|
Post by superpicker on Aug 27, 2008 9:19:09 GMT -5
Are you just gonna keep saying what you want to say until somebody say's your right or what?? This topic is over we'll know we should stay with indoor rules not arena or pass happy rules so move on!nicely stated.
|
|
|
Post by superpicker on Aug 27, 2008 9:28:23 GMT -5
In the NFL you have a number teams that rely heavily on their passing game. You also have a number that rely mostly on their running game. Then there are those teams that incorporate an equal amount of both. I personally would like to see the IFL develop a ruleset that allows for this same type of flexibility within the indoor game. And I believe that by creatively combining the best elements of the United rules with the best elements of the Intense rules that this can be accomplished. Hope so . . . The only down side to the UIF was the low scoring games. Many people I've talked with like the "arena game" because of the high scoring action it has. . I attended ArenaBowl 88. final score was 24 -13 The 1st af2 game I ever attended was a Twisters @ Pirates game ... same final score. Even the Chicago RUSH have scored 20 and 27 points total in a game. It is all subjective as far as scoring goes. Look at the final scores of the United Bowls You can't really say they were low scoring or without plenty of action.
|
|
|
Post by superpicker on Aug 27, 2008 9:32:07 GMT -5
In the NFL you have a number teams that rely heavily on their passing game. You also have a number that rely mostly on their running game. Then there are those teams that incorporate an equal amount of both. I personally would like to see the IFL develop a ruleset that allows for this same type of flexibility within the indoor game. And I believe that by creatively combining the best elements of the United rules with the best elements of the Intense rules that this can be accomplished. B I N G E A U X !!!!
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Aug 27, 2008 9:51:05 GMT -5
I attended ArenaBowl 88. final score was 24 -13 The 1st af2 game I ever attended was a Twisters @ Pirates game ... same final score. Even the Chicago RUSH have scored 20 and 27 points total in a game. It is all subjective as far as scoring goes. Look at the final scores of the United Bowls You can't really say they were low scoring or without plenty of action. The big difference between the UIF and AFL rules with scoring is this: In UIF games, defenses can help cause the low scoring. In AFL games, it's usually terrible offense that causes the low scoring. In AF2, some teams can have that many good defenders, but it's still usually terrible offense that causes it. Doesn't mean it's better for player development, but certainly the NIFL rule set has more offensive variety. It's a better game, but not enough fans know the difference for that to be all that big a consideration. Still want to see the CIFL's TE-eligible rules; you'd be surprised how much that opens things up.
|
|
|
Post by superpicker on Aug 27, 2008 11:36:41 GMT -5
I too like the tackle eligible/tight end rule.
I do however like the discipline of having to report as eligible by raising a hand at the line of scrimmage. (AFL rule)
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Aug 27, 2008 12:47:19 GMT -5
I didn't finish the season tracking it, but the UIF was by far the lowest scoring pro league.
It went UIF - CIFL - AIFA - AF2 - IFL
I don't mind the declaration of eligibility, but it does make it tougher for defenses if the TE doesn't have to declare. Same with the CIFL's blitz rule (two guys line up five yards off the line, one of them can blitz, doesn't have to declare) on offenses.
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Aug 27, 2008 13:17:42 GMT -5
Yeah, 2008 was even more low-scoring for the UIF than the Freedom years, but there was good reason.
Rock River and Lexington, two high-scoring teams left. In their place was Wichita, a team whose offense was putrid, but truth be told - their defense played pretty well.
|
|
karhu34
Cleans the Towels
Posts: 10
|
Post by karhu34 on Aug 27, 2008 13:51:10 GMT -5
For all of you stats junkies. (information obtained from the league web site stat pages)
Penalties UIF Games - 122 Penalties - 745 InFL Games - 126 Penalties - 1104
Total Yards UIF - Rush 8786 InFL - Rush 3964
UIF Pass 18048 InFL - Pass 24380
Total Per Game UIF - 8 Teams 3964 InFL - 9 Teams 3149 Ave. Points Per Game UIF 39.12 InFL 50.00 FG’s Attempted Total Attempted UIF 431 InFL 313
Why the big difference in points? Maybe it has something to do with the amount of field goals attempted.
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Aug 27, 2008 14:13:04 GMT -5
Two factors.
One - the InFL plays an arena-style game, which causes more scoring because of defensive restrictions.
Two - the InFL clock stops for a couple more things, which causes more plays - thus more scoring.
|
|
|
Post by Bouncer_Texxx on Aug 27, 2008 17:19:14 GMT -5
Difference in scoring could have a lot to do with rushing
League - pass yds/game - rush yds/game IntFL - 193.5 - 31.46 UIF 147.9 - 72.02
more than 200% more rushing yards in the U
~34% more passing in the IntFL
27% more scoring. in the IntFL
6-1 ratio of passing yards to rushinf in the IntFL 2-1 ratio in the UIF
For comparison sake NFL 2007 regular season
Avg passing yards per team per game 214.3066 Avg rushing yards per team per game 110.918
or roughly 2-1 just like the UIF
any questions?
I believe that adds credence to the "outdoor football played indoors" notion, now doesn't it.
|
|
|
Post by superpicker on Aug 27, 2008 18:07:21 GMT -5
Remember "outdoor football" is simply called ... football. The name Indoor Football, implies that it is Football played Indoors.
I would be willing to go out on a limb and say NCAA Football stacks up closer to NFL and UIF statistically as well. A good low scoring game between two great defenses is always thrilling to watch ands see who breaks first.
Since NCAA and NFL are the kings of popularity in football.
It stands to reason that playing closer to the proven formula could possibly ultimately win over more fans for the Indoor Football League than gimmicks like the (Arena) Jack in the Box Linebacker will. JMO.
And the InFL guys should go for it. There has to be umpty two bazillion quality running backs in a place that produces so many quality football players like the state of(stand and remove your hat) Texas.
And with that in mind, I could see some powerhouse running teams emerge from the InFL clutch of teams. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Aug 27, 2008 18:29:18 GMT -5
And I could see 100 touchdown passes out of Bloomington if the rules went the InFL way. That would also be quite exciting.
|
|
|
Post by Doom on Aug 27, 2008 22:59:30 GMT -5
I would be more than happy to see lower scoring games, if the margin of victory is the lowest as well
|
|
|
Post by superpicker on Aug 28, 2008 0:37:15 GMT -5
And I could see 100 touchdown passes out of Bloomington if the rules went the InFL way. That would also be quite exciting. mmmmmmmmmmmm no ... that would SUCK ... badly.
|
|
|
Post by milwaukee on Aug 28, 2008 0:49:02 GMT -5
One thing I'd like to see that would loosen things up is the CIFL tight-end rule (uncovered lineman with an eligible number is automatically eligible to go out for a pass). I do think that would open up offenses a hair, and it does add quite a bit more strategy, especially if a team has a big guy that can catch the football. I liked this rule as well. The CIFL game system was better than I expected . . . . . . too bad the teams and owners were not. The CIFL will be back in 2009
|
|