NFL 2019 Thread

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by dkgo

OK but those sports are all fundamentally different than football. You can't use the same solution. "

Just because the sport is different doesn't mean you can't operate on the same principles. Or else, hockey, baseball & basketball wouldn't have come up with basically the same solution seeing as they are "fundamentally different".

Just add extra time" makes the coin toss more important and simply doesn't work well given the possession structure of football since the team with the ball has so much control over the clock.

That is all strategy that comes into play even in regulation. If a team exercises ball control to lessen the time another has to score, how is that any different than what already happens? It hasn't added importance to the coin toss.

[dkgo]

Someone still has to get the ball first right?

Would you agree that the team who has more possessions has a better chance at scoring more points?

It fixes nothing about fairness other than people's feelings.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by ezpkns34

So the ideal solution for you would seem to be putting the ball at midfield and have a scrum to see which team secures the ball and they begin OT

Silly idea. But you know what? It is better than a coin toss. Keep in mind the Saints couldn't even call heads or tails. They had to hope the Vikes guessed wrong. At least a scrum would put their destiny into their hands.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by dkgo

Someone still has to get the ball first right?

Would you agree that the team who has more possessions has a better chance at scoring more points?

It fixes nothing about fairness other than people's feelings.

Getting the ball once is still more fair than not at all. Again, I said this before and I don't know why I have to repeat myself. I am not seeking to eliminate all advantages.

[damientheomen3]

The reason the NFL can't have a functioning, fair overtime under current rules and structure is roster sizes. Players are exhausted by the time overtime starts because teams can only carry 46 active players for a game (with a kicker, a punter, and a long snapper, that doesn't even allow for every individual spot to have a backup). That's why the league cut to the stupid 10 minute overtime in the regular season and why overtime has to be set up to end as quickly as possible while still trying to act like it's real football.

From what I saw a few months back, the players are pushing for larger rosters in CBA talks, but apparently that's another argument stuck behind the wall of owners wanting an expanded regular season.

[dkgo]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Getting the ball once is still more fair than not at all. Again, I said this before and I don't know why I have to repeat myself. I am not seeking to eliminate all advantages.

You are literally adding advantages. It is not as simple as "both teams can get the ball = MORE FAIRS"

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by dkgo

You are literally adding advantages. It is not as simple as "both teams can get the ball = MORE FAIRS"

No I'm not.

[dkgo]

Your proposal is to "add extra time" and the team with the most points at the end wins right? Getting the ball first in that scenario is even better than getting the ball first with current overtime rules unless you are planning for another hour of game time or something crazy.

Funny that no one seemed to have a big issue last year when the Saints won the toss and drew brees threw a terrible interception so the Rams were able to win by only gaining 15 yards.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by damientheomen3

The reason the NFL can't have a functioning, fair overtime under current rules and structure is roster sizes. Players are exhausted by the time overtime starts because teams can only carry 46 active players for a game (with a kicker, a punter, and a long snapper, that doesn't even allow for every individual spot to have a backup). That's why the league cut to the stupid 10 minute overtime in the regular season and why overtime has to be set up to end as quickly as possible while still trying to act like it's real football.

.

Same can happen in the other sports. Players can foul out in basketball, NHL players can be worn down, MLB can run out of pitchers or bench players. It is all part of the game. That goes to the advantage of the team with the most depth. Congrats to those that have it. However a team was built comes into play. That is the strategy of the game. All lost if you use a coin toss to decide who gets the ball/bat/puck first in a sudden death format in those sports.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by dkgo

Your proposal is to "add extra time" and the team with the most points at the end wins right? Getting the ball first in that scenario is even better than getting the ball first with current overtime rules unless you are planning for another hour of game time or something crazy.

Funny that no one seemed to have a big issue last year when the Saints won the toss and drew brees threw a terrible interception so the Rams were able to win by only gaining 15 yards.

But they did when the Patriots got the ball 1st and beat the Chiefs last year.


"Another hour" is not crazy. If no one scores, will they not keep playing until a winner is decided in the current format? This isn't an added possibility. I fail to see how your contention that getting the ball first in my suggestion is a bigger advantage.

[Rizon]

Cowboys hiring McCarthy is the most Cowboys thing ever.

[dkgo]

hopefully for them his "analytics" have advanced beyond "teams win a lot when they run the ball 25 times therefore I'm going to establish eddie lacy 18 times in the first half"

[monkeyman576]

Hiring McCarthy tells me the cowboys goal is to make playoffs not win super bowl.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Is this directed at me? Or generally?

I would be, yes. 1) Because there's a jump ball so both teams have a chance to score first. 2) Because getting the ball first doesn't guarantee a win.

The physical structure of the playing area and the ease at which teams score in basketball would make this a silly way to do it though. It's easy to score points in basketball. It's not easy in football.

Just in general. Your post just provoked my question. Yes it's easy to score in basketball. But apparently it's easy enough to score in football that we get complaints about winning the coin toss. As opposed to say hockey where no one seems to mind sudden death.

I too wouldn't care if they determined OT in the NBA with first score. Both teams have a chance at the jump ball. Both teams played to a tie in regulation. I personally don't need the 5 extra minutes. But that's just me.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by monkeyman576

Hiring McCarthy tells me the cowboys goal is to make playoffs not win super bowl.

Who in your opinion would have been a hire with the intentions of winning a Super Bowl?

Originally Posted by damientheomen3

The reason the NFL can't have a functioning, fair overtime under current rules and structure is roster sizes. Players are exhausted by the time overtime starts because teams can only carry 46 active players for a game (with a kicker, a punter, and a long snapper, that doesn't even allow for every individual spot to have a backup). That's why the league cut to the stupid 10 minute overtime in the regular season and why overtime has to be set up to end as quickly as possible while still trying to act like it's real football.

Players are exhausted? I can see a soccer player. Maybe a tennis player. But an NFL football player? I think that's a myth. From whistle to whistle these guys play about 15 minutes. Don't tell me they're exhausted.

[damientheomen3]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Same can happen in the other sports. Players can foul out in basketball, NHL players can be worn down, MLB can run out of pitchers or bench players. It is all part of the game. That goes to the advantage of the team with the most depth. Congrats to those that have it. However a team was built comes into play. That is the strategy of the game. All lost if you use a coin toss to decide who gets the ball/bat/puck first in a sudden death format in those sports.

NBA teams have 8 backups for 5 starters. MLB teams start 10 players and roster 25. NHL teams dress 22 players and start 6. NFL teams get 21 backups for their 22 non-specialist starters on gameday. I understand injuries can throw off all of those situations (especially for basketball teams), but the NFL's situation is imo the toughest to deal with for a gruelling game.

[damientheomen3]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Players are exhausted? I can see a soccer player. Maybe a tennis player. But an NFL football player? I think that's a myth. From whistle to whistle these guys play about 15 minutes. Don't tell me they're exhausted.

They are. Andy Reid said as much when he explained why the coaches voted for a shorter overtime.

Linemen run into each other at full force every play and O-linemen don't really ever sub except for injuries. Don't remember who it was, but a former O-lineman said by the end of 10+ play drives he'd be dizzy from exhaustion.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by damientheomen3

They are. Andy Reid said as much when he explained why the coaches voted for a shorter overtime.

Linemen run into each other at full force every play and O-linemen don't really ever sub except for injuries. Don't remember who it was, but a former O-lineman said by the end of 10+ play drives he'd be dizzy from exhaustion.

Ok. Maybe because I played WR all of my life that getting tired on a football field was never an issue. Other sports, yes, I'd have to fight through it. Football, not even close.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Just in general. Your post just provoked my question. Yes it's easy to score in basketball. But apparently it's easy enough to score in football that we get complaints about winning the coin toss. As opposed to say hockey where no one seems to mind sudden death.

I too wouldn't care if they determined OT in the NBA with first score. Both teams have a chance at the jump ball. Both teams played to a tie in regulation. I personally don't need the 5 extra minutes. But that's just me.

I think most NFL teams only score on 50% or less of their drives. That almost seems like the team defending in OT has as much as or a better chance of stopping the offensive team than the offensive team has of scoring.

[ezpkns34]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Who in your opinion would have been a hire with the intentions of winning a Super Bowl?

Personally, I expected Jerruh to put the full court press on Sean Peyton, especially with the Saints already being out and him not having to wait