For. Nice article. Zeitgeist 14:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
For. I'm not a fan of the sport. But I get what the article is about - it doesn't take much effort - and found it funny. Plus, most of the misgivings I had about it in last year's PLS have been recently addressed, making it a very good article. --UU - natter10:02, Apr 29
Against. I really like the idea, but there's too much wrong with this. No links, the tone is inconsistent, and the 11-wide formation is clearly a punt-block defense. If this is fixed up then it's got my vote for sure, but as it stands now no way. —SirGuildensternenstein 18:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Against. I just didn't lol, sorry RAHB. -OptyCSucks! CUN14:35, 29 Apr
Comments
Comment. The 11-wide image has got to be replaced with a chop showing that formation facing a defense and not an obvious offensive unit.-- 04:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I was hoping no one would notice that... -RAHB 06:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Could always use a caption instead e.g. "....while a confused defence attempts a goal line block on the offensive 37-yard line" or something of that sort. IronLung 06:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I'll look into a chop for you, the key is finding the right two pictures....and lots of steamy cloning tool action. Perhaps something like this. Just needs a minor caption rewrite about #9 FLA stunning #1 LSU early and often with the 11-wide.-- 10:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. Don't watch NFL. Fan of real balls. ---kun "whisper sweet nothings into thine ear..." 15:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. Don't watch NFL, so can't say the joke NFaiL'd... like that one :/ --SirDJ~Irreverent 11:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. Always preferred baseball myself, don't know enough about football, yadda yadda yadda, don't get the joke. --You know what the music means...Our time is up. 20:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment. I do like that prospective new image though. —SirGuildensternenstein 18:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment DrS has done it again, and I'm adding his image to the article. The one there already though, while clearly being a defense running the supposed play, is one that I actually did myself using the same method as DrS did for his. The problem was that I had only noticed my error in chopping the wrong side when it was too late, the PLS deadline looming at the time. Not, as the source image clearly shows, a mere picture of a punt block. -RAHB 19:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. No idea about this. Need to know the game better to understand it . Like perhaps the Brits writing about the LBW rule in Cricket. --Romartus 19:46, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment As I said during PLS time, football is a mind-numbingly simple sport, and there's only a few things you need to know about it to "get" this article. A quarterback throws the ball, a receiver receives or catches the ball, a running back runs, and everyone else stands around and beats the living shit out of each other. The rest is explained well enough in the article. -RAHB 06:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
And, all of the basic American Football terms have been blue-linked to Wiki-pee for non-fanatics or those unfamiliar with the sport to reference. Anyone who understands rugby knows what running the ball or passing the ball entails-- 08:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment. Someone tell me if it has any typos and obvious badness. If not, why not put it on front page? StyleGuide 14:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
The nomination was not successful. rm, low health (27%)SirModusoperandiBoinc! This article did not pass VFH and was removed on 21:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC). This page is now archived; do not edit it, it will have no effect.
Nom & for. The ultimate tactical formation! 
Abstain. No idea about this. Need to know the game better to understand it . Like perhaps the Brits writing about the LBW rule in Cricket. --
