Professional football is the most popular sport in North America, yet there is widespread dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the National Football League. The NFL hasn't seen a serious challenger in 30 years, since the dissolution of the USFL. If a new league wanted to challenge the NFL, here's how to do it.
Understand that I'm not talking about a minor league, a league that can exist alongside the NFL. I mean a rival, a league that competes with the NFL, eventually forcing the existing league to adopt new policies and incorporate some or all of its teams; if this league were successful, a merger would become an eventual necessity, probably for both leagues. In order for such an organization to be successful, it needs to attract three distinct groups: fans, players, and owners.
The new league's name is probably not a big deal, but for now let's borrow a name from the All American Football League, which never got off the ground. Throughout this piece, we'll call our hypothetical challenger league the AAFL.
Fans
The key to attracting fans is having great players. In order to keep the quality of each team at or near NFL level, we'll need to begin with a small league. Four teams would probably be ideal: one in the Northeast, one in the Midwest, one on the Pacific coast, and one in the South. But four teams doesn't really facilitate a full schedule, so let's say this league opens play with six teams. Every team would play the other teams three times each: a 15-game schedule, with a one-game championship at the end.
To make the AAFL seem like a preferable alternative to the NFL, we need a better game. That happens through small differences in league policy and the rules of the game. I believe that the contemporary NFL suffers from too much short passing and too many penalties interrupting the flow of the game. The long pass is the most exciting play in football, so we need to encourage that, and too many big plays get called back on trivial penalties. The AAFL's game should be crisp and exciting, compared to the three-yards-and-run-out-of-bounds offered by the NFL. The AAFL will also need a better approach to player discipline to contrast with the villainous Roger Goodell, who is loathed by many football players and fans.
Rules
The AAFL's brand of football will not be radically different than the NFL's. Fans love the game of football as it exists, so we're looking for small tweaks, not a massive overhaul; the AAFL's style of play should be familiar. But there are changes that make sense.
First of all, a catch is a catch, a fumble is a fumble, and the rules align with common sense. A seven-page explanation of what constitutes a catch is bonkers: 98% of fans agree on what a catch is, and it has nothing to do with the Calvin Johnson rule. The ground can't cause a fumble, but I think the AAFL has to err on the side of: a guy who caught the ball has made a reception (or interception), and a player who lost the ball has fumbled. AAFL referees will be directed to assume that a player with possession has caught the ball, and a player without possession has fumbled. All this going-to-the-ground, element-of-time, football-move nonsense is complicating a game that can and should be simple. Counter-intuitive policies outrage fans every time they're enforced. I'd rather have fans arguing about gray area than raging about rules and definitions that don't make any sense.
So the AAFL will have better common sense than the NFL. That's a great start. But it's also going to discourage short passing, with the goal of facilitating long passes and, to a lesser extent, rushing. So the AAFL's illegal contact zone will begin 10 yards beyond the line of scrimmage, not 5. If defenders can maul receivers for 10 yards, you'll see more press coverage. That makes short passing harder, but it opens up opportunities downfield. I think it's an obvious change, and most fans wouldn't notice anything different, except that the game is more exciting. If you go to a football game, everyone stands up when a long pass flies downfield. Even an incomplete downfield bomb is an exciting play. Trading bubble screens for bombs is a substantial win.
We'll also prohibit all picks, even "natural" picks. These are a staple of the modern NFL, but they're a cheap distortion of the rules, and they're particularly essential to the short passing game, which has replaced the more exciting vertical passes of yore. It's easy for coaches to set their crossing routes so that they don't pick the defender, and it's time they did it. We're told that the NFL has an extra ref "upstairs" to buzz down to the field. In the AAFL, there's an extra ref watching the game just to check for offensive pass interference near the line of scrimmage, such as pick plays and receivers blocking before the catch.
The most radical difference is that in the AAFL, any pass thrown to a point behind the line of scrimmage is considered a lateral unless it is spiked to stop the clock, or deflected by a defender. This means that most screens will count as run plays, rather than passes, and that an incomplete pass behind the line of scrimmage is a live ball. This will discourage short passing because [1] selfish QBs can't pad their stats with easy completions and [2] fumbles are a big deal.
All of these policies will discourage short passing, and encourage deeper passes as a necessary alternative. But they will also diminish offense, so we need other rules to keep scoring at a reasonable level. Our more generous definition of what constitutes a catch will help, but we need more. I'm still playing around with a good way to sustain current levels of offense, and passing offense in particular. Some of the ideas we might consider:
* Recruit great offensive players more aggressively than top defensive players.
* Allow receivers outside the illegal contact zone to push off; that won't count as offensive pass interference.
* Twelve men on offense, with a seventh eligible receiver. This is probably too radical, but it would definitely increase offense, and it would be fascinating to see how teams used the extra player. I think I'd want an extra lineman, never mind that he's an eligible receiver. But teams could play around with it.
* Liberalize the rules for what constitutes offensive holding. This will help offensive linemen, and it will mean a reduction in penalties.
That's our second difference to attract fans: fewer penalties. In 2015, the NFL was bogged down by excessive referee involvement, especially on big plays. It not only annoyed many fans, it drew repeated commentary from announcing teams who noted the problem. AAFL officials will be directed to err on the side of not calling a penalty; don't throw your flag on a maybe, or even a probably; the game is about the players, not the refs.
That said, there will be measures in place to prevent players from getting away with cheating. Most important is the yellow card system, similar to yellow and red cards in soccer. A player who gets a yellow card is fined, and two yellow cards results in a red card. A player who draws a red card is ejected from the game and loses his game check. His team continues to field 11 players, however; the side does not play a man short as they do in soccer. The exact offenses that warrant a yellow card could be determined, but I would suggest the following:
* Fighting is a red card.
* All personal fouls and unnecessary roughness are yellow cards.
* I'd like to cap pass interference at 15 yards (rather than a spot foul), but make flagrant pass interference downfield a yellow card.
* Drawing at least 25 yards of non-roughness penalties is a yellow card (with non-flagrant pass interference counting as 15 yards).
* Drawing at least 35 yards of non-roughness penalties is a red card. Seriously, if you've been flagged for three holding and a false start in one game, get out of here.
* Any blocking penalty on a kickoff or punt return is a yellow card. Perhaps I should explain this one. Long kick returns are exciting, but the last few seasons, it seems like every great return in the NFL is called back for holding or a block in the back or something. Long punt returns aren't even exciting any more, because I assume they're coming back for a penalty. Many of these penalties are totally unnecessary. The yellow card system will give players strong incentive to play smart on special teams, and restore some excitement to this part of the game.
The AAFL would also have a unique penalty for "instigating." This is basically a player who doesn't commit a clear foul — doesn't strike or shove or spit on anyone — but he's trying to start a fight. Remember the Week 16 Saturday night game between Washington and Philadelphia? Washington scored a touchdown, and several beats after the play, Malcolm Jenkins ran over and got in the face of Jordan Reed and DeSean Jackson. Or Joey Porter smack-talking the Bengals during the playoffs? That's just totally uncalled for. It's instigating. And it's a yellow card. The AAFL will work for a reputation as the cleaner league, with zero tolerance for fighting. Most NFL "fights" are boring; players worried about their rep, but no real action. It's a waste of time and it makes the players seem like hooligans. If a player wants to fight, fine, sign with the NFL. AAFL games will be cleaner and quicker, and they'll seem faster.
If you follow baseball, you've probably heard at some point that baseball's problem isn't simply that games take too long, it's that there's too much wasted time: the games have gotten longer, but the real problem is that during the extra time, nothing is happening. The NFL has a similar problem right now. If you reduce the number of penalties, take out some of the wasted time between plays when opponents are pretending they might fight each other, that sort of thing, you might shave 5-10 minutes off an average game. But it will seem like longer, because the game is better paced. To ensure quality officiating, the AAFL will have year-round referees, which the NFL does not.
Of course, when we talk about officiating, the replay challenge system has to be addressed. In the AAFL, everything is reviewable, including penalties like face-mask and pass interference. Teams will have unlimited challenges, but there are no automatic challenges, and teams lose a timeout every time they challenge a play that's upheld. Teams could also be allowed one or more extra challenges per half, with a 15-yard penalty if you're out of timeouts and the play stands. And it will stand, most of the time. The AAFL will have a strong policy that plays are returned on replay challenge only when the result is truly indisputable: any unbiased party who understands the rules can identify the correct call. The NFL is plagued by bizarre replay decisions, with Mike Carey or the announcers or your buddy sitting next to you sure that a call will stand, and it gets reversed. In the AAFL, it has to be obvious. Even if it looks like the call on field was probably wrong — gosh, his knee appears to be down 1/100th of a second before the ball came out — it has to be obvious and indisputable, or it's going to stand.
Thus, the AAFL allows replays on everything, to make sure it gets crucial calls, but it discourages time-wasting replays except when it's obvious that the wrong call was made. This is how the NFL should do it.
Last rule change: "half the distance to goal" penalties are silly. A team backed up inside its own 1-yard line commits penalties without fear of reprisal. Delay of game? False start? Hah, big deal. Likewise for defensive penalties at the other end of the field. Why not try to time the snap? Offside isn't a big deal in that situation. In the AAFL, penalties go the full distance, as far as the 1-yard line. So if an offense commits a false start at its own 6, the next play doesn't move to the 3, it moves to the 1. And if an offense commits holding at its own 8, the next play moves to the 1. An offensive penalty at or inside the team's 1-yard line results in a safety, while a defensive penalty inside the defensive 1-yard line results in a touchdown. This creates more scoring plays, encourages cleaner play near the end zones, and prevents teams from abusing the rules. I've always wondered why teams backed up inside their own 1 ever run a play without drawing an offside penalty first. There's no disincentive.
Summary
The AAFL will attract fans by offering a game with fewer fights and penalties disrupting the flow of the game, especially on exciting plays. It will be more fair, without lengthening the game, and the rules and replay reviews will be more intuitive. The AAFL will feature fewer boring horizontal passes, and more exciting long passes. Most of the rule changes are subtle, but they'll add up to create a crisper, better-paced game, with more long plays to generate excitement and fewer penalties to suppress excitement.
Players
This league is intended to compete with the NFL, and that means it needs to attract NFL-quality players. The easiest and most obvious way to do that is with money. The AAFL will have a salary cap, but it will be higher than the NFL's. The most important source of players will be the NCAA; you can't build a league exclusively from NFL free agents. And the AAFL should be very competitive going after the top college players, because this league will not have a draft. Rookies can sign with any team, generating bidding wars for players like Christian McCaffrey.
The AAFL will have very strict testing for performance-enhancing substances, but no testing for recreational drugs. There would be a system in place for off-field offenses like DUI and domestic violence, but it would be a transparent process that doesn't run through a megalomaniacal commissioner, and there would be people of color involved in the sentences. As long as Goodell is in charge of the NFL, it's easy for a competitor to look like the more player-friendly league. Combine that with better salaries for the biggest names, and the promise of being a star in the new league, and I think a lot of players would be willing to take a chance on the AAFL.
It might make sense for the AAFL to offer prizes for top performers, as a further incentive for stars and potential stars to join the league. Maybe the league leader in passing TDs gets a $1 million bonus, as does the rushing yards leader, and the leader in 25+ yard receptions, and potentially a few other stats. The million dollar prize could even generate fan excitement if two players are in direct competition in the final week, the way baseball's batting title used to generate so much passion a century ago, when the winner earned a car.
The new league also needs big names, in ownership and coaching, to attract fans and players. I think it's a must to get a big-name head coach out of retirement: Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Jon Gruden, someone like that. Even less accomplished coaches, if they're established, like Norv Turner or Romeo Crennel, would lend credibility to the new league. The new league probably needs a big-name college coach, as well: Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Brian Kelly, Kirk Ferentz. And of course, Jim Harbaugh is the most obvious target. Pay the man what he wants. Get two or three big names like that, and fill in the rest with up-and-coming assistants or NFL retreads.
But I'd also look for a high-profile former player. If you put a team in Chicago, for heaven's sake, hire Mike Singletary to coach it. Peyton Manning would be a fascinating choice. But the player I would really want is Deion Sanders. So many current players look up to him, and I'm pretty sure I remember Deion complaining that he's never been offered a head-coaching job. Maybe Deion would be a great coach, maybe he'd be a disaster. From the league's standpoint, there's no harm giving him a chance. If his team is bad, so what? As long as he gets people interested in the league, the production of the team can go either way. And there are young players who would jump at the chance to work with Deion.
Show players a league that will pay them more than the NFL, doesn't test for marijuana, and offers them a chance to work with top coaches, and you can put together a legit league, drawn from college, NFL free agents, NFL cast-offs, and the best players from the CFL, minor leagues, and semi-pro football. That can fill out a quality roster for a small league. I expect that many players and coaches will also be drawn to the common-sense on-field rules, and a fair and transparent system for off-field violations. If the inaugural season goes well, more and more fans and players and coaches will come on board.
Owners
This is the hardest sell, because any new league is going to lose money at first. Probably a lot of money.
Fortunately, there are more than 32 people with the means and desire to own a professional football team. Since the AAFL begins with only six teams, all we need is to find six individuals or groups who fit that description and who don't already own an NFL team. It would be a coup to put together an ownership group including Peyton Manning or Jay-Z or somebody like that.
Owning a pro football team is cool. The trick is convincing owners that the AAFL is a good investment, or — at the very least — not a black hole for their money. The key to that, however, is fairly simple. It's not easy, but it's simple: if prospective owners are convinced that the league will become successful, they'll invest in it. NFL teams are enormously profitable, and if prospective AAFL owners see that same potential, they'll want to be involved.
Are there prospective owners who believe a new league could challenge the NFL, and eventually force a merger that would make them NFL owners? Are there prospective owners who believe our rules changes would create a more exciting game, drawing fans to the new league? Are there prospective owners who believe our policies could attract top players? If those questions are answered positively, ownership shouldn't be a problem. Even if prospective owners are skeptical of those ideas, but believe in our vision for a better, more exciting game, this league can get off the ground.
There is a hitch: television. For a league to succeed, it needs to be on TV, and it probably needs to be on network television, not cable. FOX and CBS already have contracts with the NFL. NBC has Sunday Night Football. ABC owns ESPN, which has Monday Night Football. There's also the question of holding seasons in Fall, when you'll have to compete with the NFL, or in Spring, which isn't normally football season.
The TV quandary even provides a bit of a Catch-22. Owners will be hesitant to sign on without a TV contract, but securing that contract could be challenging without stable ownership already in place.
Ultimately, I think securing owners to invest in the league, and a television network to air its games, would be more difficult than attracting players or fans.
Player Safety
There's another issue that has become necessary to address in any discussion of American football, and especially an alternative approach to the sport. The NFL is already losing fans because of concerns about player safety, and the league's role in trying to hide or discredit research on head injuries and Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE).
Any new league will need to address those concerns, and could potentially distinguish itself from the NFL by handling those concerns better than the existing league. Furthermore, the motivation for the AAFL isn't just to create a league that succeeds and makes money: it's to improve the game of football, and safety is a critical aspect of that challenge.
The AAFL will have several policies that are slightly different than the NFL's, and one that is radically different. Obviously any league that is concerned with player safety would consult medical professionals, but here are some of the policies I envision:
1. Qualified, independent doctors on hand to diagnose and respond to head injuries. It won't be a team physician deciding whether players are okay, and players can't talk their way back onto the field after a head injury. We should be able to get this right, every time.
The NFL claims to have a similar policy, but that is a flat-out lie. Every week, we see players return to the field after concussions so obvious that fans can diagnose them from the couch of the living room. The AAFL will have an additional rule to prevent this problem: a concussed player who improperly continues to play is automatically placed on season-ending injured reserve. This promotes player safety by taking concussed athletes out of action, but it also eliminates the incentive for an injured player to return, both for the team and for the player himself. In fact, both parties are now eager to make sure that a player with a head injury doesn't return before he's ready. That's the way it should have been all along.
2. Better protective gear, especially helmets and mouthguards. The AAFL will strictly enforce that players actually use the mouthguards, and always buckle their chinstraps.
3. Thorough player education about the risks associated with head trauma. Information is the most vital piece of this: players and their families, and everyone who's in a position to help them make decisions about the future, need to understand the long-term health risks associated with head trauma. Players in the AAFL will take a seminar twice a year on head trauma, its long-term risks, and the league's policies to minimize its impact. Each seminar will include an in-depth profile on a former player affected by CTE-related ailments.
4. One of the NFL's problems is that clean hits are often called as penalties. When players get in trouble for clean hits, it's hard for players and coaches to know what to do, and it reduces the disincentive against dangerous plays. The AAFL will have: clear rules about what is and isn't permitted; well-trained, full-time referees who understand the rules and know how to call them; and a replay review system which includes penalties, meaning clean hits which are wrongly called as penalties can be corrected. That not only keeps players safer, it's more fair and it improves the game.
I'm sure that doctors who study these issues would have tweaks and additional recommendations, but I feel like those are good steps in the right direction, all with minimal impact on the game. In fact, other than the injured-reserve policy, none of these standards would have any noticeable effect on the sport itself, other than point 4, which is a small difference that clearly improves the game.
I don't see a new league challenging the NFL in the foreseeable future, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done, and doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a good idea: for players, fans, and the sport itself.
Leave a Comment