CFL." Texans Exec VP & GM Rick Smith said, "If you widen the field, you have more high speed collisions." But Polian said, "The farther a player has to run in terms of contact, the less ferocious the contact is going to be" (NATIONALFOOTBALLPOST.com, 2/10). ESPN's Michael Wilbon said, "If Bill Polian seriously endorses this, then you have to seriously look at doing it, even though it’s going to cost stadiums to have to be reconfigured in some places because they’re not wide enough.” ESPN’s Tony Kornheiser said, “You rip out a few rows of seats, and owners have to do that in order to keep their players safe.” Kornheiser was not sure if a wider field would be safer, but noted there would be “more offense.” Wilbon: “The league is not opposed to that” (“PTI,” ESPN, 2/11). NBC Sports Network’s Erik Kuselias said Polian “has been part of some fine organizations, and if he’s interested in that then we should all be interested” (“PFT,” NBC Sports Network, 2/11).
FEWER CONCUSSIONS IN CFL: In Sacramento, Victor Contreras writes while the CFL "has had its share of concussions, studies report fewer in our neighboring league, and one of the reasons cited is the wider field." If there is "a change, it's believed the NFL will keep its 100-yard-long field and 10-yard end zones." But still, the "advantages would belong to offenses with more room to run and pass." Player safety is "important, but is it worth it at the expense of changing the dynamics of the game?" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 2/12). ESPN’s Jackie MacMullan said, "If it shows any evidence at all that it’s going to prevent concussions or more injuries, I’m all for it. But I want to see the study first.” But Dallas Morning News columnist Tim Cowlishaw said with “more room to run around, I think you get more violent collisions." Cowlishaw: "I don’t think looking at the type of players they have in the CFL would tell you, ‘Well, this is going to reduce concussions in the NFL.’” ESPN’s J.A. Adande said, “I’m selling it. If one of the means to avoid injury is by running out of bounds, now you’re going to increase distance that it takes to get out of bounds. I don’t see how that’s going to help” (“Around The Horn,” ESPN, 2/11). Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio said, "What it would do as a practical matter is put a weight limit on the NFL, because you widen the field and you move guys out and you spread guys around. You need players who can move more quickly” ("PFT," NBC Sports Network, 2/11).
IS FOOTBALL WORTH IT? In Boston, Bob Ryan wrote, "I would argue that football today is more strategically complex and fascinating than at any point in its existence." Is football, as "entertaining as it can be, worth it?" Or would we "as a society be better off without it?" Ryan: "I believe that millions of American football fans live in denial." Football "maims people" and can "cause severe neurological damage." Ryan wrote, "I speak not of theory. I speak of fact." This being "true, how can any serious person support such an activity?" (BOSTON GLOBE, 2/10)
MLB’s investigation into the alleged purchase of PEDs by several players from a “now-defunct anti-aging clinic in South Florida will not hinge on the release of documents” by the Miami New Times, the newspaper that first reported the story, according to a source cited by Steven Marcus of NEWSDAY. The league yesterday declined to comment on the status of the investigation. Miami New Times Editor Chuck Strouse said that MLB “has asked for more information.” Strouse said, "They want our documents. We put up lots of the documents redacted online; they want more than that. Exactly what, I'm not quite sure. The downside (to releasing the information) is that we're reporters. And moreover, Major League Baseball is a business and I'm not in the habit of handing the product of reporters' work over to a business. That's sort of where the conundrum is here." He added that his newspaper “stands by the story.” Strouse: "A lot of the baseball players have denied, a number have already said they've seen the guy, acknowledged that they've seen the guy, so I think the story is fine one way or the other. The question is whether there is action to follow the story" (NEWSDAY, 2/12). ESPN.com’s Buster Olney noted as the “dollars invested in salaries grow, and they become more precious in the draft system, teams have become more and more careful about reviewing players' medical records -- and, in the eyes of some agents, becoming more apt to throw up red flags.” Agents and team officials note that the “phrase ‘pending a physical’ has never had deeper meaning than it does now.” But there is a concern among agents that some teams are “increasingly adding leverage in negotiations by red-flagging the medical reports of players -- usually because of legitimate concerns” (ESPN.com, 2/11).
CLOSING THE CAP: MLB Senior VP & General Counsel/Labor Dan Halem said that the league begins Spring Training “without an approved choice of protective headgear for pitchers, and it's uncertain whether any product will receive approval in time for the regular season.” Halem said that MLB officials “have spent the offseason considering and testing padded linings for caps, with the hope that by spring training, MLB would be able to approve and present to the players association multiple options for pitchers to try out on a voluntary basis.” But he said that thus far “no new cap design satisfies requirements MLB set for providing head protection against high-speed batted balls” (ESPN.com, 2/11).