Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

Infobox NFL team sprawl

Looking at Chicago Bears, it seems that Template:Infobox NFL team is getting too long with less notable lists like the team's historical list of owners and presidents. They don't seem more notable than head coaches and GMs, and comes off as worshipping organizational hierachy. Certainly useful information, which I suggest moving into the body and sourcing (eventually). Then we can remove the parameters from the infobox.—Bagumba (talk) 03:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

• Support: I do agree that we shouldn't include the full owner and president history in the team infoboxes like that. I do think though that we could possibly wikilink some of the listed personnel to a list of the team's personnel, if it exists. For example, on Green Bay Packers, linking General manager to List of Green Bay Packers presidents, head coach to List of Green Bay Packers head coaches, president to List of Green Bay Packers presidents, etc., while still listing the active person in that role beside it. That would be one way to still provide that info, if it's available. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
• Support that is what the lists are for. What is next a list of head coaches? Imagine if all of the countries had a list of monarchs and prime ministers in their infobox?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 15:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
• Support but only if the ownership information is preserved in the article body, like what I've done here with the Washington Commanders. I'm indifferent on maintaining a list of team presidents, as they are a hired position that aren't notable in most cases (could any of you name 10 active ones without looking it up?). A list of general managers would make more sense. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

• Actually, I'm going to redo the list of NFL franchise owners page and add the same information under individual team headers. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  @Dissident93: That article was actually on my to do list to rework and nominate for featured list status, so I'm open to working on it with you. But, based on your description, I think maybe a List of NFL franchise owners and List of current NFL franchise owners might be useful as different lists. That way we could have an "at a glance" for current ones and a full historical page for all that info. Thoughts? Hey man im josh (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  I was actually thinking it would be best to prominently list the team's current owner first and then list the ownership history below. Having two articles makes more sense if we decide to list them in chronological order with notes on each (if possible) like the Commanders example. But anything is better than the current status of the article. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  List of current NFL head coaches and List of NFL head coaches provides a precedent for the layout that Hey man im josh is proposing. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:08, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  I love the idea of all the information in one place, but I do worry that if we include it ALL in one list, the entire ownership histories, we'd be doing a disservice to readers. I expect that they'd be normally searching for a current list first and foremost with the historical list of owners being a secondary thought. We could strike a good balance I think. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  For my first example, I was imagining a smaller condensed table for the previous owners that omitted prose and only included years owned, purchase price, and team achievements overseen. The current owner would be the one with a historical summary of their ownership that includes all of the above. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  Purchase price was a difficult aspect for me when I was brainstorming about the owners list in the past. I thought about an acquired column instead of purchase price, where you could state it was inherited or purchased, and use either notes to include how that happened (at least when thinking about the "current" list) or an extra column. I'd think for a historical list you'd simply include a notes column that gives you the info instead of using notes themselves for that info, based on the goals of such lists. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  Another thing I'd like to work is changing the scope of Glazer ownership of Manchester United to include their Bucs ownership. Glazer family redirecting to Malcolm Glazer, somebody who has been dead for 10 years, isn't ideal. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

  I'd support the scope change, however, the article is already promoted to good article status... that makes it a little more difficult of a sell. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

  Maybe then a subsection on Malcolm page? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Support: Yeah these seem a bit much to include in infoboxes. I agree with Dissident93 that the info should be in the body in a table. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

If a player has only played in college, can it be made into an article?

There are a few players that did not player or even make an NFL team yet they have Wikipedia pages. Is it important enough or no? WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

They can have independent articles if they meet WP:GNG. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

OK, so should I start it as a draft then, rather than just making a page? WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Not a bad idea to start it in draft space if you are unsure. I do that often. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

How did this look? Michael Geiger (American football) WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I'd remove the cookie-cutter prose listing his stats which are already listed in the table below and get rid of the professional section since he clearly never played or even tried out for a pro team. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated List of Minnesota Vikings starting quarterbacks for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Standardized naming for Category:American football team records and statistics

Within WP:NFL we have a tiny mess regarding the naming of lists related to records and statistics, as well as awards. Some examples:

• List of Green Bay Packers records
• Minnesota Vikings statistics
• List of Carolina Panthers records and statistics
• List of Chicago Bears team records

Regarding awards, we have:

• Baltimore Ravens awards
• List of Chicago Bears award winners

I propose we standardize these in the following ways:

• List of *TEAM* team records (i.e. List of Green Bay Packers team records): this clarifies the content of each list, which is "team records" and not an indiscriminate list of statistics
• List of *TEAM* award winners (i.e. List of Green Bay Packers award winners): this also clarifies the content of each list, which is a list of award winners (not a list of team awards)

Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Unless anyone objects in the next few days, I plan to make the moves as non-controversial. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

I support standardization. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Also lending my support. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 03:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

All cleaned up now. Moved to Category:NFL team records and Category:NFL team award winners. All pages moved. Created the {{NFL team records}} template to keep them organized as a whole set. The pages are all in a pretty sad state, and we only have 14/32 created, if anyone is interested in a project. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

When does the season begin?

I changed the description of the 2024 NFL season in the infobox of National Football League, from current season to upcoming season, but my change has been rejected to. When does an NFL season begin? GoodDay (talk) 20:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Interesting question. The NFL has "league years", and based on this it would appear that the 2024-2025 league year began June 17 with the first official deadline for certain transactions. That said, you could argue the actual "season" begins with the first game and ends with the last game. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: I believe the league year actually starts in March. The link you shared, I believe, updates, given that the draft and other significant events are no longer listed. If you scroll down to 12-Mar, you'll see that it says "The 2025 League Year and Free Agency signing period begin at 4:00 p.m., New York time." Hey man im josh (talk) 15:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

What josh said haha « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I've found a number of other sources on. It began March 13 this year as well, per the Giants, the Raiders, the Chiefs, Sports Illustrated, etc. It's probably regularly scheduled to be March 13, but that's just a pure guess based on it matching between last year and this. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I reverted you once, mostly because in my past experience, the "current season" parameter in the infoboxes on team articles as well as on the NFL article has been updated when the new league year starts, so that's what I've gone by.

However, it's a good question. Whether league year and season are the same. All team season pages currently talk about the 2024 season being the "upcoming" season for a team, and we still consider this time period before the preseason to be offseason. It's all a minor thing, but if we're going to say that the 2024 season hasn't started yet we'll also have to change Template:Infobox NFL team with a parameter for upcoming season for consistency, as they all say "Current season". KristofferAG (talk) 12:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Personally I'd prefer upcoming season only be used between the conclusion of the Super Bowl and March 13th, since that's when free agency begins. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Disagreement on the "We want the ball" game

Hello, looking for some help and consensus on a disagreement between Clarityfiend and myself regarding my recently created article "We want the ball and we're going to score!". First, I agree with their assessment that the article title should not have punctuation in it, so whenever this is resolved, happy to fix that and clean-up after the move. The crux of the issue though seems to focus on whether the eponymous name of this topic refers to the game itself, or just the comment by Hasselbeck. From my perspective, this game is notable for a few reasons: its the playoffs, it was the first consequential game in the team's rivalry, it was a competitive game, it went to overtime and then obviously what really did it was Hasselbeck's comment and then subsequent interception returned for a TD. I did consider just naming the article 2004 NFC Wild Card playoff game (Seattle–Green Bay), but that is clearly not its WP:COMMONNAME. Also, although the comment by Hasselbeck is obviously important, the actual play that is most notable is the interception returned for a TD. As I mentioned to Clarityfiend, this game was ranked as the 72nd greatest game in NFL history, so the game appears notable (noting that every source provides an overview of the game itself, not just the comment made by Hasselbeck). For assistance, Clarityfiend is proposing changing the opening lines to this version. I do not support that change because the topic of the article is not Hasselbeck's comment, its the NFL game that occurred in which he made his comment. Thank you for any assistance you can provide. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Can you provide any sources calling/naming the game itself "We want the ball and we're going to score!"?

I've never heard the game itself referred to directly as "WWtBaWGS". That's the problem with the current lead sentence, and I agree with the other user that it's awkward phrasing. The "WWtBaWGS" game... would be better.

The "We want the ball and we're going to score!" game was the 2004 NFC Wild Card playoff game between the...

Or have the lead sentence describe the phrase and then the rest of the lead and the article describe the game, as their edit does.

Article title is a separate matter that can be decided later through WP:RM.

PK-WIKI (talk) PK-WIKI (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

PackersNews.com is titled "'We want the ball and we're gonna score!': Looking back at Packers-Seahawks classic". I think the point about moving the article would resolve the main concerns, because the first sentence would likely no longer have a bolded title in it. I think the point I want to get across though, is that the topic of the article is the game itself, not Hasselbeck's comment. Had the game ended in a Packers' field goal or some other non-dramatic way that included Hasselbeck, its likely the game doesn't get anywhere close to the coverage it has gotten. Note that we typically try to avoid (at least in my experience) repeating what the topic is, so The "WWtBaWGS" game...was a game is not preferred. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the sourcing is there to name the game itself "WWtBaWGS". That phrase is often used as a "headline" for articles about the game, but I doubt we would ever see the game itself described as such in prose without being wrapped as "The WWtBaWGS game".

Note that I have no problem with the article title being "WWtBaWGS". Just that the lead sentence should be phrased with "The WWtBaWGS game" or describe the statement by Hasselbeck or some other solution like that. Likewise I have no problem with the article describing the full game + statement, rather than just the statement.

PK-WIKI (talk) 21:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Taken from Gonzo's talk page: The phrase is the proper name of the article, since that is what people remember (though there should not be quotes - see Category:Quotations and particularly Category:Quotations from sports). So really, this should be a quotation article, not a game one. And, as I have just noticed, A drive into deep left field by Castellanos uses pretty much the exact same phrasing as I did. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC) – While I don't have an opinion on the article title, I disagree with Clarityfiend on what the focus of the article should be. Those are two entirely different situations and, despite a quote from each being notable, they're not really comparable. I agree that the focus should be on the game, but I'd find it perfectly acceptable to expand aftermath section. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)