National Football League Thread

[skidmarkgn]

I'm kind of surprised post season overtime rules hasn't come up yet.  I guess since the 2012 rule change there's been (I think) 8 post season games that have gone into overtime, in (I think) 5 of those games the team that lost the coin toss never got to touch the ball (and that includes a Superbowl).  I don't mind the overtime rules staying the same in the regular season but in the post season, when you usually have the best QB's (which usually means the top offenses) on the field combined with all the rule changes to help offenses and handcuff defenses, I wouldn't mind both teams getting at least 1 possession no matter what.  

 

And this isn't just an anti-Patriots thing, the Seahawks (my home team) were one of the teams that benefited from the rule against Green Bay in the NFC title game in the 2014 season and it didn't feel right to me back then either that Rodgers never got to touch the ball... at least, after I was done celebrating the miracle comeback and thought about it for a second.

Edited January 22, 2019 by skidmarkgn

[kidson2004]

I’ve always felt that Mahomes should’ve been able to go back on the field after the Pats scored. Very surprised that there’s no new playoff OT rules yet. This will be talked about at the owners meeting, but the biggest thing talked about will be that no PI call. That alone will prompt them to have a new postseason rule. 

[djb5f]

Saints had the ball first but... ☹️

Edited January 22, 2019 by djb5f

[PsychicVibe]

The team that wins the coin toss wins about 55 percent of the NFL games decided in overtime. So the evidence suggests that the current rule(s) as being "fair". Throughout the year Kansas City's defense couldn't stop anybody. Personally I wish the NFL would make overtime sudden death in regular and post season play.

 

16 hours ago, skidmarkgn said:

 

Funny you mention that, about 10 or 15 minutes after the game started I posted something here about the helmet to helmet hit a Rams player committed that also got ignored.  It was the one where afterwards the Saints player was forced (by the same officials that chose not to make the call mind you) off the field because of how shaky he was while getting up, because... you know... he just got blasted in the head.

 

Right.....that should have been called, too. And I'm sure that there were plenty of missed calls on both teams throughout the game.

 

But that final PI - Defenseless Player - Helmet to Helmet non call wasn't just bad, it was THE WORST EVER in terms (1) of how obvious the call was, and (2) when it occurred.

[acasser]

Here's a novel thought:  How about winning the game in the first four quarters before getting to OT and risking the scenario where your team never touches the ball because the other team gets it first and scores a TD?  Or how about having your defense make a stop?  We've seen teams change their strategy and tactics in the late stages of the 4th quarter playing to win as opposed to playing not to lose; maybe we could use a little more of that.

 

The overtime rules are fine as they currently stand.  There are so many other things that deserve attention and tinkering.

[skidmarkgn]

4 hours ago, PsychicVibe said:

The team that wins the coin toss wins about 55 percent of the NFL games decided in overtime. So the evidence suggests that the current rule(s) as being "fair". Throughout the year Kansas City's defense couldn't stop anybody. Personally I wish the NFL would make overtime sudden death in regular and post season play.

 

 

The vast majority of that statistic is regular season games where garbage teams with inept offenses are clouding the numbers.  I'm just talking about post season play, I'll even narrow it down further and say just "championship games" (AFC/NFC title games and the Superbowl) are the ones that should be looked at.  At that level, the offenses are most likely going to be so good, and the rules are so skewed to benefit them that it's taking the excitement out of an overtime game.  When New England won the toss, I turned the game off, the only reason I lasted that long was to watch the toss to see who was going to win, because after watching an entire 4th quarter where neither defense forced a punt and the only field goal was to tie it up, it was a foregone conclusion (at least to me) that the winner of the toss was going to win.  This'll also be the 2nd time in 3 years that a team loses a championship game while their league MVP QB (I'm assuming Mahomes is going to win it) never got to touch the ball.  Just feels wrong to me.

[PsychicVibe]

43 minutes ago, skidmarkgn said:

 

The vast majority of that statistic is regular season games where garbage teams with inept offenses are clouding the numbers.  I'm just talking about post season play, I'll even narrow it down further and say just "championship games" (AFC/NFC title games and the Superbowl) are the ones that should be looked at.  At that level, the offenses are most likely going to be so good, and the rules are so skewed to benefit them that it's taking the excitement out of an overtime game.  When New England won the toss, I turned the game off, the only reason I lasted that long was to watch the toss to see who was going to win, because after watching an entire 4th quarter where neither defense forced a punt and the only field goal was to tie it up, it was a foregone conclusion (at least to me) that the winner of the toss was going to win.  This'll also be the 2nd time in 3 years that a team loses a championship game while their league MVP QB (I'm assuming Mahomes is going to win it) never got to touch the ball.  Just feels wrong to me.

 

So I went and checked the data. There have been 8 overtime games in championship play and one in the Super Bowl. Out of the nine games, 5 ended with a win by the team who happened to gain first possession. 55%! Of those 9 games, the first possession resulted in 3 TD's, 1 FG, 3 punts and and 2 INT.

 

So even with cherry picking the data, the result is the same......only a slight advantage to the team that wins the coin toss.

[djb5f]

19 minutes ago, PsychicVibe said:

 

So I went and checked the data. There have been 8 overtime games in championship play and one in the Super Bowl. Out of the nine games, 5 ended with a win by the team who happened to gain first possession. 55%! Of those 9 games, the first possession resulted in 3 TD's, 1 FG, 3 punts and and 2 INT.

 

So even with cherry picking the data, the result is the same......only a slight advantage to the team that wins the coin toss.

 

Yes, backs up what I would suspect.  Playoff rates would mirror the regular season.  Chiefs are an odd exception, most teams don’t get to a conference title game with such a lousy D.    

 

There are a lot of really good defensive teams in the playoffs typically, like recent versions of the Seahawks, Broncos, Ravens, etc.

[MidnightDragon]

Now I've heard everything....

 

https://abcnews.go.com/US/orleans-attorney-files-lawsuit-requesting-nfl-enforce-league/story?id=60553364

[Conker]

7 hours ago, acasser said:

The overtime rules are fine as they currently stand.  There are so many other things that deserve attention and tinkering.

I couldn't agree more that the OT rules are fine as they are, we don't need no college OT rules where game could keep going forever  

[skidmarkgn]

3 hours ago, PsychicVibe said:

 

So I went and checked the data. There have been 8 overtime games in championship play and one in the Super Bowl. Out of the nine games, 5 ended with a win by the team who happened to gain first possession. 55%! Of those 9 games, the first possession resulted in 3 TD's, 1 FG, 3 punts and and 2 INT.

 

So even with cherry picking the data, the result is the same......only a slight advantage to the team that wins the coin toss.

 

Fair enough, still feels weird when it happens for me though, like the game's "unfinished".  Out of curiosity, how many of those games were after say... 2014, when the rules started really focusing on giving offenses advantage after advantage?  Off the top of my head I can think of 3 TD's (Seahawks / Green Bay, Pats / Falcons, and Pats / Chiefs) and 1 pick (Saints / Rams).  That's the cherry I really wanna pick.

Edited January 23, 2019 by skidmarkgn

[PsychicVibe]

After New Orleans beat Minnesota in the 2009-2010 championship game on a first possession field goal, the rules were changed. Sudden death remains except for the first possession field goal.

 

The three TDs were two Bradys and one Wilson. I attribute their success not to rules changes causing a dramatic increase in scoring, but rather they are two exceptional quarterbacks who are particularly accomplished when it counts the most. (Perhaps the rule change in OT after 2010 has made teams more aggressive in OT).

 

The highest ever average score per team per game over a season in modern times occurred in 2013 at 23.4 points per game. 2018 was 23.3 per game. As far back as 1965 they scored 23.1 per game. and in 1948 it was 23.6 per game. The average since 2014 is 22.6; the prior five year average was 22.0. Whatever rules changes there have been have had a minor impact on scoring at best.

 

 

[PsychicVibe]

 

I wonder if the Niners are going to pony up the money for him. Even 7 million per year isn't going to get it done.

[Avatar_Of_Battle]

Did anyone else see this green laser pointer thing I saw an article about during the Pats/Chiefs game?

Shit looked huge in the video clip how big was this laser pointer? lmfao

[PsYcHoNxVa]

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Did anyone else see this green laser pointer thing I saw an article about during the Pats/Chiefs game?

Shit looked huge in the video clip how big was this laser pointer? lmfao

 

I saw it. It must be one old ass shitty lazer, without any lens focus. The point of my lazer stays the width of a pencil’s eraser for many miles.

[acasser]

11 hours ago, MidnightDragon said:

Now I've heard everything....

 

https://abcnews.go.com/US/orleans-attorney-files-lawsuit-requesting-nfl-enforce-league/story?id=60553364

 

No judge worth his robe and the bench he sits on should entertain this case for more than a split second before dismissing it with prejudice.  Saints fans and their attorneys have no standing as far as the law is concerned.

 

Moreover, if one even browses this article and the rulebook section the lawsuit cites, and reads a little further down -- either in the rule or the article -- the rule explicitly says this is one of those things the Commissioner cannot step in and force a replay over.

 

This is the problem with the American court system:  any bozo can file a suit and gum up the works over something as ridiculous as this.  I understand being upset over the outcome of the game and how it got there, but grow up and get over it and expend your energies on something more constructive (either for yourself or for society at large).

[starcrunch061]

Late to the party, but the lawsuit is dumb as shit. It doesn't change the fact that those zebras should be out on their asses after some of those calls (and I am hardly a Saints fan or anything). There's letting the players play, and there's the shit that the refs let the players get away with in that game.

 

19 minutes ago, acasser said:

This is the problem with the American court system:  any bozo can file a suit and gum up the works over something as ridiculous as this.  I understand being upset over the outcome of the game and how it got there, but grow up and get over it and expend your energies on something more constructive (either for yourself or for society at large).

 

Actually, it's a lot better than many of the other court systems in that regard, if you can believe that.

Edited January 23, 2019 by starcrunch061

[TheLakota]

33 minutes ago, acasser said:

 

No judge worth his robe and the bench he sits on should entertain this case for more than a split second before dismissing it with prejudice.  Saints fans and their attorneys have no standing as far as the law is concerned.

 

Moreover, if one even browses this article and the rulebook section the lawsuit cites, and reads a little further down -- either in the rule or the article -- the rule explicitly says this is one of those things the Commissioner cannot step in and force a replay over.

 

This is the problem with the American court system:  any bozo can file a suit and gum up the works over something as ridiculous as this.  I understand being upset over the outcome of the game and how it got there, but grow up and get over it and expend your energies on something more constructive (either for yourself or for society at large).

 

Relax. It's a publicity stunt on D'Amico's part; he's an ambulance chaser and wannabe Gordon McKernan.

[Conker]

Larry Fitzgerald is returning next season http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25831802/cardinals-wr-larry-fitzgerald-returning-16th-season

[majob]

20 hours ago, kidson2004 said:

I’ve always felt that Mahomes should’ve been able to go back on the field after the Pats scored. Very surprised that there’s no new playoff OT rules yet. This will be talked about at the owners meeting, but the biggest thing talked about will be that no PI call. That alone will prompt them to have a new postseason rule. 

If they didn't talk about it when the Pat's won against the Falcons  with one possession in the Super Bowl in OT, I doubt they'll do it because the Chiefs lost in OT in the AFCC

[kidson2004]

2 hours ago, majob said:

If they didn't talk about it when the Pat's won against the Falcons  with one possession in the Super Bowl in OT, I doubt they'll do it because the Chiefs lost in OT in the AFCC

I agree it wouldn’t be talked about. But after that game, I do think it’ll be discussed. 

[Cassylvania]

3 hours ago, starcrunch061 said:

Late to the party, but the lawsuit is dumb as shit. It doesn't change the fact that those zebras should be out on their asses after some of those calls (and I am hardly a Saints fan or anything). There's letting the players play, and there's the shit that the refs let the players get away with in that game.

 

I think I have a slightly different take on this than most people. While I agree the Saints got screwed over at a critical point in the game, it was not the end of the game, nor was it the only call that was missed. The Saints defense had the opportunity to stop the Rams and they couldn't. Credit Zuerlein for making an extremely clutch field goal. And even if the Saints want a "do-over," that's essentially what OT is. They even had the ball first. By what's being argued above, they had the better odds of winning the game by winning the coin toss. Instead, Brees throws an interception and Zuerlein punches in a 57-yard field goal. That's three opportunities the Saints had to make up for that no-call, and they couldn't.

 

Too much fuss is being made about one play. How about the terrible clock management that allowed the game to go to OT? How about the Saints settling for field goals in the first half? How about just an ounce of credit to the Rams, who came back from 13-0 on the road in an extremely hostile environment, against one of the best QBs of all time? This is something we see over and over again, but no team should allow a single play to determine the outcome of the game. That's not championship football.

 

That said, I'm fine with the way OT is now. Maybe just give the ball to the visiting team first, instead of the coin toss? That'd be the gentlemanly thing to do. Also, go back to 15 minutes. 10 minutes means each team is going to possess the ball once, MAYBE, and definitely seems to favor the team that has the ball first. We only had two ties this year, but I remember several more games than nearly ended in a tie. (I guess they still do 15 minutes in the playoffs, though? Seems kinda dumb, since those games can't end in a tie anyway...)

[starcrunch061]

Just now, Cassylvania said:

I think I have a slightly different take on this than most people. While I agree the Saints got screwed over at a critical point in the game, it was not the end of the game, nor was it the only call that was missed. The Saints defense had the opportunity to stop the Rams and they couldn't. Credit Zuerlein for making an extremely clutch field goal. And even if the Saints want a "do-over," that's essentially what OT is. They even had the ball first. By what's being argued above, they had the better odds of winning the game by winning the coin toss. Instead, Brees throws an interception and Zuerlein punches in a 57-yard field goal. That's three opportunities the Saints had to make up for that no-call, and they couldn't.

 

Too much fuss is being made about one play. How about the terrible clock management that allowed the game to go to OT? How about the Saints settling for field goals in the first half? How about just an ounce of credit to the Rams, who came back from 13-0 on the road in an extremely hostile environment, against one of the best QBs of all time? This is something we see over and over again, but no team should allow a single play to determine the outcome of the game. That's not championship football.

 

That said, I'm fine with the way OT is now. Maybe just give the ball to the visiting team first, instead of the coin toss? That'd be the gentlemanly thing to do. Also, go back to 15 minutes. 10 minutes means each team is going to possess the ball once, MAYBE, and definitely seems to favor the team that has the ball first. We only had two ties this year, but I remember several more games than nearly ended in a tie. (I guess they still do 15 minutes in the playoffs, though? Seems kinda dumb, since those games can't end in a tie anyway...)

 

One play never costs a team a game, but that's still no excuse for poor officiating. And I'm sure that the Rams got poor calls, too, but again - I don't like letting the officials off because they managed to screw both teams over at different times.

[Cassylvania]

1 minute ago, starcrunch061 said:

One play never costs a team a game, but that's still no excuse for poor officiating. And I'm sure that the Rams got poor calls, too, but again - I don't like letting the officials off because they managed to screw both teams over at different times.

 

I agree. Fix the officiating. That was atrocious. But teams have to know going into a game that there's a chance they will end up the recipient of a bad call. If you're the better team -- and I believe the Saints were -- you can't let that play decide the game. From what I saw, the Saints did.

 

Unless you can completely remove the human element from the game, this is something both teams have to face, so I don't think it's fair to say the Rams were gifted a Super Bowl appearance. They simply made the most of their opportunities, and the Saints didn't.

 

In either case, is the NFL becoming too much like the NBA to you guys? I used to enjoy watching football games in their entirety, but I'm finding myself only tuning in to the fourth quarter now. I've done that for almost every playoff game this year, and I don't feel like I'm missing anything.

[kidson2004]

4 minutes ago, Cassylvania said:

In either case, is the NFL becoming too much like the NBA to you guys? I used to enjoy watching football games in their entirety, but I'm finding myself only tuning in to the fourth quarter now. I've done that for almost every playoff game this year, and I don't feel like I'm missing anything.

Nah, I enjoy games from start to finish. But I can see where you’re coming from in terms of the overall flow of the game.