NFL Thread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
mikal said:
Any overtime that doesn’t involve both teams having a chance on offense is unacceptable.

Not saying the NFL needs to completely copy College rules, but that seems like the best option.
Click to expand...
They had the WHOLE GAME to try and win. It's not as if a coin toss decided the game... the entirety of the game decided the game.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
They had the WHOLE GAME to try and win. It's not as if a coin toss decided the game... the entirety of the game decided the game.
Click to expand...



So did the Patriots and they weren’t able to win in regulation either. The coin toss gave them one extra possession. Overtime needs to be an even playing ground where both offenses have a chance to touch the ball.
 
mikal said:
So did the Patriots and they weren’t able to win in regulation either. The coin toss gave them one extra possession. Overtime needs to be an even playing ground where both offenses have a chance to touch the ball.
Click to expand...
This is saying that offense is more important than defense, rather than each being equally important.

Kansas City could have stopped the pats from scoring. They didn't.
 
LuckyNumber7 said:
Ok so what you’re saying here is that if a game is close both teams are inherently at fault for not doing more to win in regulation.
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is that too much emphasis is being placed on a small number of plays vs the entire game.

The Chiefs had plenty of opportunities to play better and not have to worry about a coin toss. It's silly to say that the toss cost them the game vs, oh I don't know, putting up a goose egg in the first half at home.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
What I'm saying is that too much emphasis is being placed on a small number of plays vs the entire game.

The Chiefs had plenty of opportunities to play better and not have to worry about a coin toss. It's silly to say that the toss cost them the game vs, oh I don't know, putting up a goose egg in the first half at home.
Click to expand...



If a 0-0 game goes into OT and the winner scores a TD, sure, that’s valid.

If the game is 49-49 and scoring is normal, that’s stupid.

It wouldn’t make sense if baseball were sudden death. It wouldn’t make sense if basketball were a 1 minute overtime where if you made a 3 it was over.

Football is a complex sport where both offense and defense matter. By flipping a coin in the playoffs to determine which team in a tied matchup is better and awarding one team the choice to play to their strength to outright end the game, you’re not determining which team is better. You’re just getting on with the match (which makes sense in the regular season!).
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
What I'm saying is that too much emphasis is being placed on a small number of plays vs the entire game.

The Chiefs had plenty of opportunities to play better and not have to worry about a coin toss. It's silly to say that the toss cost them the game vs, oh I don't know, putting up a goose egg in the first half at home.
Click to expand...



I’m thinking more big picture. I agree that both teams could have played better at certain points of the game to avoid a tiebreaker. I just want the tiebreaker to be more fair and quite frankly, more exciting. Put both teams at the 50 (like college rules except move them back 25 yards) and that would be freaking awesome. Imagine if we were lucky enough to be treated to 2 or 3 more possessions each last night.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Does it make sense for hockey?

I don't really care if they keep it or switch it. But the outcry over how ehrmagad it cost them ze game is fucking stupid
Click to expand...



Ok yeah this is where I totally agree with you. It shouldn’t be an outrage, just more of a good example of why a better system would work better.
 
I don't understand why it's not just a regular extra ten minutes. Then next score wins. I've never understood that. Football is a game that requires both sides to really show a whole picture, imo.
 
I could care less about the OT system. It's ok as it is.

What I do care about are phantom roughing calls. It's one thing for the refs to miss something they should have caught. Quite another to call roughing a QB when it wasn't even close.

How do you call something you didn't even see -- especially on a game winning drive in OT?

I'd rather they not call something they should, rather than invent calls that don't exist. But that's me.
 
bono_212 said:
I don't understand why it's not just a regular extra ten minutes. Then next score wins. I've never understood that. Football is a game that requires both sides to really show a whole picture, imo.
Click to expand...



I do understand that football is a full contact sport and during the regular season they want to limit wear and tear.

In the playoffs I agree. No sudden death.
 
mikal said:
Ok yeah this is where I totally agree with you. It shouldn’t be an outrage, just more of a good example of why a better system would work better.
Click to expand...
:up:

The team that wins the coin toss wins 54% of the time. That's an advantage, sure - but it's not this huge OH MY GOD IT'S SOOOOOOOOO UNFAIR LEAVE BRITTANY ALONE advantage that people make it out to be every time someone scores on the first drive.

it also tends to be more of an outrage when it works in the advantage of the team that people don't like.

You wanna change it? Change it. But let's stop hyperventilating about how unfair it is when the advantage gained a historically, is minimal.
 
Mac_Fly said:
What I do care about are phantom roughing calls. It's one thing for the refs to miss something they should have caught. Quite another to call roughing a QB when it wasn't even close.

How do you call something you didn't even see -- especially on a game winning drive in OT?

.
Click to expand...
Let's use some facts, shall we?

The roughing call didn't happen in OT, it happened with 7:05 left in the 4th on a 2nd down play with the score 21-17. There were 24 more points scored in the 4th quarter after that penalty.
So yes it was a bad call, ref as was noted by Gene Steratore was behind the QB (where he is supposed to be) and from his angle it apparently looked like Jones' swipe came down on Brady's helmet/facemask.
But let's not make it out like that play was what cost the Chiefs the game.
 
Especially when there were plenty of missed flags on both sides.

As for OT, I’m fine with it as is. The Saints, with a HOF QB, got the ball first in their game, and they couldn’t win it. It’s not just the coin toss.
 
Hewson said:
Let's use some facts, shall we?

The roughing call didn't happen in OT, it happened with 7:05 left in the 4th on a 2nd down play with the score 21-17. There were 24 more points scored in the 4th quarter after that penalty.
So yes it was a bad call, ref as was noted by Gene Steratore was behind the QB (where he is supposed to be) and from his angle it apparently looked like Jones' swipe came down on Brady's helmet/facemask.
But let's not make it out like that play was what cost the Chiefs the game.
Click to expand...

Ok, so it was getting rather late in the 4th. Still was a horrible call and we can't say whether that cost the Chiefs the game or not because dynamics shift on things like this. But I do tire of Brady getting sneezed on and the resulting flag that ensues (don't pretend this hasn't happened over and over -- I'm a Dolphin fan and I've seen the Pats twice a year since forever).

If it's not as big a deal to you then so be it. Sure, had the KC player not lined up offside the Chiefs would have won, then the phantom roughing call would only warrant a mild eye roll. But I believe that penalty played a huge part of the final outcome.

Basically for the SB we have two great teams competing for the Championship this year, but two teams that really shouldn't be there.
 
Mac_Fly said:
Ok, so it was getting rather late in the 4th. Still was a horrible call and we can't say whether that cost the Chiefs the game or not because dynamics shift on things like this. But I do tire of Brady getting sneezed on and the resulting flag that ensues (don't pretend this hasn't happened over and over -- I'm a Dolphin fan and I've seen the Pats twice a year since forever).

If it's not as big a deal to you then so be it. Sure, had the KC player not lined up offside the Chiefs would have won, then the phantom roughing call would only warrant a mild eye roll. But I believe that penalty played a huge part of the final outcome.

Basically for the SB we have two great teams competing for the Championship this year, but two teams that really shouldn't be there.
Click to expand...

Check this list out:

Roughing the Passer By Quarterback - NFL Penalty Stats Tracker - List/Statistics/Data of NFL Penalties - 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018

Sort it by roughing the passer calls per 100 attempts, most to least and you'll see Brady shows up 28th out of the 46 QB's who've played at least 40 games the past 10 years at 0.42 roughing calls per 100 dropbacks.
By contrast Ryan Tannehill benefits from the call 7th most frequently over the past decade at 0.76 roughings per 100 dropbacks.

So maybe you've seen the Pats twice a year, but you're wrong, you're looking at things through teal colored glasses.
I've watched every game of Brady's career, less the odd portion of the occasional game I've had to listen to on radio while in the car, he doesn't get the preferential treatment fans of opposing teams are so convinced he does.

Thanks for playing.
 
Hewson said:
It does when the team you are rooting against wins.
Click to expand...



If I could separate from this narrative though, I’ve been pulling for a change to Overtime rules to mirror College for probably 20 years, so my argument has nothing to do with the desired result of Sunday night’s game.
 
mikal said:
If I could separate from this narrative though, I’ve been pulling for a change to Overtime rules to mirror College for probably 20 years, so my argument has nothing to do with the desired result of Sunday night’s game.
Click to expand...

You're more the exception than the rule.
 
Hewson said:
Check this list out:

Roughing the Passer By Quarterback - NFL Penalty Stats Tracker - List/Statistics/Data of NFL Penalties - 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018

Sort it by roughing the passer calls per 100 attempts, most to least and you'll see Brady shows up 28th out of the 46 QB's who've played at least 40 games the past 10 years at 0.42 roughing calls per 100 dropbacks.
By contrast Ryan Tannehill benefits from the call 7th most frequently over the past decade at 0.76 roughings per 100 dropbacks.

So maybe you've seen the Pats twice a year, but you're wrong, you're looking at things through teal colored glasses.
I've watched every game of Brady's career, less the odd portion of the occasional game I've had to listen to on radio while in the car, he doesn't get the preferential treatment fans of opposing teams are so convinced he does.

Thanks for playing.
Click to expand...

There was a recent article on ESPN that looked into various common conceptions about the Pats and attempted to verify or debunk them, and they came to the same conclusion as you did on this one. It’s factually not true that Brady gets so many calls compared to the league average. Even if you look specifically at his playoff games, he’s hardly the biggest beneficiary of these types of calls.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Digital Spy 2
I am back
Replies
2
Views
272
Digital Spy 2
Digital Spy 2
C
Will Larry Return to U2?
Replies
14
Views
349
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
Janet H
  • Sticky
Forum Update - We're back! Ask your questions here.
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Popmartijn
Popmartijn
pacemaker
New Album Discussion 10 - Songs of Sir, this is a Wendy's, durr
52 53 54
Replies
2K
Views
77K
Hewson
Hewson
Miroslava
Friday, February 23, 2024 - MSG Sphere - Las Vegas, NV
Replies
2
Views
503
Miroslava
Miroslava

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom