That is the only time a team has scored 40 points. Is there a shortened clock (relative to the NFL) or some other tangible reason for that?
Probably just comes down to parity in the league. It’s relatively rare when an NFL team scores 40 because they’re going against defenses equivalent to their offenses. AAF talent isn’t the same as NFL, but they’re still on the same level as talent.
Orlando has the best offense in the league by far and Atlanta is pretty bad. So it took less time for the good team to gel then it did for the bad team to. This was also week one, teams have more or less settled into themselves since then.
The total length of the game (four 15-minute quarters) is the same, but there are fewer stoppages of play in the AAF (i.e., no “TV timeouts”). In theory, that might lead to fewer total plays per game. But, on the other hand, the AAF play clock is 35 seconds (shorter than the NFL’s 40 second play clock), which would, theoretically, lead to a few more plays per game. Both of those changes were made to keep the pace of play up, as well as shorten the effective overall length of the game, to enhance the viewer experience.
In other words: the timing rules are a little different, but I’m not sure that they’re different enough to suggest that there’s substantially fewer plays being played (and, thus, that being the reason for fewer points being scored).
Sure, but those are not substantially different from a non-televised college game, and those routinely are high scoring affairs.
I’m guessing the parity explanation is the right one.
I heard the majority owner say the AAF might fold soon.
Do you think the AAF will play for a second season next year, or is the league doomed?
And here’s a pretty good thumbnail analysis of why it probably would never have made it to a second season.
Will the AAF at least be able to finish its season?
It’s a fair question. It sounds like some of the teams are still drawing OK – San Antonio apparently had 30,000 attendees the other night. On the other hand, at this moment, the San Diego / Salt Lake game is on (from last night, I presume), and Salt Lake’s stadium looks pretty empty, though one can hear crowd noise on the broadcast.
They have two more weeks left in the season, then two weeks of postseason. All three of their postseason games are scheduled to be on live TV (TNT and CBS); if they fold before then, I would not be surprised if the league would be out the money they’d get from those networks (or, be liable for repaying it, if they’ve already received money). For that reason alone, I wouldn’t be surprised if they very much want to at least play out the string this season.
It looks like, in the last post, I guessed wrong.
This article on SI.com indicates that the AAF is meeting via conference call today (right now, in fact), and the plan appears to be that they are going to suspend operations, effective immediately. That doesn’t necessarily mean that the league is folding, but it does seem likely.
The article also indicates that SI writer Albert Breer has noted that there are perceptions among league officials that Tom Dundon, the investor which brought in $250 million after the league’s first week, and became the league’s majority owner, “bought a bought a stake in the league for the gambling app being developed with one source saying, ‘Dundon got the technology he wanted and he’s now minus one rather large headache.’”
Did the league launch too early, or was it always doomed to fail?
It was always doomed to fail.
I couldn’t tell you why, but for some reason, football is a sport that just cannot exist outside of the NFL and college. The AFL has been making a go of it for a good 20+ years, but even they’re in a completely separate category.
Oh well…twas fun while it lasted
I think the timing of their season is totally wrong. We are about to have the NBA and NHL playoffs, and baseball is starting, so even the have-nots haven’t had time to get disgusted, lose hope, and look for something else to watch.
I think their season should have been July and August. Baseball is the only other sport going, and 3/4 of the teams are pretty much out of it by the All Star break.
Is the AAF a bigger failure than the XFL? At least the XFL played its full season.
And even the AFL (assuming you’re referring to the Arena Football League) isn’t in great shape. The AFL had 19 teams in 2007, went bankrupt in 2010, and was down to just 4 active teams in 2018, all in the Northeast. They’ve announced that there will be two new teams for 2019, so there’s that, at least.
I’m not sure that being able to finish their one season made the XFL any less of a failure. WWF and NBC both lost boatloads of money on it, and, as i remember it, the XFL had substantially higher ambitions than the AAF did.
From what I’ve read, the XFL had HUGE ratings for its opening game, then the ratings plummeted afterward. Meanwhile, the AAF was doing decently ratings-wise.
McMahon may have stubbornly chosen to lose more money before facing reality. Maybe that makes the XFL the bigger loser. He’s gonna do it again, too.
The Orlando Apollos had the best season, 2 more wins than anyone else in the standings. We’re the champs! Yippee!
It’s like I said earlier, this whole thing was to sell an app.
Indeed. Now, can you focus your crystal ball on what’s gonna happen with Brexit? 