You have no discounts. Click here to get some.
With the new emphasis on stopping DBs from being physical, which offenses do you think will most benefit? Which defenses will most suffer?My thought . . . Detroit will benefit (two words: Calvin Johnson)Seattle will suffer (physical defensive backs)What do you think?
Login to reply to this post. Not a member? Joining Pregame.com is fast and free.
Tend to agree. I noticed in college football this weekend that secondaries were allowed to play a little bit more physical, which I don't expect in the NFL this season.
Benefits:
Lions, Packers, Bears (big WRs), Patriots, etc.
Teams with weak Linebackers.
It will benefit any team that can't score...and will hurt teams on the verge of a blowing out a team....It's the new NFL..higher scoring close games means more ratings..i don't think it will hurt or help any offense or defense in specific. I believe it will help the NFL achieve the goal they have.
The Seahawks starting secondary was flagged for exactly ZERO flags this preseason in over 280 snaps!! It sounds right saying this will hurt the most physical secondary in the NFL but if the preseason is a sign of things to come the Seahawks secondary will make the adjustments needed to not get flagged. They also played the Broncos,Chargers and Bears this preseason(3 of the better passing offenses in the NFL) and did not get flagged once and shutdown the Bears in the 3rd preseason game where starters played into the 3rd quarter! Don't be so quick to downgrade Seattle because the national pundits want to pass along this commentary!
Amazing that Seattle seemed to be the focus on the rule, but their DBs were only flagged 3 times the entire preseason (tied for 2nd fewest).
What other teams benefit or suffer?
Your share has been sent.
Loading...
Future Game
League:
Teams:
Date:
Time:
Pick:
Bet Type:
Odds:
Picked:
Contests: ,
Full Pick Details
Pick Name Odds: Odds Picked: Stamp
Rank:
Member:
Team:
Wins:
Losses:
Ties:
Join the Contest