-OZ-
Footballguy
With both first year coaches too.
Staley isn’t going anywhere soon but Bissacia has to be thinking he’s auditioning.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Playoff Scenario - What would you do? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Gally
- Start date
Staley isn’t going anywhere soon but Bissacia has to be thinking he’s auditioning.
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
I hope they tie
i think you play to win the game, but if it comes down to the last minute of OT, why take a chance on a season ending turnover?
At that point, you start to turtle…
i think you play to win the game, but if it comes down to the last minute of OT, why take a chance on a season ending turnover?
At that point, you start to turtle…
Godsbrother
Footballguy
belljr
Footballguy
Yeah if I was playing there is no way I agree to a tie before hand. I'd want to knock out my rival
belljr
Footballguy
They already did not about agreeing to it but would you change your strategy
it certainly should be discussed.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Any chance both teams got a call from the commissioners office about importance of not tying?
Desert_Power
Footballguy
You have to try to tie
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
YOU PLAY TO TIE THE GAME!
bro1ncos
IBL Representative
Sarlakticacid
Footballguy
Godsbrother
Footballguy
No because the NFL set up a situation where the two teams playing tonight have an incentive to tie instead of winning
Sarlakticacid
Footballguy
How closely did the owners work together on the Carson shared stadium project? They could make the call to not compete and go for the tie as the best F all U to the rest of the league.
here is hoping
here is hoping
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
Going for two would be idiotic. Just tie and you're in. I don't get why this would even be a decision?Here's what I would love to see: Chargers are down 24-17 late; Herbert toss to Keenan Allen for a TD with 15 seconds left ...
... does Staley kick the XP or does he pull a Harbaugh and go for two?
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
I was mostly joking (hence the emoji). But no, you wouldn’t automatically be in, because it would send the game to OT, where you could still lose
Mr.Pack
Footballguy
While true, you at least are still alive to get in. Still wouldn't be a tough decision.
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
That's true. Normally the base-case scenario is that it's a wash: your odds of converting a two-pointer and your odds of winning a game in OT are both around 50%. But if a tie is as good as a win, that nudges the odds in favor of kicking the XP.
On the other hand, going to OT means you're forcing your team to play an additional 10 minutes of football in advance of a wildcard game that could be in as little as six days. I still think in a vacuum you kick the XP there, but in a situation where you thought your odds of converting the 2pt were better (say, a half-the-distance penalty) I could see that factoring in
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
OMGHere's what I would love to see: Chargers are down 24-17 late; Herbert toss to Keenan Allen for a TD with 15 seconds left ...
... does Staley kick the XP or does he pull a Harbaugh and go for two?
(OK fine, it was Williams, not Allen. And there were zero seconds left, not 15. Still, I'm putting this down as #nailedit.)
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Will be interesting to see how the potential tie impacts strategy during the OT. Both teams are exhausted.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
Hopefully the NFL kind of learned its lesson, but probably not.....while it was entertaining game and the tie potential added some drama.....it still doesn’t mean it was the right decision to flex the game and they were two seconds or a missed FG away from having it blow up in their face......the two teams should not have been in a position to know a tie could benefit them both....the Raiders were going to run out the clock and not risk anything until LAC called the timeout.....it really wasn’t fair...and had it ended in an “intentional” tie.....the Steelers would have had every right to be pissed.....
Cjw_55106
Footballguy
Is anyone going to mention that the chargers-raiders game was originally scheduled to be in the "late" game timeframe? Whether it was flexed or not, they would have known the Colts lost the 1pm game.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
kind of the point of the thread is that the NFL should have played all the games that had an impact on each other at the same time....they have no problem moving games around....
Cjw_55106
Footballguy
This can’t be the first year this has happened. I don’t ever recall the NFL moving games to prevent later teams from knowing the outcomes. Surely this can’t be the first time it’s came down to the final week.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
For the last decade the rule has been that any Week 17/18 game can be flexed to any time slot, with a priority placed on highlighting the games with the most at stake and not giving any team a competitive advantage. What was unusual this year was a) there were no two teams facing off against each other for a division title and b) Chargers-Raiders were competing for a wildcard that was mostly, but not completely, self-contained.
Last year the NFL gambled by scheduling WFT-Eagles in SNF and lost when Philly threw in the towel halfway through. This year they gambled and won. A few years ago they didn't schedule any SNF game in the final week.
In theory, switching to a 17-week season should make the league's job harder going forward, because with every added game it becomes marginally more likely that playoff scenarios will be settled in advance of the final week
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
had the Raiders run out the clock....which they were going to do before the timeout by LAC.....they and the Chargers would have received this "competitive advantage" at the expense of the Steelers.....that is why the game should have NEVER been flexed...the only movement the NFL should have done was to make sure the PIT/INDY/LVR were all played at the same time....not sure if the NFL "won" or just got really, really, really, freaking lucky Staley called a timeout....the narrative (led by Steeler Nation) would be completely different if LVR had just run out the clock and not attempted a FG like they were going too....
bottom line: the teams should not have known before the game started that a tie was a legit option to have both advance.....the NFL could have made sure that didn't happen....but chose not to for the almighty dollar...
this doesn't mean it wasn't fun to watch, by any means....but that doesn't make it right....
had they played at the same time.....and because of different game flow in them, and this scenario plays out cause one game ends sooner and then teams adjust their strategy....that is one thing.... at least the NFL can say they did what they could to maintain "competitive balance".....but in this case, they went out of their way to make an opportunity not for competitive balance...
Last edited by a moderator:
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
OK, first of all, Staley's timeout didn't affect the outcome, but there's a whole other thread for that debate ...
Second, the fact that we're talking about decisions made in the final seconds of OT means that, even if the games had been scheduled simultaneously, everything else would likely have been decided by the time Charger-Raiders reached that point (although it would have been very cool if both Pitt-Balt and that game went to OT at the same time and CBS went to a split-screen).
But ultimately, yes, they gambled that the game would be a pure win-and-in, and the whole thing nearly blew up in their face. Not sure what to say other than that there will sometimes be a tension between the league ensuring competitive fairness and maximizing TV ratings, and well, I think we can all guess who's going to win that face-off.
Similar threads
