JeepinBen

November 15th, 2010 at 3:27 PM ^

I also dont know why they changed the field from how it faced when Da Bears played at wrigley (bottom pic) but my guess is with the subtle field dimension changes recently the field didn't fit that way either - seats along both baselines have grown onto the playing surface. 

Wish I could go, should be interesting. Hope there's a lot of padding in Right Field

Joined: 01/22/2010

MGoPoints: 32224

MGoBender

November 15th, 2010 at 3:28 PM ^

This is literally against NCAA rules and field requirements which means they had to petition for the NCAA's approval to do this.

And the NCAA let them.  I wonder why....

Joined: 03/26/2010

MGoPoints: 15128

dennisblundon

November 15th, 2010 at 3:29 PM ^

This will not turn out well. I hope I am wrong for the sake of the players but how about putting some padding on those walls instead of All State advertising. Kind of ironic if you think about it.

Joined: 02/23/2010

MGoPoints: 9613

ixcuincle

November 15th, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^

Really should have been modeled after the last black-and-white image.

Wonder if a similar thing exists at the New Yankees Stadium for their Army - ND game

Joined: 08/11/2010

MGoPoints: 6753

Flying Dutchman

November 15th, 2010 at 3:32 PM ^

Sun could have been a factor in field configuration.   This way, its going to be obscured by the grandstand for the entire game and won't get in anybody's eyes.   This game will be entirely dependent on the lights at Wrigley.    Wrigleyville is going to be apeshit - I wish I was going to be closer.

Joined: 09/16/2009

MGoPoints: 11415

bklein09

November 15th, 2010 at 3:35 PM ^

I saw this a couple days ago, I really cannot believe that this is being allowed.

I mean I understand the idea of having a game at Wrigley, but at the expense of player safety? 

I wonder if something like this would fly in the NFL with the players' union and such. I have to believe that they would put up a huge objection. 

But for some reason its okay for college kids, 95% of whom don't have futures in football.

Now I know that things will probably go off without a hitch, as I'm sure players/teams will be sure to avoid that part of the endzone.

But I can't help but think about what happens when an outfielder crashes into the wall and nearly kills themselves.

Now imagine that same scenario with a football player diving head first for a football and two guys trying to tackle him in the process.

Dangerous!

Joined: 08/24/2009

MGoPoints: 7121

MichiganStudent

November 15th, 2010 at 3:38 PM ^

Not sure if its 95% but point taken. This could end poorly. Either way, if its injury or the wall impeding a touchdown/interception. Imagine Santonio Holmes catch in the Superbowl where he had to lay out and catch it while keeping his feet in (it was off to the side, but I think you get the point). I don't think this wall would have let that happen. 

Joined: 08/27/2008

MGoPoints: 7223

bklein09

November 15th, 2010 at 5:13 PM ^

Actually, between Northwestern and Illinois I doubt if more than 5% of their players have a future in professional football, especially a couple of years down the road. 

I guess I could be wrong if you count Canadian, European, etc Leagues. But the number of college athletes that are able to make a career in their sports is extremely small.

Joined: 08/24/2009

MGoPoints: 7121

MGoBender

November 15th, 2010 at 9:26 PM ^

Michigan has had 335 players drafted since 1937.  That's approximately 4.6 per year.  From Michigan.  The winningest program in the nation and the program with the fifth most draftees ever.

Far, far, far less than 5% of college football players will have NFL careers.

http://www.drafthistory.com/n_college/college_n.html

 

EDIT: Even simpler:

There's 7 rounds in the draft.  7 x 32 = 224 players drafted.

There are 120 Div I teams.  230 x 105 = 12,600

224 / 12600 = 1.78%

And that's not even including FBS and other divisions; though it also doesn't count undrafted players.  However, I think the number of undrafted players that have what most would consider "NFL careers" is probably equivalent to the number of FBS players that have NFL careers, so the effect on the 1.78% is probably negligible.  On the other hand, if you include all divisions (and why shouldn't you?) the number becomes fractions of fractions of a percent.

Joined: 03/26/2010

MGoPoints: 15128