*** NFL Week 13 Discussion Thread ***

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
IndyColtsFan

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
688
126
Colts keep rolling, while the Pats and Steelers lose. Any time the Patriots lose, it is a GREAT football weekend. :)
 
A

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
mugs said:
Statistics and logic indicate that the the NFL's overtime rules are less than ideal.

Your response to that is a single game between an undefeated team and a 3-9 team.

/facepalm
Click to expand...

Fail argument is fail. If your special teams and defense do not choke and actually do what they are supposed to do, you don't have a one possession OT. This game should have been decided in regulation but the Skins could not handle it.

Last time I brought up a fairness of equal possessions idea is what people should complain for if not liking OT rules and wanting them changed. OT is fine how it is in the NFL. I never hear complaints about hockey OT when the faceoff is a coin toss, and if you lose that you can lose really quick.
 
A

a123456

Senior member
Oct 26, 2006
885
0
0
Adrenaline said:
I am not a Saints fan. I like Drew Brees though and wish him the best. This year I have a wish of 2 undefeated teams playing in the Super Bowl.
Click to expand...

I would love to see two 18-0 teams meeting in the Super Bowl, but that's a long shot by far, especially since the Vikings lost today. Both teams are going to clinch home field pretty early and then rest starters the last week or two. I read that Colts worked out J.P. Losman on Friday since Sorgi, their current backup, isn't 100%. With Losman starting and probably other backups at other positions, I can't see the Colts winning their last game.

This week was a good week in terms of entertainment value. Multiple close games in Mia-NE, Oak-Pit, NO-Was, and even Sea-SF.

I still can't believe NO pulled it out with what was basically pure luck. After the Pats game, I thought NO would cruise but it looks like they expended a lot of energy there and injuries are catching up with them. If Washington was even close to making the playoffs, that kicker is pretty much waived right after the game and being replaced with someone that doesn't miss 23-yard FGs. Pats looked terrible today, both with Brady at the end and getting outcoached yet again. I don't think they're getting far this year.

I thought the Vikings would cruise to 15-1, but they looked awful today with those O-line injuries. Favre's always been a gunslinger so I can see his performance today, but Peterson with only 19 yards is crazy. I hope Henderson can play again some day because that injury looked Bradshaw-like. Warner looked good today with some pass protection but he was limping at the end. Hope he's okay.

Speaking of bad kickers, did anyone see the Vikings onside kick? That had to have been the worst onside kick I've ever seen. The Vikings were offside *and* the kicker shanked it by kicking a low line drive (didn't even bounce let alone the high bounce that onside kicks are supposed to have) that flew past everyone on the Cards and ended up going out of bounds 30 yards away, as opposed to the 10 yards it was supposed to go.

In other news, I guess this ends the era of JaMarcus Russell. Not that he will be missed by many but 2 clutch wins by Gradkowski pretty much seals his starting job.
 
Last edited:
mugs

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Adrenaline said:
Fail argument is fail. If your special teams and defense do not choke and actually do what they are supposed to do, you don't have a one possession OT. This game should have been decided in regulation but the Skins could not handle it.

Last time I brought up a fairness of equal possessions idea is what people should complain for if not liking OT rules and wanting them changed. OT is fine how it is in the NFL. I never hear complaints about hockey OT when the faceoff is a coin toss, and if you lose that you can lose really quick.
Click to expand...

This post is so full of fail. :D

1. What happened in regulation doesn't matter; both teams failed to win in regulation, so neither deserves an advantage in overtime.
2. No matter how you look at it, the team that loses the coin toss has to do more to win in OT. How is that preferable?
3. It is possible to make football overtime more fair and more entertaining without significantly altering the rules.
4. The hockey analogy fails because the players are in control of the faceoff, and changes of possession happen much more easily in hockey.
 
moshquerade

moshquerade

No Lifer
Nov 1, 2001
61,504
12
56
One picture says it all

tuck.jpg
 
A

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
mugs said:
This post is so full of fail. :D

1. What happened in regulation doesn't matter; both teams failed to win in regulation, so neither deserves an advantage in overtime.
2. No matter how you look at it, the team that loses the coin toss has to do more to win in OT. How is that preferable?
3. It is possible to make football overtime more fair and more entertaining without significantly altering the rules.
4. The hockey analogy fails because the players are in control of the faceoff, and changes of possession happen much more easily in hockey.
Click to expand...

1. There is no advantage in OT rules, they play to win the game, win it. If their special teams or defense mess up, then they deserve to lose.
2. Perhaps they continue to play like they have been for 60 minutes? I think that should work.
3. It is fair how it is.
4. Hockey teams can play extremely possessive and make smart passes and not yield the puck. The away team in the NFL is in charge of the coin toss, they make the call. Three tries in the NFL can yield a punt, how about defenses not playing horrible in OT?

/yawn

Anyways, why not dumb down regulation to appease OT complainers also, like give each team 5 possessions, call it halftime, then 5 more possessions and call it the end of regulation? Thats what it sounds like the OT complainers want OT to be turned into. That would be fair to everyone.
 
Last edited:
mugs

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Adrenaline said:
1. There is no advantage in OT rules, they play to win the game, win it. If their special teams or defense mess up, then they deserve to lose.
2. Perhaps they continue to play like they have been for 60 minutes? I think that should work.
3. It is fair how it is.
4. Hockey teams can play extremely possessive and make smart passes and not yield the puck. The away team in the NFL is in charge of the coin toss, they make the call. Three tries in the NFL can yield a punt, how about defenses not playing horrible in OT?

/yawn

Anyways, why not dumb down regulation to appease OT complainers also, like give each team 5 possessions, call it halftime, then 5 more possessions and call it the end of regulation? Thats what it sounds like the OT complainers want OT to be turned into. That would be fair to everyone.
Click to expand...

I've already explained (in the previous thread) how the current system gives an advantage to the team that wins the coin toss. You can deny it all you want, doesn't make it any less true. I also explained in the previous thread why the regulation rules are fair. That's a strawman.

Before the Sunday Night Football game two weeks ago Bob Costas stated his opinion on the NFL overtime rules. He agrees with me. Bob Costas > you.
 
R

RyanPaulShaffer

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,434
1
0
Each team should get at least one possession in overtime, with the game turning into sudden death after each team has the ball once. Winning a random coin flip is a huge advantage for the team that wins it, and a huge disadvantage for the team that has to defend, because the winning team only has to drive into field goal range to win it, while the other team might never even get a chance.

The Colts/Charges playoff game from last year is a perfect example as to why the NFL OT rule needs to change ASAP. The best QB in football never even got a chance to win the game for his team.
 
R

RyanPaulShaffer

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,434
1
0
mugs said:
That's a strawman.

Before the Sunday Night Football game two weeks ago Bob Costas stated his opinion on the NFL overtime rules. He agrees with me. Bob Costas > you.
Click to expand...

Talk about a strawman argument. "Bob Costas > you"...really? Bob Costas? Wow. :p
 
A

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
mugs said:
Bob Costas > you.
Click to expand...

Negative. Just because someone is a commentator in a sport doesn't make them knowledgeable on every subject. There are plenty of commentators that spew out garbage on different things.

OT rules are fair. These are professionals, if they can't play defense and stop the other team then they deserve to lose.

Thats the same principle as in regulation with only one exception. Why not make them play the entire 15 minutes of OT?
 
C

crownjules

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2005
4,858
0
76
I can't find longer stats, but from 2000-2007 over 148 OT games:

- The coinflip winner takes the games 60%
- The coinflip loser never touches the ball in 30% of those games
- The home team only wins 51% of games that went to OT

The last stat is significant because homefield is seen as a huge advantage in the NFL. This shows that home teams win only as much as they win the coin flip. And 60% is a huge edge. When you are in control of the ball on offense then you dictate the tempo of the game which is a major advantage. A team is both offense and defense and a team should be given equal chance in winning in OT as in regulation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom