mannc

Both teams have that "advantage" in college. In the NFL, the team that has the ball first is forced to play "conservative" three-down football the entire length of the field and, if they manage to score, the other team gets to play four-down offensive football. Against a QB like Mahomes, that's game over. What a bizarre comment. Care to address the substance of what I said, you know, with logic?

That's a cop-out. All you have to do is look at college football to know that the team that has the ball second in that situation has a HUGE advantage. I know the college rules are a little different, but the principle is the same: Much better to know what you need to do on your first possession and potentially have the advantage of utilizing a four-down offense. In fact, the advantage might be even more pronounced under the NFL rules because the offense has the advantage of playing four-down football the entire length of the field, not just from the opponent's 25 yard line.

This is really it. KC and Mahomes knew they needed at least three points, so until they got inside the SF 40-yardline the Chiefs were operating with an extra down--a huge advantage that Purdy did not have on SF's possession. And if the Niners had scored a TD on their drive, that advantage becomes more--not less--pronounced, because the Chiefs are operating with four downs the entire length of the field. Mahomes with four downs to work with in that situation is pretty much unstoppable. As I said, it's almost like Shanahan was unaware of the rule change...that's really the only logical explanation for his decision.

Same

Good grief…we got every single possible break this year against the Chiefs and lost at home. We recovered three of our own fumbles, got the Hardman fumble through the EZ and got most every call by the officials…and still lost. Give it a rest.

That’s the thing about the postseason…it reveals truths about your team that might not have been apparent in the regular season.

Under the new playoff OT rules, it’s a firing offense to take the ball first. It’s almost like Shanahan didn’t know the rule. Absolutely the worst coaching blunder I’ve ever seen in a Super Bowl.

He’s nowhere near as good as Chris Jones. Not even close.

Totally agree. And the Chiefs have other really good players, like Karlaftis, Bolton and Willie Gay, who are as good as anyone on the Bills’ defense. That’s how you make a dynasty. Oh, and the Chiefs only have three starters left from the team that won the Super Bowl four years ago.

The thing that stands out to me, watching this game, is that both teams have a lot of star players, huge difference makers: Kelce, Mahomes, Chris Jones, McDuffie, Snead…McCaffery, Samuel, Trent Williams, Bosa, Fred Warner…the Bills have 1 guy in that category. It’s just not enough.

Because we never have top 3 picks in the draft

Sammy Watkins…

I can’t see the Bengals taking WR in round 1.

The NFC is just sad. Literally no top quarterbacks in the whole conference. And about 7 in the AFC.

Chiefs have three star players on defense. We have none. That’s the difference.

Huge blunder not to challenge that spot. Kelce def had the first down.

Since drafting Mahomes, 17 of Chiefs 24 picks in the first four rounds have been defensive players.

Gonzalez and Gates were just big WRs and neither has any post-season accomplishments…Ditka falls so far short statistically, that it’s not really much of a comparison, despite the different eras in which they played. Gronk was probably the second most important player on probably the all-time NFL dynasty.

Not arguable. Gronk is top 2, without any question. Kelce's the only one who's got an argument and they're not really comparable in that Kelce's rarely asked to block.

Such a low bar that Kincaid might already have cleared it…

I'm shocked that the guy who just handed the Chiefs the AFCC Game with two of the most boneheaded plays in recent memory--including the most blatant taunting penalty I've ever seen--doesn't have his s**t together off the field, either...

As a HS senior, Curry was the top recruit in the country in both basketball and football, so there’s that…

What new staff?

That's an interesting perspective, but it's really just anecdotal, and where I live (on the West Coast), it's just the opposite. Here is a long but very interesting recent article on this topic from the Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2023/football-participation-decline-politics-demographics/ Basically, rates of participation in HS football are declining precipitously nationwide (about 13 percent over the past 10 years, and the decline is even steeper in younger age brackets), although in certain regions, mostly in the South, rates have held pretty steady. It's a highly complex issue that has political, racial and economic components. One thing the article makes clear is that the NFL considers these declining participation rates "an existential threat". Hence, among other things, their promotion of flag football. It's not out of the question to think that in some parts of the country, tackle football will cease to exist in its current format and that will drive major changes at the NFL level, too. And by the way, the idea that the NFL is ever going to benefit from a significant influx of foreign players is nothing more than a pipe dream. There is really nowhere else on the planet outside of North America where tackle football is more than a fringe sport and I don't see how that's ever going change, for a lot of reasons. There is certainly no noticeable increase in foreign players playing in the NFL, despite many years of the NFL promoting itself internationally.

I do hope you’re right. The NFL is as popular as it’s ever been, but I worry that the foundation on which it rests is wobbly. HS football participation numbers are falling every year and college football is committing slow suicide. This is where NFL players come from, and if these “factories” falter, it will profoundly affect the NFL game. And unlike the other three major sports, there is no real source of international players whose influx strengthens the pool of players from which the teams draw. This could eventually lead to declining popularity—and declining political influence—which would open the door to major changes in the way the game is played.