Quote Originally Posted by hoosier View Post
Agree with Bass for the most part (except the part about only watching football: in my current life I don't have time to watch anything at all). Frequent roster turnover deprives teams of continuity and makes watching (for those who have time...) less interesting. For all of its warts, the NFL of the 1970s was much more interesting than the 2010s. Or maybe it was just that the NFL is more interesting when you're a kid.
1970 football was terrible, only I was young so it was hard to know how terrible until the NFL put in the 1978 rules changes.

1970 football was ruled by hoary cliches and a lack of risk taking. Unless your idea of innovation was run, run, then long pass on 3rd and 7.

I could see arguing that the 1960s were better. For every Lombardi then there was the AFL.

But better passing AND player movement means that teams are not stuck in the same track for nearly as long as they were back in the day. Now teams that bounce around from mediocre to terrible and back again are truly poorly run (see Rams, Los Angeles, or Jets, New York).