The New USFL

[BucsItaly]

Hello. So, apparently the USFL is getting a reboot next year.

Hi!!

I'm an italian guy, and I was a fan of the past USFL (in those years american football was very popular here). Now I hope the new league could start, even if the lack of news on their site is a little worrying...

BTW, I wrote on the "commissioner" (Michael Dwyer) facebook page about your wonderful job, and he answered to contact him by email.

Unfortunately I cannot send you a PM with his address (maybe because I'm a new member?), if you're interested you may contact me.

His facebook page is:

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1247826937

[Bleujayone]

The CFL is cool but it's not real football. Football is played woth 11 guys on the field for each team, uses 4 down, and the field is 120 yards from the back of the endzone to the back of the endzone.

I find it amusing that a Raiders fan is telling me what "real football" is.

Actually the CFL can be traced back to the 1860's, more than half a century before the NFL.

+1

And it's so antiquated too. It's a dinosaur of a sport. Say what you will about the American version but at least they're far more willing to evolve- for that matter so are the majority of other sports out there. The Canadian version is so overburdened with old rules that the game has taken a hit because of it. Nevermind the 12 men on each sides or only three downs or the size of the field. There are many, Many, MANY rules that need tweaking or elimination far more than those.

And before my Canadian cousins decide to take this as a cue to pile on, I've been coaching the Canadian version for high school for the last two years. There are so many rules and little known (and used) quirks to the game that I've found not even the coaches, refs, spectators and especially the players are fully aware of them all. It makes the game very confusing to everyone, and when one person takes advantage of some bizarro rule or is unaware of one- it cheapens the games integrity.

Let's for example take a look at the seemingly simple task of kick a field goal.

In the American version, you attempt the kick, if you make it you get 3 points (half a touchdown) and proceed to then kick it off to the other team just as you would if a touchdown were scored. If you miss, you get no points and the other team takes over from the spot of the kick. The only exception being that if the kick is within 20 yards of the goal line it's moved back to the 20. If the attempt is blocked the ball is in play and is treated as a live ball. If the kick gets off but falls short and there is a defender back there to pick it up before exiting the endzone, he can attempt to run it back as one might run back a kickoff or punt, however since the goalposts are at the back of the endzone as opposed to remaining on the goal line as the Canadians still do- such a tactic is extremely rare to happen upon. That's it. Now let's look at the Canadian version (hang on to your hats, kids)

In Canada if you kick it and make it you get 3 points. You then either kick it off just like the American version, or the opposing team can automatically take it 1st & 10 on their 35 yard line- without receiving a kickoff. They also do not have to tell the team that just scored they are taking this option, only the ref. So if the team that just scored is set up to kick off and is waiting for the other team and ref to give the signal, they can then be shocked to see the other team's offense already set up (with their own ball) to snap and run in for a cheap score. No, I am not making that up. It's not done very often partially because most teams would probably rather try to run the ball back, and more probable that most people simply do not know the rule exists. Oddly enough though, this option can only be taken after a field goal is successfully made, and ONLY a FG- NOT a touchdown. Why? I haven't the foggiest idea. That's okay though, neither do the refs. If on the other hand the field goal is missed, then there's a whole new plethora of stupid that could happen. If the ball rolls out the back of the endzone the team that kicked the ball is awarded with a single point or rogue. Personally, I still don't get why a team should get rewarded anything for missing a FG, but let's move on. Often times, especially on longer kick attempts, the defense will keep at least one person back to retrieve the ball in case it should miss. If the ball is retrieved in the endzone by the offense its now a touchdown, unless the ball is recovered by the defense. If the defender who recovered the ball in the endzone is tackled down in the endzone, the offense is again awarded a single point and the ball is placed on the 35 yard line or from the line of scrimmage of the FG attempt- whichever is further out, 1st & 10 for the defense's team. If the defender manages to exit the endzone and is tackled, there are no points awarded to the offense and the defense's team is awarded possession of the ball. The ball is then placed where the defender is tackled or on the 20 yard line whichever is more advantageous. If the defender is not tackled, he can try to run it back for a touchdown himself. Got all that? No? That's okay, neither does anyone else.

It gets even worse if we were to dive deeper in the Ulysses-sized rulebook. Much of the game is spent consulting this tome. It is overburdened with too many rules. There are many more examples I could give, but I believe the point's been made. I think the CFL took a baby step forward this year towards that end with a couple of alterations, but they need to take a more daring attempt to solidify themselves in the 21st century. If the Canadian game is serious about trying to maintain its existence in the coming years, the powers that be really should consider streamlining many of the rules- (especially the out-of-date ones) or else they run a very strong risk of losing the next generation to the American counterpart.

[Corvus]

Your in New England, but the HS you coach plays Cdn rules?

[Dodger]

Awesome! That is ridiculously perfect. Great colors, great logo and wordmark, I can't spot a major flaw. You win.

[IceCap]

Bleujayone, I'm going to disagree. I actually like the "quirks" of the Canadian version. It's a nice reminder of where the game came from (rugby). Furthermore the Canadian game's been around at the very least just as long as the Yankee version, and we all seem to follow it without any problem.

Furthermore I'm chuckling at your assertion that the American version's "far more willing to evolve." Just ask the NFL when they're going to go to a more balanced OT system.

And don't point to American leagues with rule variations like the XFL, UFL, or the new USFL. The NFL IS professional American football, and so far they've proven to be just as stubborn when it comes to their rule book as the CFL.

And yeah, what's up? You live in New England but you coach Canadian football? Did we annex Vermont or something?

[logocruncher]

Just going to chime in on the CFL debate. To me, it presents a really nice alternative to the NFL. I follow both avidly, and each brings different pros and cons to the table. The CFL is all about passing and the return game with only three downs, and the rouge makes for a nice twist. Also, the CFL has some pretty nice names and logos (but awful unis, with the exceptions of the Esks and Bombers). Speed is the keyword in Canadian football. The NFL, meanwhile, is much more about establishing and stopping the run, long, clock-eating drives, and strength is paramount. I enjoy both in different ways.

Back to the concept: I actually love the colors, and the way the striping style mimics the logo is nice. I also like the Hamilton alt logo. Really nice work, and I can't wait to see what's next!

[IceCap]

Just going to chime in on the CFL debate. To me, it presents a really nice alternative to the NFL. I follow both avidly, and each brings different pros and cons to the table. The CFL is all about passing and the return game with only three downs, and the rouge makes for a nice twist. Also, the CFL has some pretty nice names and logos (but awful unis, with the exceptions of the Esks and Bombers). Speed is the keyword in Canadian football. The NFL, meanwhile, is much more about establishing and stopping the run, long, clock-eating drives, and strength is paramount. I enjoy both in different ways.

Oh I agree. I love the NFL. I also love the CFL though, and I just find the assertion that it's not "real football" to be laughable.

Back to the concept: I actually love the colors, and the way the striping style mimics the logo is nice. I also like the Hamilton alt logo. Really nice work, and I can't wait to see what's next!

I agree. I love it. Maybe it's just because Hamilton is one of my favourite American historical figures, but that really drives the set home.

Really though the best part is the eagle logo. A great update of the original design.

[rentz]

#2: Arizona Outlaws

Just the wordmark for now. Version one:

Version 2, in monochrome:

C+C welcome. The O is kind of bothering me.

[kinznk]

For the Wranglers first wordmark I found the black part of Wranglers remind of a mustache. I mean that in a good way. It looks like those old western photos where the mustache is tipped at the ends. I really like that wordmark. If you were trying to do that good job if not good job.

[omnibus]

I dont notice the "O" it did not stick out at all.

Dude, these are F-ing sweet! Liked the original Federals, then saw the green and thought NO! till I scrolled down. MUCH BETTER than I thought. Now that Outlaws wordmark is damn good. That is one thing I am not able to do for some reason, I am VERY jelous. Cant wait to see one of these redesigns ACTUALLY finished so keep up the good work.

[-(dp)-]

For the O, here is what I would suggest trying. First, widen the whole letter; it looks thin as is. Then I would make the vertical strokes thicker than the horizontal ones. Finally, try making one corner more rounded than the rest (and maybe making the one across from it come to a point). The symmetrical, square-ish O is disrupting the flow the rest of the letters have. I think those changes may help. (Then again, I may be completely wrong.) Nice job on the series so far.

[Puck]

#2: Arizona Outlaws

Just the wordmark for now. Version one:

Version 2, in monochrome:

C+C welcome. The O is kind of bothering me.

If anything the R bothers me as it's too thin.

[JayLo1112]

the script is really flat. you need to add some out lines to make it pop and add some depth. its also a bit too......playlful. for a team named outlaws. idk if playful is the word but i think it gets the point across.

[kinznk]

As I look at the Outlaws wordmark more the more I like the black and red. At first the black looked like a tipped mustache like an old gunslinger might have had but it also looks like a bandana. I really like it.

[afarough]

The CFL is cool but it's not real football. Football is played woth 11 guys on the field for each team, uses 4 down, and the field is 120 yards from the back of the endzone to the back of the endzone.

I find it amusing that a Raiders fan is telling me what "real football" is.

Actually the CFL can be traced back to the 1860's, more than half a century before the NFL.

+1

And it's so antiquated too. It's a dinosaur of a sport. Say what you will about the American version but at least they're far more willing to evolve- for that matter so are the majority of other sports out there. The Canadian version is so overburdened with old rules that the game has taken a hit because of it. Nevermind the 12 men on each sides or only three downs or the size of the field. There are many, Many, MANY rules that need tweaking or elimination far more than those.

And before my Canadian cousins decide to take this as a cue to pile on, I've been coaching the Canadian version for high school for the last two years. There are so many rules and little known (and used) quirks to the game that I've found not even the coaches, refs, spectators and especially the players are fully aware of them all. It makes the game very confusing to everyone, and when one person takes advantage of some bizarro rule or is unaware of one- it cheapens the games integrity.

Let's for example take a look at the seemingly simple task of kick a field goal.

In the American version, you attempt the kick, if you make it you get 3 points (half a touchdown) and proceed to then kick it off to the other team just as you would if a touchdown were scored. If you miss, you get no points and the other team takes over from the spot of the kick. The only exception being that if the kick is within 20 yards of the goal line it's moved back to the 20. If the attempt is blocked the ball is in play and is treated as a live ball. If the kick gets off but falls short and there is a defender back there to pick it up before exiting the endzone, he can attempt to run it back as one might run back a kickoff or punt, however since the goalposts are at the back of the endzone as opposed to remaining on the goal line as the Canadians still do- such a tactic is extremely rare to happen upon. That's it. Now let's look at the Canadian version (hang on to your hats, kids)

In Canada if you kick it and make it you get 3 points. You then either kick it off just like the American version, or the opposing team can automatically take it 1st & 10 on their 35 yard line- without receiving a kickoff. They also do not have to tell the team that just scored they are taking this option, only the ref. So if the team that just scored is set up to kick off and is waiting for the other team and ref to give the signal, they can then be shocked to see the other team's offense already set up (with their own ball) to snap and run in for a cheap score. No, I am not making that up. It's not done very often partially because most teams would probably rather try to run the ball back, and more probable that most people simply do not know the rule exists. Oddly enough though, this option can only be taken after a field goal is successfully made, and ONLY a FG- NOT a touchdown. Why? I haven't the foggiest idea. That's okay though, neither do the refs. If on the other hand the field goal is missed, then there's a whole new plethora of stupid that could happen. If the ball rolls out the back of the endzone the team that kicked the ball is awarded with a single point or rogue. Personally, I still don't get why a team should get rewarded anything for missing a FG, but let's move on. Often times, especially on longer kick attempts, the defense will keep at least one person back to retrieve the ball in case it should miss. If the ball is retrieved in the endzone by the offense its now a touchdown, unless the ball is recovered by the defense. If the defender who recovered the ball in the endzone is tackled down in the endzone, the offense is again awarded a single point and the ball is placed on the 35 yard line or from the line of scrimmage of the FG attempt- whichever is further out, 1st & 10 for the defense's team. If the defender manages to exit the endzone and is tackled, there are no points awarded to the offense and the defense's team is awarded possession of the ball. The ball is then placed where the defender is tackled or on the 20 yard line whichever is more advantageous. If the defender is not tackled, he can try to run it back for a touchdown himself. Got all that? No? That's okay, neither does anyone else.

It gets even worse if we were to dive deeper in the Ulysses-sized rulebook. Much of the game is spent consulting this tome. It is overburdened with too many rules. There are many more examples I could give, but I believe the point's been made. I think the CFL took a baby step forward this year towards that end with a couple of alterations, but they need to take a more daring attempt to solidify themselves in the 21st century. If the Canadian game is serious about trying to maintain its existence in the coming years, the powers that be really should consider streamlining many of the rules- (especially the out-of-date ones) or else they run a very strong risk of losing the next generation to the American counterpart.

All the football coaches I know are aware of the rules, so I don't see how it makes things worse than the American rules, just different. If anyone is coaching they should be aware of the rules, in over 50 games of watching and playing, the other team has not been surprised by the team's offense taking the field at the 35 because the ref has to blow in the play /sorry for continuing to sidetrack the thread.

[seancarter]

i like to see redesign arizona wranglers

[stennis]

Bleujayone, I'm going to disagree. I actually like the "quirks" of the Canadian version. It's a nice reminder of where the game came from (rugby). Furthermore the Canadian game's been around at the very least just as long as the Yankee version, and we all seem to follow it without any problem.

Furthermore I'm chuckling at your assertion that the American version's "far more willing to evolve." Just ask the NFL when they're going to go to a more balanced OT system.

And don't point to American leagues with rule variations like the XFL, UFL, or the new USFL. The NFL IS professional American football, and so far they've proven to be just as stubborn when it comes to their rule book as the CFL.

And yeah, what's up? You live in New England but you coach Canadian football? Did we annex Vermont or something?

Im with IceCap in this.

IMO, both styles of football (Canadian or American) are equally as valid, they're just variants evolved from the same root game: rugby. I much prefer the Canadian game but each set of rules has its pro's and con's. Calling it a dinosaur just because it follows slightly different rules is unfair. The National League and American League use different rules as far as pitchers going to bat and the use of designated hitters are concerned but one isnt necessarily "better" than the other.

These quirks, as IceCap puts it, are part of what make the Cdn game unique. It's a matter of perspective. Growing up on a Cdn Prairie farm and watching only CFL (this was a time BEFORE satellite/cable tv was available in rural areas), when I saw my first NFL game, I thought IT was strange! Just because something is different, doesnt mean it's better or worse - it's just different!

Ive never seen any confusion between FG's & KO's. And having the rouge (not rogue - might be a typo) rules make special teams play actually mean something. Nothing brings a crowd to its feet like a missed FG being run back for a TD. Do some research on the rouge rule, it's all about ball control and field position. Yes it is an easy way to score but because of that it's the lowest score values. It also means that every play has scoring potential. Know the rules and their foundations before criticizing them, please. Would you have the Aussie Rules league get rid of "behinds" just because the player didnt kick the goal? Probably not - it's part of those game rules! Like the rouge, it's about controlling the ball and getting it into/through the opponent's end of the field (or pitch).

But back to the original topic: keep on going with these USFL revamps! IF the USFL comes back, they are definitely gonna need some major updating and this is a great place to see some concepts tossed around. Good or bad I like seeing them. As any creative person should know, sometimes the bad ideas lead to the good ideas.

[swe3t]

I would love to see the Jacksonville Bulls done!!!! pleeeaassseeeee!!!!!

[GeauxColonels]

Wow, I have to say that I am blown away with the Washington Federals concept. Incredible job. I thought that the blue was a good look but the change back to green with the gold is better than I could have imagined. And, typically, I do not care for the oversized helmet logos, but this one works out very well. Awesome job!

[rentz]

Well this was a blast from the past!

Thanks for the comments guys. However, generally when a topic hasn't been posted in for seven months, it's pretty much dead. So while it's nice to see the enthusiasm in the request, I honestly have no plans to continue this project.

(This is Nole42 by the way; I changed my user name since this project)