Pro Bowl Overhaul?
After spending some time in GB's Pro Bowl post, it got my wheels turning on how much I hate the voting process for the Pro Bowl, as well as for all-star games in general. Since they're moving the game out of Hawaii (bad idea) and moving it in front of the Super Bowl (bad idea #2), I figure maybe they can change the selection process as well.
I understand the idea behind letting the fans vote for all-star games. It promotes interaction and makes fans feel more like they're a part of something. Unfortunately, there's no way of restricting people who are not particularly knowledgeable about the game or are just tools and vote for everyone on their favorite team. Repeatedly. Kinda like Chicago elections. That is a big part of why we end up with so many undeserving players voted in every year. It also gives an advantage to teams in a big market with large fan bases, because they've got more fans to get online and vote (except for in Philly where their own self-loathing and contempt keeps them from voting for the Iggles players.)
Year after year we see guys get in on name recognition alone, especially linemen. With other positions there are stats to at least point people in the right direction (although they can be misleading as well), but few people really know how to judge line play, especially when all you've got is TV camera angles. So you end up with people voting for whoever Joe Buck declares to be great every Sunday. I'd be willing to bet that if you put Jonathan Ogden on the ballot this year, he would get a sizable chunk of votes, and I'm not kidding when I say that. The last few years of his career were far from All-Pro caliber, but he kept making it anyways. Unfortunately, a lot of players/coaches admit to doing the same thing. They'll vote based on what they've heard or who they're friends with.
The only thing I can think of is to have a group of scouts and possibly a few media people, but the ones that truly know the game and are not just typical beat writers (I'm thinking of guys like Paul Zimmerman. Like him or not, the guy knows the game inside and out.) The selections can be left up to them, or if you want to maintain some level of fan involvement, have a panel narrow it down to a few players at every position and let the fans vote from that group.
Anyone out there have any alternatives, or do you think it should be left alone? Also, is anyone else concerned that moving the Pro Bowl back before the Super Bowl may inspire a boneheaded MLB-like attempt to assign relevance to the game by awarding an advantage to the winning conference? I don't think it will happen, but the possibility definitely increases by the game being moved back.
0 recs |
13 comments
Comments
Look
The way it stands, Fan voting counts for 1/3rd of the process. We really don’t have much to do with it, they just like to let us think we do.
Besides, how many stars have been turning down the appearances as of late? Its not as big a deal as it used to be.
"If God had wanted man to play soccer, He wouldn't have given us arms" - Ditka
by EricEmpire on Jun 29, 2009 7:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the game is meaningless… it’s an exhibition game for the fans, a celebration of the season… with the fans vote only counting 1/3 I say it’s the best voting process in all sports
by wiltfongjr on Jun 29, 2009 8:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I like the idea
of the Pro Bowl being moved to the super bowl city the week before the SB. The pro bowl was meaningless and unwatched before, anything they do could only help make it watchable.
I am usually jonesing for football a little the week before the super bowl, so this will give me something to watch besides the same rehashed network storylines. Players might put a little more effort into the game if they were playing in front of a larger audience.
DEJESUS!!!
by tomas21 on Jun 29, 2009 12:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The problem is anyone playing in the Super Bowl will turn it down
(Asshole Sr) "If you learn one thing here, NEVER pass out in Ohio."
by ThorCo on Jun 29, 2009 10:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It won't be a matter of them turning it down, they aren't allowed to play in it
Historically, the 2 Super Bowl teams have the most players of any team on either squad named to the Pro Bowl, so this format automatically takes the players that are “the most deserving” and eliminates them from the game. We all know that All-Star games mean nothing and aren’t true representations of the sport, but they are meant to be fun for the players and the fans. They are also meant to be recognition for the best players, so keep it in Hawaii and let the players play who have earned it.
Also, a lot of performance clauses in contracts are tied to making the Pro Bowl, so if a large group who are in the Super Bowl aren’t allowed to play and the group who replace them didn’t “really” make it, what happens to those incentives? Just asking….
by BearFan611 on Jun 30, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Pro-Bowl clauses
Work for if your voted, not if you actually play in it?
by CutlerDabears on Jun 30, 2009 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's one of the biggest reasons I'd like to see the voting changed.
Pro Bowls are one of those big stats that play into contracts, HOF decisions, etc.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay
by JerBear50 on Jul 2, 2009 4:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why not let former pro-bowles be the voters
Let all ex-bowlers of said positions, be the ones that get to vote in their respective positions. If they don’t know how to judge those spots then who really truly does. I do think you are right thou Jerbear if you put Ogden on the ballot he woud get some votes but I think if Emmit was on the ballot he would be the starter so what does that say? It is a flawed process no doubt about it. And if we leave it up to the T.V. jocks then we still wouldn’t have the right guys cause you would have who ever they like or hang out with in the big sham i mean game. And with that being said does anyone really want the likes of MATT MILLEN telling us who should be in the pro-bowl. . .Look ata what a great judge of talent he was fr the last 8 years.! Yeah I DID have to get a good shot in on that piece of trash. Just cause they played the game doesn’t always mean they know how to judge talent.
by davis0169 on Jun 29, 2009 12:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
my suggestion
eliminate the game entirely. It used to be an intense game, but not any more. I don’t blame the players. They want the money they get for playing, but don’t want to get hurt in an essentially meaningless exhibition game. Time to pull the plug on this, just like they did with the College All Star Game years ago.
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
--Winston Churchill
by lookingdeadred on Jul 2, 2009 9:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I wouldn't be opposed to that
They can still vote/nominate the years all-stars but skip the game. Maybe keep the other components (QB contests, kicker competition, etc) and the fan interaction type stuff like they have now, but drop the game. Not a bad idea.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay
by JerBear50 on Jul 3, 2009 3:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had a good idea?
Proves the old saw, even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.
All star games work in baseball and basketball as entertaining exhibitions, but it is a bad joke in football. It used to be a better game but that has not been the case for years now. And as for the hockey all star game, don’t even go there.
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
--Winston Churchill
by lookingdeadred on Jul 3, 2009 11:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 






















