Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
As the OP, and after deep consideration, I’ll allow it.I would but breaks have been specifically excluded from this thread's charter.
You'll have to speak with ownership.
As the OP, and after deep consideration, I’ll allow it.I would but breaks have been specifically excluded from this thread's charter.
You'll have to speak with ownership.
the second TD team knew they could lose on the next possession....they should have went for 2 if they didn't think their defense could stop them...I will relish when the first postseason game goes TD-TD-FG in the first three possessions of overtime. Then the contingent of it’s not fair people will stomp their feet and demand OT needs to be an equal number of possessions.
Until ♾I will relish when the first postseason game goes TD-TD-FG in the first three possessions of overtime. Then the contingent of it’s not fair people will stomp their feet and demand OT needs to be an equal number of possessions.
“But the 2nd team didn’t get the ball twice and the 1st team did! It’s not faaaaaaiiir!”the second TD team knew they could lose on the next possession....they should have went for 2 if they didn't think their defense could stop them...
now if you are talking TD+2, TD+2, FG....then I guess all you can really say is the second team had a chance to stop them twice (plus once on a 2 pointer) and didn't....and thems the breaks....
TD+2, TD+2, FG..... is really the only issue....
So why can't you use the bolded for true sudden death or even how the rule used to be. You had a chance to stop them all game and didn't.....and thems the breaks.the second TD team knew they could lose on the next possession....they should have went for 2 if they didn't think their defense could stop them...
now if you are talking TD+2, TD+2, FG....then I guess all you can really say is the second team had a chance to stop them twice (plus once on a 2 pointer) and didn't....and thems the breaks....
TD+2, TD+2, FG..... is really the only issue....
seemed like a good investment.Why are people so invested in hating it?
It’s shocking to think a losing team’s fans could ever complain about anything.I will relish when the first postseason game goes TD-TD-FG in the first three possessions of overtime. Then the contingent of it’s not fair people will stomp their feet and demand OT needs to be an equal number of possessions.
Here's a thought: 95% of rule changes in the past 20 years are in favor of the offense. This has become an offensive league. It's nowhere near a 50/50 split between offense and defense. Therefore, barring an anomaly where a team has an insanely good defense, the offense has a distinct advantage. As a result, winning the coin toss is a huge advantage. The numbers show it.Here's a thought: play defense, and you'll get a possession in OT.
Or they could just play defense, hold the opponent to a FG or 0 points, then get the ball back & win. Maybe even on a FG, which the other team couldn’t do.Here's a thought: 95% of rule changes in the past 20 years are in favor of the offense. This has become an offensive league. It's nowhere near a 50/50 split between offense and defense. Therefore, barring an anomaly where a team has an insanely good defense, the offense has a distinct advantage. As a result, winning the coin toss is a huge advantage. The numbers show it.
That said, I still don't understand how we don't just to to instant sudden-death when the 4th quarter clock expires. That is, once the 4th quarter clock expires, the game clock is turned off. Keep playing from that spot and the next team to score wins.
That completely eliminates the coin-toss, which can completely flip the game based 100% on luck. And it rewards any field-position gained by the team that just got the kickoff from the team that just tied the game. This is a game of taking turns (and taking field position). Let the team that got the ball after the tying score get their full turn instead of the possibility of "You don't get to finish your turn. We're just going to stop and flip a coin and start a new turn."
That’s a disingenuous narrative I see in this topic, sure."Play defense" is a disingenuous argument considering that is exactly what the league doesn't want and has been neutering that side of the ball for years. Yes, I see what I did there.
Stop pretending it's a level playing field.That’s a disingenuous narrative I see in this topic, sure.
Meanwhile teams pay defensive players millions of dollars to (checks notes) play defense. You know, on the field. Like it’s 1/2 of the game of football or something.
Who knew all those highly paid defensive coordinators weren’t actually doing that job at all.
Try this test: go film yourself telling Aaron Donald that he doesn’t actually play defense. I’ll wait.
I can show you YouTube videos swearing the earth is flat & flow-charting a 137 point plan to take over Mars using nothin but mayonnaise, a car battery & the corpse of Robert Kennedy.
You're doing oyster shooters with tequila and your surplus hot sauce, aren't you?I can show you YouTube videos swearing the earth is flat & flow-charting a 137 point plan to take over Mars using nothin but mayonnaise, a car battery & the corpse of Robert Kennedy.
doesn't make it true.
Well can you?Chaka: "NFL defenses have been neutered by league rules giving offenses a clear advantage."
HSG: "Oh yeah? Well, can you beat up Aaron Donald?"
Chaka: "...da fu...???"
Sounds good actually.You're doing oyster shooters with tequila and your surplus hot sauce, aren't you?
Well using my own completely original and entirely unplagerized thoughts on the subject of LD hot sauceSounds good actually.
Why should their be a game? They just televised the coin toss. "Taco Bell" on one side of the coin, and "Draftkings" on the other.Does anyone think the team that wins the coin toss to start the game should get the ball to start both half's of the game?
If you have possession of the ball at the end of regulation and you don't have MORE points than your opponent.... then you lose. Period.I will relish when the first postseason game goes TD-TD-FG in the first three possessions of overtime. Then the contingent of it’s not fair people will stomp their feet and demand OT needs to be an equal number of possessions.
While that may be fair, it would completely eliminate all the awesome end of game finishesHere's a thought: 95% of rule changes in the past 20 years are in favor of the offense. This has become an offensive league. It's nowhere near a 50/50 split between offense and defense. Therefore, barring an anomaly where a team has an insanely good defense, the offense has a distinct advantage. As a result, winning the coin toss is a huge advantage. The numbers show it.
That said, I still don't understand how we don't just to to instant sudden-death when the 4th quarter clock expires. That is, once the 4th quarter clock expires, the game clock is turned off. Keep playing from that spot and the next team to score wins.
That completely eliminates the coin-toss, which can completely flip the game based 100% on luck. And it rewards any field-position gained by the team that just got the kickoff from the team that just tied the game. This is a game of taking turns (and taking field position). Let the team that got the ball after the tying score get their full turn instead of the possibility of "You don't get to finish your turn. We're just going to stop and flip a coin and start a new turn."
I say put clickers in front of every fan and have a live vote. Except the clicker would be unmarked, so the fans wouldn’t know which team they were voting for.I do like the idea of getting rid of coin flips and just give the home team the choice.
The NFL basically said that was why they did this. Not sure if that’s a “narrative” or the “actual factual reason” they did this.The most annoying part is the narrative that the rule was changed because of what happened to the Bills.
Meanwhile Bills fans know they lost because of coaching and not the OT rules.
I disagree. it’s March, news slowed down, and this was a fun discussion.Much ado about nuttin
I know some people in Vegas who would say a lot about the value of 2.8%funny thing is that the stats weren't really showing THAT strong a need for a change. The team winning the coin toss was only winning 52% in the regular season since the last change. It was quite a bit higher for playoff games but the sample size was dramatically smaller too.
Not worth a lot of argument. I think it was a silly change, but not really a big game changing thing.It might effect 2 games this year...and statistically speaking, only has around a 10% chance of even effecting the results of either of THOSE games....and certainly not effecting them in any UNFAIR way.
Much ado about nuttin
I've pounded the table for this for a long time.....just keep playing from the point of interruption (which is when the regulation clock expires).....just keep playing...Here's a thought: 95% of rule changes in the past 20 years are in favor of the offense. This has become an offensive league. It's nowhere near a 50/50 split between offense and defense. Therefore, barring an anomaly where a team has an insanely good defense, the offense has a distinct advantage. As a result, winning the coin toss is a huge advantage. The numbers show it.
That said, I still don't understand how we don't just to to instant sudden-death when the 4th quarter clock expires. That is, once the 4th quarter clock expires, the game clock is turned off. Keep playing from that spot and the next team to score wins.
That completely eliminates the coin-toss, which can completely flip the game based 100% on luck. And it rewards any field-position gained by the team that just got the kickoff from the team that just tied the game. This is a game of taking turns (and taking field position). Let the team that got the ball after the tying score get their full turn instead of the possibility of "You don't get to finish your turn. We're just going to stop and flip a coin and start a new turn."
I don’t hate the idea, but I can see a Hail Mary at the end of every regulation that’s tied, hoping for the DPI.I've pounded the table for this for a long time.....just keep playing from the point of interruption (which is when the regulation clock expires).....just keep playing...
if you have it and its 3rd and 10 when regulation expires....you start OT with you having the ball 3rd and 10 and next score wins...
if the only argument is "this eliminates awesome endings"....I say who cares....we are not shooting for awesome endings....we are shooting for the fairest way to end a game without it being a tie....don't stop it and start over, just keep playing...
this would strategically affect the way many teams approach the end of regulation and would be very "awesome" to watch....
not so fast....are you going to throw that hail mary if its third and one....probably not....cause you know you are going to keep playing and then all you need is a FG....I don’t hate the idea, but I can see a Hail Mary at the end of every regulation that’s tied, hoping for the DPI.
OT starts 1st & goal with the ball at the 1. And won’t that just be thrilling.
I also have suggested in multiple threads that teams should just continue the game from when the clock hit zero. Switch sides of the field and keep going, sudden death, same down and distance. It's the most logical conclusion. Basically, it just extends the game, next score wins. The coin toss, having another kickoff, installing artificial scoring or possession requirements, etc. all seem forced and unnecessary.I've pounded the table for this for a long time.....just keep playing from the point of interruption (which is when the regulation clock expires).....just keep playing...
if you have it and its 3rd and 10 when regulation expires....you start OT with you having the ball 3rd and 10 and next score wins...
if the only argument is "this eliminates awesome endings"....I say who cares....we are not shooting for awesome endings....we are shooting for the fairest way to end a game without it being a tie....don't stop it and start over, just keep playing...
this would strategically affect the way many teams approach the end of regulation and would be very "awesome" to watch....
Ok. So not a Hail Mary. Maybe it’s just taking a deep shot. Get the DPI call & It’s 1st down at the 28.not so fast....are you going to throw that hail mary if its third and one....probably not....cause you know you are going to keep playing and then all you need is a FG....
DPI never called on hail mary's....it could get picked...other team starts OT with ball....hail mary's would probably be one of the last things you see...
deep shots have a better chance of getting picked and you can't bank on a DPI....if you take your deep shot and it gets picked, the other team gets the ball and just needs a FG to beat you....Ok. So not a Hail Mary. Maybe it’s just taking a deep shot. Get the DPI call & It’s 1st down at the 28.
OT starts & they kick a FG. Game over.
It's better to have different rules for the playoffs than the regular season?
Thank you for addressing this for what is now the fifth time in the last two pages.They always have. If tied after OT in regular season ... tied result. In playoffs ... keep going.
I would think such a rules change what result in more teams trying to just win it in regulation.Stinkin Ref said:deep shots have a better chance of getting picked and you can't bank on a DPI....if you take your deep shot and it gets picked, the other team gets the ball and just needs a FG to beat you....
all you would want to do is keeping moving the chains and play for maybe a FG....so not much risk...
about the only thing you might miss out on are long FG attempts to win games in regulation....
this by far would be the most fair way to end a game....which many are complaining about....by saying its boring or it loses some excitement is trying to have your cake and eat it too....which is, as we have seen, pretty much impossible...I think the strategy in the way games end approaching the end of regulation would make up for the excitement....coaches would have to be thinking about the potential of the game going to OT and becoming sudden death well before just the final seconds....
Except this isn't true. A division winner with a 10-7 record would be the home team over a wild card with a 12-5 record.Ilov80s said:I actually think the coin toss for playoff OT shouldn’t exist. The home team should get the advantage. They theoretically earned it by being better during the season.
Hot Sauce Guy said:Thank you for addressing this for what is now the fifth time in the last two pages.
that would be great.....I would think such a rules change what result in more teams trying to just win it in regulation.
OK. All caught up now. Only thing to add is clearly Hot Sauce Guy is off his rocker. But, everyone knew that. Carry on.
Sorry. Was a lame attempt at a joke. I wasn't even serious about it.Don't.
If you disagree, make your case and say why. But please be more cool to other posters.