Talk:American football/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

"American football" vs "football"

I would like to lend my support to the use of the term "American football" in this article in order to disambiguate from other codes of football which are discussed in this article. Same goes for the other codes, instead of "rugby", either "rugby football", "rugby union" or "rugby league" should be used as is appropriate. Instaed of "soccer", "association football" should be used as appropriate. Both the sport itself and the article are both called "American football", for sake of consistency and clarity, this term should be used instead of just "football". ParkH.Davis (talk) 18:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

A previous discussion at Talk:American football/Archive 3#"American football" vs "football", several more in archives also. As the article is written in American English, "football" is sufficient in most cases. It's certainly not needed where you've been adding it. - BilCat (talk) 18:22, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

The discussion which you cited did not establish a consensus. As per wikipedia policy, If, in a discussion, 10 editors support one side, and 7 support another, this does not mean the side with 10 automatically wins. I have restarted the discussion in an attempt to reach a true consesus. Even if the discussion you cited did establish a previous consensus, as per wikipedia policy, it is possible for a consensus to change. I am breaking any consensus which may or may not have previously existed and am disputing the use of "football" in favor of "American football" on this page. ParkH.Davis (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

No, it affirmed an existing consensus, which has stood for years as an application of WP:ENGVAR. Your welcome to challenge the.existing consensus here, but not to make unilateral changes. The discussion on "US resident" football also didn't establish a consensus by your standard, but I wouldn't recommend following that one either. - BilCat (talk) 18:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

No prior consensus existed, on this talk page or elsewhere. Referring to the sport as "American football" does not violate WP:ENGVAR as the term is in wide use, both in the United States and elsewhere. The discussion which you cited did not establish a consesus as in a discussion, if 10 editors support one side, and 7 support another, this does not mean the side with 10 automatically wins. ParkH.Davis (talk) 18:39, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm against the blanket enforcement of the term "American football". Unless it's completely unclear which code of football is being referred to, I think it's sufficient to use the term "football" throughout the article. – PeeJay 01:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

This article is for people not already familiar with the topic. The word "football" by itself can be misleading and ultimately confusing to those not familar with the distictions between different football codes. ParkH.Davis (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Except it shouldn't be confusing since this article is called "American football". If the context of an individual sentence leads to any confusion, then obviously clarification is required, but to refer to the sport as "American football" throughout the article is unnecessary and excessive. – PeeJay 02:43, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

How is it "unnecessary and excessive" to refer to sport by its name"? This article meant for people not familar with the topic, this not a place to promote or propogate any nationalistic ideas surrounding the word "football". There is already a section pointing out that many Americans refer to the sport as "football", so I don't think it hurts to be consistent throughout and to not confuse readers new to the topic by continually referring to the sport by different names. ParkH.Davis (talk) 02:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Because it's unnatural to continually refer to the sport by that name. By the vast majority of people in countries that play the game, the sport is referred to simply as "football". You don't see anyone insisting that we consistently refer to "association football" in that article, do you? Once the code has been established, a shortened name is appropriate (n.b. I didn't say 'necessary') unless confusion arises. – PeeJay 03:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Unnatural to who? You, who likely is already familar with the topic of this article? Or the person who is brand new to this topic? The sport is referred to quite commonly as "American football". Walter Camp's seminal book is entitled "American football. ParkH.Davis (talk) 03:27, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

It's unnatural to me and every other American familiar with the most popular spectator sport in the United States. The name of the sport is FOOTBALL, not "American football." No one -- and I mean no one -- who has every played the sport or has been a fan of the sport refers to it as "American football." To Americans (and most Canadians), it is simply "football" because Americans refer to association football as "soccer" and rugby football as "rugby." The only reason we call it "American football" on Wikipedia is to distinguish it from association football; please note that in Wikipedia's association football articles, sensible people do not feel the need to repeat "association football" 30 times, when once at the outset of the article is sufficient. Give your readers a little credit, and use the American vernacular in an article written in American English about an American sport. Please. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:38, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, no, the name of the sport is "American football", but you're right that most people simply refer to it as "football" (most people here in the UK still refer to it as "American football", but that's because we have our own code of football). – PeeJay 03:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

The UK has many different codes of football. Association football is the one most commly reffered to as "football" as it is the most popular. This trend tends to ring true in all English speaking countries. I have no objection to pointing out this liguistic factoid, but regardless the name of the sport is "American football. ParkH.Davis (talk) 03:53, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

We're getting a little bit off-topic here. Yes, the full name of the sport is "American football", no one is disputing that fact, but as I've told you already, once the context of the article has been established, there's no reason to continue to refer to the sport by a less common name. Yet again, you wouldn't expect the association football article to refer to "association football" throughout, so why are you insisting that this sport be consistently referred to as "American football"? – PeeJay 03:57, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

This is not the talk page for association football. If you have an issue with that article, then please bring up your concern on the appropriate talk page. I am insisting on this article being consistent and clear to people who are new to the topic of this article. ParkH.Davis (talk) 04:07, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

This article is for NOT familar with the toic of this article prior to reading it. It is meant as an introduction to the sport. The name of the sport is in fact "American football", this is why the name of the article is "American football". There is already a section which explains the the liguistic problem with the word "football". The sport is commonly referred to as "American football" in addition to being reffered to as "football". ParkH.Davis (talk) 03:44, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

You're wrong, this article isn't for people who aren't familiar with the sport; it's for everyone. And you're wrong that there's no consensus; consensus can be established by silence as much as by discussion - the fact that you're the only one campaigning for the sport to be consistently referred to as "American football" surely tells you something...? – PeeJay 03:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the 'Note To Editors' which shown to you before making an edit says: "Remember, this is an introductory article to American football. It exists to give people who know little or nothing about the sport a basic understanding of the game.". This article is an introductory article for those who are new to the topic, it is not for those who are already familar with the topic. ParkH.Davis (talk) 04:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

You don't have to be familiar with the sport of American football to realise that, in an article entitled American football, uses of the word "football" usually refer to American football. In fact, you could probably be in a persistent vegetative state and still realise that. That note is there to remind editors not to use overly jargonistic language; using "football" as shorthand for "American football" does not qualify as "jargon". – PeeJay 04:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

The note is there so that editors keep in mind that this article "is an introductor article to American football. It exists to give people who know little or nothing about the sport a basic understanding of the game." Why same would it say one thing and then mean another thing? This article is for people who are new to the topic of "American football", not for those who already familar with the topic. ParkH.Davis (talk) 04:15, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or do you really not understand what I'm telling you? Being new to American football does not stop an individual from understanding that "football" in this context refers to "American football". You do not need to use the term "American football" every single time where "football" will suffice. That is the end of the discussion. Thanks. – PeeJay 04:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

All I have done is cite the 'Note To Editors' which every editor of this page is prompted with prior to editing this article. It must be assumed that the reader of this article "know[s] little or nothing about the sport". I am simply advocating for consistency and clarity. ParkH.Davis (talk) 04:27, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Please delete the word "American" from the article wherever you see fit. This discussion would be more constructive if it was deciding where to add the word "American" and not where it should not be. ParkH.Davis (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

We've had that discussion before. It's been decided that it makes sense to use 'American football' when other codes of football (like rugby or soccer), and just use 'football' everywhere else, because people who are reading this article don't need it beaten in their heads every time they read. Toa Nidhiki05 14:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

No consensus existed via any previous discussion concerning the name of the sport discussed in this article. Nothing has been decided, that is why we are discussing it here and now in this thread. This article is for people who are not already familar with tne topic. It can be extremely confusing when different codes of football are refered to by a different name inevery other sentence. 16:41, 7 November 2015 (UTC)ParkH.Davis (talk)

Who says it would be referred to by a different name in every other sentence? – PeeJay 17:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

It would, by your position, be alternatively be referred to as either "American football" or "football". Other codes would alternatively be called "association football", "soccer", "rugger", "rugby", "rugby football", "rugby union", "rugby league" or "football", which could potentially refer to any of the previous. This is extremely confusing to someone not familar with this topic. Disambiguation should be used whenever possible. ParkH.Davis (talk) 17:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

In what idiotic universe would we use confusing terms such as "rugger"? In cases where another code of football is referred to, obviously the full name of that code would be used, i.e. "association football", "rugby union", "rugby league", "Australian rules football", etc. Using "football" to refer to one of those would be absolutely retarded, and I think your assumption that I was suggesting that is insulting to my intelligence. – PeeJay 17:47, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

"Rugger" is a term still used in the United States despite not being widely used in the UK since the 1950s.

Please do not use the word "retarted" as per WP:PA, WP:NDP and WP:CIV. My only intention here is to make this article clearer and more consistent for those who are unfamilar with the topic of this article. A consensus must be made as to how to refer to each code of fooball and for this article to be consistent throughout, in its use of such words. A preference should be for the full names of each code, but if an abbriviation is preferred, then this article must have constistent usage throughout. ParkH.Davis (talk) 18:08, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

There is no consensus currently regarding the use of the word "American" in this article. If you have an objection to the word or any other phrasing in this article, please bring your concerns here first before removing content. ParkH.Davis (talk) 03:31, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I thought I might chip in my 2 cents worth because, as an Australian, we encounter this problem very frequently and, as such, I hope my opinion might help. As a former British colony, in Australia we play the 3 types of football invented by the British - Rugby League, Rugby Union, and Association Football (i.e. Soccer) - and we also have our own brand of football - Australian Rules Football - which was invented to keep cricket players fit during the winter (cricket is our national sport). We suffer the problem you're discussing because Queensland and New South Wales (2 states on the East Coast) primarily play both forms of Rugby, while the other states primarily play Australian Rules football. Soccer is played everywhere but isn't as popular as the other codes. The problem is that while I'm in New South Wales - where I live - if I say 'football' I might be referring to either Rugby League or Rugby Union, but when I travel south to Victoria I would then be referring to Aussie Rules. At any stage I might bump into an English person (there are many of them here) and they will immediately assume I mean Soccer. It's a cause for never ending problems! So ... what's my point??? My point is that the most common thing to do is establish - up front - what is meant by 'football' at the start of the conversation - e.g. Rugby League - then to refer to the game as football for the remainder of the conversation. If I went to the United States I would be crazy to think that an American would think I was referring to Rugby Union if I mentioned 'football'. Obviously they would assume I meant American Football and it would be up to me, as the 'outsider', to ensure I clarified what I was talking about before I continued the conversation. The same thing applies here. Since the article is called American Football, I think once it has been established that 'football' - in the case of this article - refers to American Football, then it is fine to simply refer to it as 'football' for the rest of the article. I think it would be unnecessary to keep referring to it as American Football and that doing so would be needlessly wordy and even confusing. The problem I have outlined above occurs EVERYWHERE in the world; though nowhere as commonly as in Australia because no one else plays 4 separate codes the way we do. It's only going to get worse too because American Football is becoming popular here and it won't be long before we're playing 5 codes! We LOVE our football here. But I digress. I think you should just:

1. Make sure the lede establishes that 'football' refers to American Football.

2. Refer to the game as 'football' for the rest of the article, unless mention of another code is made and someone could infer that a different code was being referenced, in which case...

3. Use the full name - i.e. American Football - in those instances.

FillsHerTease (talk) 00:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Exactly right. They clearly breed'em smart down under. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:51, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Article protection

This article's editing protections should be reinstated. Vandalism is clearly a problem. ParkH.Davis (talk) 16:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Gridiron football

A user has questioned the existence of the Gridiron football article at Talk:Gridiron football#Merge/deletion, and wants to merge it here. Comments welcome. - BilCat (talk) 18:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Gridiron football is the way I like to describe football because it is tuff and played on the "Gridiron". There have been books, movies, and even skits written about Gridiron football. The goal of football just isn't bashing heads into each other and scoring touchdowns and getting all of the love from the fans its a lot more then that there is a lot of work that goes into to place to be able to even run a play in a game of football. Football is a bout building a bond with a group of brothers that you trust and that all have the same mindset in mind. I think that with my experience of playing the game of football since in was six years old, I've seen it all and the game will never change. The game of football with always be fast, hard hitting , and physical. There is just no other way that the game should be played and that is what I think the meaning of gridiron football is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Elijah215 (talk • contribs)

Most popular?

"football as a whole is the most popular sport in the United States"

Most popular spectator sport, or participator sport? Or both? Perhaps the article should make this clear?

Paul Magnussen (talk) 22:56, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

PAT/conversion/try huh?

My edit has been reverted, which is fine, but the text left behind is confusing to someone who doesn't know the subject matter. Why is there a link to the rugby article on trys? Why is the other article called Conversion (gridiron football) if it is more commonly called "point(s)-after-touchdown (PAT)"? Are these 3 names for the same thing, or are they different? The conversion article uses "conversion" in the title, but in the lead says "PAT" and "convert," but not "conversion" Since I am obviously not qualified to fix this, will someone who knows the subject matter please give it some attention? -- ke4roh (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Picking off the easy part: there is a link to rugby because the rugby try and subsequent kick for goal are analogous to the football touchdown and conversion/point(s)-after-touchdown/try-for-point/convert/extra point. Many aspects of American football evolved from rugby (scrum to scrimmage, mark to fair catch, etc.), so it makes sense to tie back to the history. —C.Fred (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Officially, it's either a try in the US or a convert in Canada. Here are the relevant rules:

Country	Code	Rule(s)
US	NFL (pro)	SECTION 41 TRY A Try is the attempt by a team that has scored a touchdown to add one point (by a field goal) or two points (by a touchdown) during one untimed scrimmage down. (2-41) SECTION 3 TRY ARTICLE 1. GENERAL RULES. After a touchdown, a Try is an opportunity for either team to score one or two additional points during one scrimmage down. The Try begins when the Referee sounds the whistle for play to start. The team that scored the touchdown shall put the ball in play: (a) anywhere on or between the inbound lines (b) 15 yards from the defensive team’s goal line for a Try-kick (c) two yards from the defensive team’s goal line for a Try by pass or run (11-3-1)
	NCAA (college)	SECTION 3. Try Down The point or points shall be scored according to the point values in Rule 8-1-1 if the try results in what would be a touchdown, safety or field goal under rules governing play at other times. [Touchdown – 2 Points; Field Goal or Safety — 1 Point] A try is an opportunity for either team to score one or two points while the game clock is stopped after a touchdown. (8-3-1, 2)
	NFHS (high school)	SECTION 3 TRY. After a touchdown, the scoring team shall attempt a try.... During a try, A may score two points from what would be a touchdown or one point for a field goal or safety by B under rules governing play at other times during the game. Only A may score during a try. (8-3-1, 3)
Canada	CFL (pro)	Article 5 - Convert A team scoring a touchdown may attempt to add to its score by means of a scrimmage play from any point on or between the hash marks on either the 3 yard-line or the 25 yard-line, as follows: 1 point – By kicking a field goal on a scrimmage play initially scrimmaged on the 25 yard line. 2 points – By scoring a touchdown by means of a ball carrying or passing play initially scrimmaged from either the 3 yard line or the 25 yard line. ... If Team B legally gains possession during an unsuccessful convert attempt (i.e. interception of forward pass, recovery of loose ball, or recovery of a short or wide field goal attempt), it may score two points by advancing the ball across Team A's Goal Line. If the play terminates with Team B in possession in its own Goal Area or in the Field of Play, there shall be no score. (3-5)
	Football Canada (college and high school)	Article 5 - Convert A team scoring a touchdown may attempt to add to its score by one scrimmage play at any point on or between the hash marks or play from any point on or outside the opponents’ 5 yard (5 metre) line, within the hash marks, as follows: a) 1 point – by kicking a field goal. If the kick is unsuccessful, the ball is dead immediately. b) 2 points – by scoring a touchdown by means of a ball carrying or passing play. A punt or onside kick is prohibited. If B gains possession, the ball is dead imediately. (3-5)

Informally, a number of terms are used. Since conversion is relatively common to both countries, that's what was used for the article Conversion (gridiron football). The formal terms and some other informal terms are then listed in the introduction of that article. —C.Fred (talk) 16:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Some thoughts

Firstly, the writing in this article is a mess. There's far too great of a reliance on parenthetical comments to splice in additional, possibly needless, information. The etymology section is a prime example of this, but it's a problem throughout the article.

Secondly, there needs to be consistency between nomenclature of the articles as well as something be done about the fact there's a Gridiron Football article as well as this one. I see in that article's talk page there's mention of a merger, but I'm not seeing discussion of that merger here. That said, if that article is merged into this one, there will need to be a retitling of pages like Penalty (Gridiron Football).

Thirdly, the Officials and Penalties section should just be "Officials" because there's basically no discussion of penalties. I also question the value of that section as a quick survey of other sports articles (rugby football, baseball, basketball, and association football) do not have anything remotely similar, and the officiating crew varies between leagues. I'm almost of a mind that there should be a unified template for the structure of sports articles to ensure things like history, rules, personnel, etc. are treated in directly comparable ways.

Fourthly, under teams and positions, it describes the game as being between two teams of 11 players. This is untrue. A team can only field 11 players at any one time (less in some variations), but an NCAA team can have 105 players and an NFL team can have 53 players on it. This is an important distinction in the modern version of the game where "player packages" are often substituted from play to play to take advantage of various specialties or even just get fresh players in.

The game of American football is a game played between two teams of 11 players, not between two teams of 105 or 53 players. ParkH.Davis (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Added by edit Adding some more as I'm reading this article more deeply now: Under offensive unit -- the leading, ponderous aside into legal formations and motion before the snap is both incomplete and unnecessary in terms of a high level overview. At this point it would be better to simply mention there's two classification of players those on the line and those not on the line, then discuss the basic differences. It would also make phrasing simpler to here introduce and define the phrase "skill positions".

It's also erroneous to say that the quarterback always lines up behind the center and takes the snap. The Wildcat formation and several other more exotic formations see the ball snapped to many different skill position players.

The "quarterback" is the player that recieves the snap from the center. It is a position in which a player can line up in, it is not a set circumstance. ParkH.Davis (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

In speaking about the offensive line, their primary job is to block defensive players, not just players on the defensive line. With 4-3 and 3-4 defenses being popular defensive packages these days, there's a blitz of some form almost every play. Claiming the o-line's main job is to block the d-line is either incorrect specification or over-simplification. It's likewise an oversimplification to say that the center is the leader of the offensive line. It's just as common these days to see blind side tackles (usually the left tackle) calling blocking assignments on the line.

On the defensive side, the primary job of the defensive line is to disrupt the offensive play's development. This can come in many forms from containment to pressuring and penetration with an ideal state of getting some tackle for a loss, but mainly, it is to keep the offensive players from getting to where they're supposed to be and doing what they're supposed to be doing.

In speaking of linebackers: If you're looking for a term to oppose outside linebacker, inside linebacker is a much better choice. These players are also in the defensive backfield (which is not just the secondary as the article claims).

With the corners, it would be more correct to say that they are primarily responsible for pass coverage and to delete the bit about them lining up outside of defensive formations (which can only be true of man to man coverage and entirely ignores zone and combination coverages).

Under special teams units there's absolutely no discussion of kickoff or receiving units.

The scoring section is just a mess.

What about it? ParkH.Davis (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Field and equipment needs to keep to a single measure and not pop between yards and feet. An why are fractional inches used for the ball size and decimal yards used for the field width when the field width is defined by rule as being 53 1/3 yards, not 53.33? I don't care which is used, but consistency should be a goal.

Yards and feet are both measurements of the same system, the Imperial system. ParkH.Davis (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Why is there talk about the coin toss under Duration of Play and Stoppages?

Under Advancing the Ball -- the play is over when the referres whistle it is over. This isn't coaching speak, this is how it's actually defined. Certain actions such as a player being downed can cause a ref to whistle the play over, but it's not over until the whistle blows.

Under kicking I see mention again of dropkicks...weren't those outlawed at all levels quite some time ago?

Drop kicks are 100% legal at all levels of American football. However, just as place kicks, all dropkicks must be taken from a legal position, either from a scrimmage kick or from a free kick. ParkH.Davis (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

72.168.176.17 (talk) 20:18, 18 January 2016 (UTC) 72.168.176.17 (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Taking the low-hanging fruit: where's your source that the play is over when the referee blows the whistle? There is only one circumstance where the referee's whistle ends the play: an inadvertent whistle. (That's a mess if it happens in the NFL and a problem at any other level, where a team might choose to replay the down as if it didn't happen.) In all other circumstances, the ball is dead before an official blows the whistle.

American football is played by two teams of 11 players the same way soccer is played by two teams of 12, rugby (union) by two teams of 15, etc. Substitutes aren't players, per se. Roster size can be discussed where substitutes are discussed.

Soccer is played with teams of 11 players, not 12. Canadian football teams have 12 players each. ParkH.Davis (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Dimensions move among yards, feet, and inches because the rulebook measures things in different units: the field is in yards, the goalposts are in feet, the ball is in inches. I agree that it would be best if the field width were specified as a fraction; the problem is, it may need to be hard-coded, rather than using the {{convert}} template for the metric equivalent. —C.Fred (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Things like ball carrier's knee touching the ground, the ball being carried out of bounds, a player declaring himself down, etc. trigger the officials calling the down over, but by rule, what actually ends the play is the official's declaring it over. This is the reason players are taught to play until the whistle blows, and the language of Rule 12 Section 2 Article 6-e (the portion of Unnecessary Roughness that refers to late hits) is "running, diving into, or throwing the body against or on any prostrate player either before or after the ball is dead".

Anyway, here are the two important rules to this distinction: Rule 2 Section 9 Article 1: "A Down is a period of action that starts when the ball is put in play (3-2-3) and ends when the ball is declared dead (7-2-1)." Rule 7 Section 2 Article 1: "An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended"

http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2015-nfl-rulebook/#section-2-personal-fouls http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2015-nfl-rulebook/#section-9-down http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2015-nfl-rulebook/#rule-7.-ball-in-play,-dead-ball,-scrimmage72.168.176.162 (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The official's whistle merely announces that the down is over. There are some downs in the NFL that end with no whistle blown. The blowing of a whistle will end a down in progress, though: that's why 7-2-1-m is there. The NFHS fundamental is clearer on this: "A game official's whistle seldom kills the ball. It is already dead by rule." (2015 NFHS Football Rules, Football Fundamentals III.1, p. 82) —C.Fred (talk) 17:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

That's a different rule entirely. The NFL rule is beyond clear. The official does not announce the ball is down, it is DECLARED down. I'd also like to know what NFL plays end without whistles being blown that are not a failure to follow rules or defined separately elsewhere.96.2.182.231 (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2016

This article is missing a key football match as you can see in the citation listed below. The first football game played with an oval ball was the second of a two game match between Harvard and McGill University. I believe that the article should be updated to incorporate this information, since, unlike the Harvard Princeton game, this match represented the first definitive break with the English soccer round ball.

https://www.mcgill.ca/channels/news/date-history-first-football-game-was-may-14-1874-106694 GPB875 (talk) 19:29, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:03, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

page edit goal posts

Field and equipment

Goalposts are located at the center of the plane of each of the two end lines. The crossbar of these posts is ten feet (3 meters) above the ground, with vertical uprights at the end of the crossbar 18 feet 6 inches (6 m) apart for professional and collegiate play and 23 feet 4 inches (7 m) apart for high school play.[64][65][66] The uprights extend vertically 35 feet on professional fields, a minimum of 10 yards (30 feet) on college fields, and a minimum of ten feet on high school fields. The plane of the uprights continue upwards to infinity. So a ball that is kicked and passes over the horizontal line created by the tops of the goal post uprights, but within the plane of the uprights, is still good. Goal posts are padded at the base, and orange ribbons are normally placed at the tip of each upright.[64][65][66] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caeastwood79 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2016

27.6.215.131 (talk) 07:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: This is not an edit request. Topher385 (talk) 09:54, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on American football. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061116215456/http://www.profootballhof.com/history/general/birth.jsp to http://www.profootballhof.com/history/general/birth.jsp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303235622/http://uaasnfl.blob.core.windows.net/live/1807/2015_nfl_rule_book_final.pdf to http://uaasnfl.blob.core.windows.net/live/1807/2015_nfl_rule_book_final.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/About%2Bthe%2BNCAA/index.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/about%2Bthe%2Bncaa%2Bold/who%2Bwe%2Bare/differences%2Bamong%2Bthe%2Bdivisions/division%2Bi/about%2Bdivision%2Bi
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Championships/Postseason%2BFootball/Overview
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10240829
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140405230913/http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/01/30/super-bowl-2014-comparing-the-nfls-popularity-in-canada-and-the-u-s/ to http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/01/30/super-bowl-2014-comparing-the-nfls-popularity-in-canada-and-the-u-s/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:09, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on American football. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/01/30/super-bowl-2014-comparing-the-nfls-popularity-in-canada-and-the-u-s/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304084406/http://refereenation.docs.s3.amazonaws.com/2011_NFHS_Football_Rules.pdf to http://refereenation.docs.s3.amazonaws.com/2011_NFHS_Football_Rules.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Lead paragraph

The lead paragraph says:

American football, referred to as football in the United States and Canada, and also known as "gridiron football" or simply "gridiron", is a sport played by two teams of eleven players on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end.

This is incorrect because “American football” is not synonymous with “gridiron football”. For example, Canadian football is another type of gridiron football. I changed it to this:

American football is a sport, referred to as football in the United States and Canada. It is a type of "gridiron football", or simply "gridiron", in which two teams of eleven players compete on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end.

This has been reverted for reasons I don’t understand. Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

It's not inaccurate. "Gridiron" and "gridiron football" are terms often used to refer to American football in other countries (see: Etymology and names). To say they aren't goes against multiple reliable sources. Toa Nidhiki05 16:23, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

You disagree that Canadian football is a form of gridiron football? Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

This issue was recently discussed at Talk:Gridiron football#Requested move 4 October 2017. In summary, the terms "Gridiron" and "gridiron football" are used to refer to both American and Canadian football, and often American football by itself. As such, the original wording is accurate, but we could add a ref note that the term includes both versions so we don't bloat the lead paragraph. - BilCat (talk) 18:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. In view of that info, I suggest this language which seems to clearly describe the situation:

American football is a sport, referred to as football in the United States and Canada. It is a type or synonym of "gridiron football", known also simply as "gridiron", in which two teams of eleven players compete on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end.

I don’t think a ref note is needed, but would not object to one. Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

One problem with what you've written is that the first sentence needs to explain what the subject is, not just what it is called. The original sentence is quite long already, so just combining the two sentences that you've suggested wouldn't help that. That's one reason I suggested a note. - BilCat (talk) 19:35, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

It said in the first sentence that it’s a sport, but things are easily rearranged to say more in the first sentence:

American football is a sport, referred to as football in the United States and Canada, in which two teams of eleven players compete on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end. It is a type or synonym of "gridiron football", known also simply as "gridiron".

I think this is much better than what’s currently in the article, because this new proposed material very clearly and concisely says that American football is both a type and a synonym of gridiron, instead of just saying it’s a synonym. Why just say it’s a synonym and not also say it’s a type? This can be done so concisely in the lead that I don’t see the need for a note, but wouldn’t object to one. Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Again, I really don't like this. The current wording is really fine and just needs a note for clarification - if anything. Your revision is incredibly unclear as to who calls it "gridiron". Toa Nidhiki05 22:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Toa Nidhiki05, the article now says “also known as ‘gridiron football’ or simply ‘gridiron’” and I’m suggesting that be changed to “a type or synonym of ‘gridiron football’, known also simply as ‘gridiron’”. Neither version says who calls it gridiron, right? So could you please clarify your objection? Many people consider American football to be a type of gridiron, whereas many other people consider American football to be a synonym for gridiron, and the version I’m suggesting gets that point across clearly and concisely, unlike the current lead which treats them exclusively as synonyms. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Okay, well, I plan on giving that last version a try, along with a note as Bilcat suggested. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:17, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

You’ve given it a try on the talkpage and nobody else wants it. Toa Nidhiki05 20:39, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

The only one who’s objected to the latest proposal is yourself, and your reason makes no sense, because what’s in the lead now already is “incredibly unclear as to who calls it ‘gridiron’". If you give a reason that makes sense, then I’d be glad to consider it and give it weight. Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I have inserted a note, as User:BilCat suggested above. "Gridiron football" should be in bold in the lead sentence, per WP:Lead which says "significant alternative titles ... are placed in bold". Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:59, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Intro rewrite

I changed the intro to start out:

American football is a team sport played by two teams of eleven players on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end. It is a type of gridiron football closely related to Canadian football, and in both countries either might be referred to as football, gridiron football, or simply gridiron.

@BilCat: Could you explain why you reverted this as being incorrect? I'll note Canadian football says:

In Canada, the term "football" may refer to Canadian football and American football collectively, or to either sport specifically, depending on context.

Thanks! -- Beland (talk) 00:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

It is not "referred to as gridiron football, or simply gridiron" in the US and Canada. - BilCat (talk) 00:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

In addition, the current Lead paragraph was decided by lengthy discussion in the previous section. You really need to discuss it here first and get a consensus before making any changes to it. - BilCat (talk) 00:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@BilCat: If you mean to say those terms are only used in other countries, then how about the following. -- Beland (talk) 01:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

American football is a team sport played by two teams of eleven players on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end. It is a type of gridiron football closely related to Canadian football, and in both countries either might be referred to as football. Both sports are also known as gridiron football or simply gridiron in the rest of the world.

"in some other parts of the world" would probably be better, as "American football" is also used in some countries also. - BilCat (talk) 01:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, does anyone have any concerns with:

American football is a team sport played by two teams of eleven players on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end. It is a type of gridiron football closely related to Canadian football, and in both countries either might be referred to as football. Both sports are also known as gridiron football or simply gridiron in some other parts of the world.

-- Beland (talk) 02:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Updated. -- Beland (talk) 02:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Wrong Title

Chane all instances to football. Americans dont call it that. Its just football. Do we call it Euro football? Why are Euros defining what our sport is called.

Also known as football in United States and Canada. What a joke! America is where the sport was founded. Not an also known. Also known would be for what Euros call it and that would be wrong.24.44.70.67 (talk) 01:56, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Lead picture

Any chance of getting a different picture? [Asking, rather than being bold, since it's a prominent article with GA status; maybe the picture has previously been discussed.] If I knew nothing of this sort, and I saw the picture and read the first sentence, American football...is a team sport played by two teams of eleven players on a rectangular field with goalposts at each end, I would imagine that the player is attempting to throw the ball over or past the yellow posts. A defended player catching a touchdown pass is a good idea for a lead picture, but we ought to use one without uprights nearby. I'm not familiar with the Commons category tree for American football, or I'd suggest a specific image. Nyttend (talk) 02:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 November 2018

I would like to add a disclaimer and a redirect on the top of the page for Soccer in the United States in case non-Americans are confused with American football with American soccer. Ziggy7th (talk) 01:02, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done. There's already a hatnote at the top of the page leading to a disambiguation page. If you want something different there, you need to specify exactly what. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed change in it's status as a Global sport to Popular in North America

American football is nowhere near being a global sport. The only professional league exists within the United States and international participation within the league is minimal. Furthermore the sport wasn't even popular enough to warrant a continental league in europe that was partially financed by the NFL. A global sport should at least have more than one pro lague. SWAGnificient (talk) 18:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

See this discussion. This has been discussed before. There are indeed other professional and semi-pro leagues in other countries, and the sport broadly has a presence worldwide. Toa Nidhiki05 19:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You're confusing popularity with "Presence", which is what the section heading clearly says. As the hidden note states, "According to the template, this section is suppose to list ALL geographic areas the sport is present in the broadest possible terms". This has nothing to do with professional leagues only, nor is it a claim of being a "global sport". It's merely a statement of presence in any form, as is cited in the article. - BilCat (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The way it is worded now, gives the impression that AF is similarly popular in europe and japan as it is in america. Which is categorically false. Propose change to Most popular in United States and Canada, which is clearly the most correct statement SWAGnificient (talk) 22:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

That's because you don't want to see a difference between "presence" and "popularity". If you don't like the Infobox's wording, get it changed there. Until then, we're going to follow what it actually says, not what you think it says,what you think it ought to say. - BilCat (talk) 22:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The current wording exists because the sport has active leagues in North America, Europe, and Japan. Honestly that might even be worth removing since few, if any, other sports have similar wording. But as-is the text is entirely clear and in keeping with guidelines. Toa Nidhiki05 22:47, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

How else are they going to use the "World Champion" moniker when they win the Superbowl yet again! 194.207.86.26 (talk) 12:52, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Like how the “World Series” of baseball, a global sport, is exclusively between US and Canadian teams? Toa Nidhiki05 13:26, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

that's 3 for the removal and change of current wording. SWAGnificient (talk) 20:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

You are literally making shit up. Me and BilCat and long-standing consensus here rejected this. It's just you, buddy, and I'd advise you not my page ever again. Toa Nidhiki05 21:13, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but I've retired, partly because of fools like this who don't or can't understand the difference between popularity and presence. You should probably take him to ANI for being tendentious, and vandalizing your user page, which also violates WP:POINT. - BilCat (talk) 23:34, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

NFL fanboys need to get real!

wake up and smell the cofee! the NFL is not popular outside the US! it's a fact of life but apparently it doesn't matter how many articles and studies anyone brings up, it get reverted by unobjective fanboys. SWAGnificient (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

We have actual sources in the body that say otherwise and your additions are extremely poor in quality both in prose and interpretation. Additionally, as was said above in the previous thread, the infobox has nothing to do with "popularity". If a sport is played in any capacity on a continent it counts, and American football has a presence on every continent. I would suggest you self-revert and stop editing in this topic area, as clearly you are incapable of behaving rationally here, as evidenced by you vandalizing my user page. Toa Nidhiki05 21:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

the infobox has nothing to do with "popularity". If a sport is played in any capacity on a continent it counts, and American football has a presence on every continent.

show me another sports page where these rules apply. it's only for this page and your fantasy. SWAGnificient (talk) 22:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

As has been explained to you before, it's in the infobox rules.

Geographic area(s) the sport is present. Use the largest geographic area(s) that apply.

Self-revert now, please. Toa Nidhiki05 22:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

will not revert. it's misleading in prior form. it's not a global sport. multiple attempts have been made to correct or even remove false and misleading statements, but you 2 fanboys are desperate to make it a global sport. there isn't even a professional league outside the US. it tops out at semi pro leagues no one cares about. SWAGnificient (talk) 22:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

btw it still states that it's a sport has a worldwide presence. the mention of it being most prominent in the US doesn't negate that fact. it gives better context.SWAGnificient (talk) 22:25, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Per the ANI discussion, "most prominent in North America, Europe and Japan" has been removed. Is there some problem with saying "most prominent in the United States"? The issue of excessive detail raised at ANI may focus on Europe and Japan (while there are leagues there, they're their regions' major sports in no sense), but unless the infobox criteria says "don't focus on any region for worldwide sports", it doesn't at all seem excessive if we just say "most prominent in the United States". Nyttend (talk) 22:49, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

The primary issue here is that the infobox criteria say nothing about prominence. It's a misuse of the template to do that. The infobox criteria is simply that the sport is played in any capacity, and to use the broadest possible definition. By that standard there's no reason to have a disclaimer or modifier there. A better location might be to summarize in the lede better, which I will attempt to do. Toa Nidhiki05 22:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

OK, if the infobox isn't supposed to be used that way, that's fine. Nyttend (talk) 23:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Odd isn't it when i did this it was considered disruptive editing by these fanboys and when i added THE FACT WITH SOURCES that the sport is not as popular outside the US i got reported. and no one took the time to look at what i edited or the sources provided. apparently. repeating a lie enough times makes it real for you disruptive backwards fandboys. SWAGnificient (talk) 18:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

High School Play Clock

Under "Duration and Time Stoppages", the information about the play clock should be updated to reflect the adoption of the 40-second play clock in high school football for the 2019 season. Source: https://www.nfhs.org/articles/40-second-play-clock-postseason-instant-replay-among-football-changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:8C30:7980:8428:D99A:ACF7:80B (talk) 01:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Excess detail about player stances

Is there a need, in this article, to talk about pre-position stances? If so, how do we make sure the information is up to date? I deleted several long, recently-added passages of text that indicate that offensive linemen work out of the three-point stance. Many linemen, particularly when the quarterback is in shotgun, use a two-point stance. —C.Fred (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I made those edits. I did mention that offensive linemen also used the two-point stance. I feel that the information was concisely stated. I inferred from your previous comment that you would like to see some expansion on the use of the two-point stance, so this is what I did in order to achieve concensus. I do feel that this information on stance and the play from scrimmage is important because it's such an important part of the game. The line of scrimmage is also something that is visually very recognisable and people who are new to the game will probably be able to connect with more readily. So I think to elaborate on why some people are crouched on hands and feet and some are in a standing/semi-crouched posture is reasonable, and also useful in regard to understanding the nature of the gameplay and the roles players have. RickyBennison (talk) 22:50, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

The problem is multiple here. One, this is a top-level article. I basically exists to just give the absolute basics of football. The way players arrange their hands before the snap doesn't qualify as that, in my opinion. Another problem is that some of this is uncited: this is a good article that I intend to bring to featured article, but it's also the top-level article for football. This requires scrutiny that every statement is cited. Overall I really don't think this brings a ton of value for the average reader here, but it could very well be useful in other articles about linemen specifically, for example. Toa Nidhiki05 23:01, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Note not clear?

Where exactly did you get the info in hb1? It doesn't have a ref, unless I noticed wrong. Maccore Henni _{Mii! Pictochat Mii!} 17:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Never mind. Just looked at it. But I have another question: how do you make a nb note like in this article? Maccore Henni _{Mii! Pictochat Mii!} 17:35, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Regarding reversion of my revision...

If you want to claim this sport is the most popular in the United States, then cite the statistic that you said the article used as reference as a footnote next to the asinine statement. Jason.cinema (talk) 00:33, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Citations are not used in the lead. The claim is cited in the appropriate section of the article. Toa Nidhiki05 01:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2020

an american football field is 100 yards long, not 120 Oofergang 21 (talk) 03:10, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: 120 including the end zones. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:19, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

the text in the article could be written in a way that is less "win a bar bet" pedantic/confusing. It seems to go out of its way to avoid "100" by only suggesting that you have to subtract 10 yards twice. I mean if you want to be pedantic, the article should mention that the NFL (and all other leagues) also has requirements for ample room to run out of bounds so you don't get injured by running into something. If you want to be pedantic and also precise, each side has a side line, but "the sidelines" actually refers to the area outside the two side lines. nobody crosses "the sidelines", you cross "a side line" and then find yourself "on the sidelines" 98.7.201.234 (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on April 30 2020

The lead sentence claims that the sport is known as "gridiron" and it's not; only the field is. And the [nb 1] contains citations that back up what I am saying and not what the article is claiming. 98.7.201.234 (talk) 18:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

See Gridiron football. - BilCat (talk) 14:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2020

Could someone simplify "Full-contact" to just "Full". As it already says Contact on the side/table. Thanks! 83.187.165.93 (talk) 12:24, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The list of contact types linked to suggests that writing out “full-contact” is appropriate. — Tartan357  ^(Talk) 13:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The template docs have this for the field: "Is this a contact sport? Typical values are No or Yes, though something more specific could be put here (e.g. With feet only, etc.)". —C.Fred (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Article is lacking modern history

The article contains much about the rules of the game but lacks information about recent events. No mention of Joe Montana, Tom Brady, or other greats of the game. In my opinion the article should contain more about these subjects as well as moments like specific Super Bowls and signature moments (Dwight Clark's catch) (The Immaculate Reception). These can serve to make the article a bit more interesting as well as be informative, not just a collection of rules and regulations. Benberg11 (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

This article is not about the history of American football. The article that covers that is History of American football, which is a featured article. This article is only an introduction to the sport, similar to the pages for other sports. There is, of course, mention of history here, but once we get past the formative years and early mergers there's not need for much more. Toa Nidhiki05 23:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 September 2021

NFL is NOT the most watch club event that is the UEFA Champions League from Football/soccer. And the most valued league in the world is the English premier league from football/soccer, not NFL. Infomerchant (talk) 07:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. BilCat (talk) 08:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Infobox subheading edit request

The infobox subheading, "Highest governing body ... International Federation of American Football" is requested to be edited to read, "Highest **AMATEUR-LEVEL** governing body ... International Federation of American Football", along with a request that both the NFL and NCAA are added in separate infobox subheadings as the highest governing bodies at the professional and collegiate levels, respectively. Both of these subheadings should be listed above the listing for what should only be the Highest *Amateur-level* governing body, the IFAF.

The infobox, as currently configured, ignores the fact that both the National Football League (NFL), along with collegiate-based NCAA Football, both headquartered in the United States, are and have been, the sources of the highest level of play of the sport of American Football--far and away, operating at the forefront of historical and operational development from the founding level, over a 100+ year lifespan. To have to even point this out here is nothing short of ridiculous. Furthermore, to singularly designate the IFAF, headquartered in Paris, France of all places, a *thoroughly amateur-level* league organized only very recently in 1998, as the "highest governing body" of the sport of American Football, to the glaring exclusion of the actual long-time keepers of the flame, is the very definition of surreal.

Yes, one may be aware that the well-established and deep-pocketed NFL provides some support to the IFAF (mainly through their support of the US national IFAF team) and to other organizations, as the NFL has a direct stake in what they hope will someday be a world-wide proliferation of the sport. However, the NFL is in no way subordinate to the IFAF, either in practice or description. The infobox in this article is in severe need of a change to better reflect both the reality of primary governance and historical proprietorship concerning this sport. 71.112.240.132 (talk) 00:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

The edit content, time stamp and the identity of the editor who first cited the IFAF in the infobox is as follows:

"| union = IFAF" "Revision as of 18:54, 20 April 2017 (view source) 2804:d59:269d:8200:98fb:e736:17c8:d0ee (talk)". So, it appears that some anonymous editor quietly inserted this infobox template edit without first attempting preliminary discussion in the Talk, labels it "Highest governing body", without even defining the modifier "highest" in this context and it isn't even questioned by the ranking editors? I thought 'consensus' was the operative term when it comes to editing WP. So, where's the consensus here? 71.112.240.132 (talk) 22:35, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Canada in Lead

For those who don't know, American football is actually played as a high school sport in British Columbia, Canada, where it is known as "football" [1], not American football. Whether or not other codes of football are known and played in Canada is totally irrelevant. BilCat (talk) 06:16, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Joeeluff.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2022

American football page's been incorrectly edited to remove the Canadian invention of the game and removed the actual first game using McGill rules (modern football not using feet and throwing the ball with modern team sizes and composition)

https://www.rcinet.ca/en/2015/05/14/history-may-14-1874-how-canada-created-american-football/#:~:text=While%20Canadian%20James%20Naismith%20invented,a%20game%20developed%20in%20Canada. 45.72.196.117 (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. BilCat (talk) 18:42, 12 February 2022 (UTC)