More than two months removed from the Patriots' thrilling overtime win in January's Super Bowl and still two months away from players reporting to mini-camps, the NFL has made several headlines over the last few weeks. Three things in particular come to mind.
1. In the aftermath of the Justin Timberlake-Janet Jackson Super Bowl controversy, the NFL decided to cancel the halftime show for this year's Pro Bowl that would have featured JC Chasez, Timberlake's partner-in-crime in 'NSync.
For those just emerging from hibernation, I will recount the Super Bowl incident. During the halftime show, Cameron Diaz's beau performed a song with Jacko's sister that no one actually remembers. What we do remember is Timberlake coming up from behind Jackson and ripping off a patch from her shirt that had been covering her breastal region.
Coming as a shock to viewers and CBS executives alike, Jackson's breast popped out of the shirt, exposing her nipple on national network television. Jackson covered herself almost immediately, but the damage had been done. In what appeared to be an obvious effort to avoid a punishment from the FCC, both CBS and the NFL lashed out against Jackson, condemned "her" actions and canceled Chasez's upcoming Pro Bowl performance.
The NFL's reason for cancelling Chasez had less to do with his connection to Timberlake and more to do with what the NFL perceived might be another racy show. Chasez was slated to sing two with relatively explicit sexual references. Chasez had even agreed to change a few of the lyrics in his songs to suit his national audience, but the NFL had made its decision. The olive branch was extended in the form of an offer to perform the pre-game National Anthem, but Chasez declined.
In response to the NFL's decision, Chasez said the following through MTV.
"While I agree the mishap at the Super Bowl was a huge mistake, the NFL's shallow effort to portray my music as sexually indecent brings to mind another era when innocent artists were smeared with a broad brush by insecure but powerful people."
I have two problems with the way this situation has been handled from the get-go. First, the NFL, CBS and everyone associated with the Super Bowl show left Janet Jackson out to dry. She was forced to take the blame for the entire incident. Is it just me, or wasn't it Timberlake who ripped the shirt off? Maybe she was supposed to have some sort of bra on underneath, I don't know. But in an age when network television allows words like "damn," "bitch" and "ass" to be aired in primetime, the reaction to this incident seems particularly harsh and out of place.
My second problem is with the cancellation of Chasez's performance. I had never heard of this guy before now, and I still haven't heard a note of his music. But he is absolutely right that the NFL has punished him for an act that he had nothing to do with. I understand that the league wants to prevent incidents like the Nipple Sighting, but cancelling performances is not the way to do that. Nothing like the Jackson problem had ever occurred before, and the NFL's reaction was misguided.
2. Instant replay. Earlier this week, the owners overwhelmingly voted in favor of continuing the use of instant replay for the next five years.
Given the black-and-white choice of whether to keep it or nix it, I would have to agree with the owners' decision. Instant replay has certainly cut down on incorrect calls and helped allow the game to be decided by the players and not by controversial or blatantly poor whistles. But there are certain problems with instant replay that were not adequately addressed.
My biggest issue has to do with fumbles. As the rule now stands, if a team fumbles the ball, and the coach feels it was not a fumble, he can challenge the call in order to have it overturned. On the flip side, though, if a play is ruled dead because the refs deem a player down by contact, the play is unreviewable.

This brings in two problems. First and most obviously, if the call is wrong, it can't be reviewed. But that leads to the second problem. Since refs know that, they are more likely to rule the play a fumble so that it can be reviewed. But since replays sometimes do not have sufficient evidence to overturn the call, more incorrect fumbles have been called under instant replay. Though I can't suggest a viable alternative, the league dropped the ball when it failed to address this issue. The fact that instant replay exists cannot and should not influence the way officials call the game.
3. Endzone celebrations. The league has proposed a new rule that any touchdown celebration involving more than one person will receive an automatic 15-yard penalty.
One of the things I hate most in sports is showboating. My father instilled it in me when I was very young and I have held that maxim in the highest regard. In Little League he always told me, "When you hit a home run, put your head down and run around the bases. Don't jog." He hated the idea of showing up a pitcher. I think he also didn't understand why someone would have to brag right at the moment when their actions seemed to be doing the talking. If that is what the NFL has in mind, I'm all for it.
But that isn't what endzone celebrations are. I see those more as excitement and team camaraderie. It's one thing if a receiver starts pointing at the cornerback he just burned, but team celebrations are fun. The NFL wants to cut down on "preplanned" exhibitions. Why? Professional sports are very much about entertainment these days and some of the dances are just that: entertaining.
Should Terrell Owens be allowed to show up Dallas by running to the 50-yard line and putting the ball on the Cowboys' logo? No. That is meant to taunt. But shaking pompoms? Shake away. It's fun for the fans and, to be honest, it's good for the league. A flag should only be thrown when the line is crossed from celebration to showing up the other team. Some might say that is too subjective, but aren't most calls in the NFL more or less subjective?