[please fix subject]Peter King - overtime rant

[truth on hold]

that WR #85 for the Aints did the most obvious acting job I'd ever seen. Any ref worth a dime would have realized right then there was no foul. Not only was the ball not catchable, but every angle they showed the LB never even touched 85. Brees purposely threw that ball away under pressure. Pathetic call.

[ExiledInIllinois]

that WR #85 for the Aints did the most obvious acting job I'd ever seen. Any ref worth a dime would have realized right then there was no foul. Not only was the ball not catchable, but every angle they showed the LB never even touched 85. Brees purposely threw that ball away under pressure. Pathetic call.

 

Yep. It put them in FG range to win the game is the most heinous part.

[Chandler#81]

Yes, but the ends justify the means... just like when Siragusa squished Gannon 9 years ago. If the Jets would've done that to Peyton Gump, they'd still be playing in 2 weeks.

 

 

While I don't care one way or the other, I was quite impressed with Favre's perseverance. It was a truely gutty performance, akin to Y.A.Tittle, Johnny U. If it was his last game -yeah, here we go again- it was a sterling -albeit typical- Brett Favre performance.

[vincec]

Holy crap will it ever end. Just found an article summarizing overtime results from 1974-2003.

 

Total no. of overtime games (1974–2003)

365

Both teams had at least one possession

261 (72 %)

Team won toss and won game

189 (52 %)

Team lost toss and won game

160 (44 %)

Team won toss and drove for winning score

102 (28 %)

Games ending in a tie

15 (5 %)

 

Interestingly, though, the author concludes: "The data appear to support the notion that the football team scoring first in sudden-death overtime is usually the one that had won the coin toss and received the ball." However, I think the author is not a football fan and does not fully understand the argument.

 

The number to look at is 28%, not 52%. That is, only 28% of the time has the coin toss winner won the game without playing defense. Just because the same team that won the coin toss also won the game - after both teams had a possession - doesn't translate to an advantage. IMO.

 

In 72% of OT games, both teams' offense get the ball. Clearly, the argument that it is somehow unfair because one team doesn't get the ball, just isn't supported by the numbers. None the less, people will still argue it. I can only guess it's because they don't get to see their "stars" play.

Yeah, but check this out:

 

"29% of the time the team that wins the toss drives down and scores without the other team touching the ball. Overall, however, the coin toss winner only wins 52% of the time. It seems fair but these numbers are somewhat misleading because in 1994 a rule changed moved the kickoff back 5 yards to the 30 yard line (those numbers were based on data from 1973-2003). Since then, it's been about 60%. Prior to the rule change, the coin toss had no predictive value for deciding who would eventually win the game. Since 1994, the coin flip winner has a clear advantage. "

[papazoid]

i prefer NFL overtime to be for a "fixed" period of time, like 15 minutes (1 Qtr), not sudden death. that way, each side will have at least one possession.

[nickvh]

I think the referees caused all the Viking fumbles and interceptions too

[ExiledInIllinois]

I think the referees caused all the Viking fumbles and interceptions too

 

 

That is not the point... Of course they made their mistakes and still could have won even with the refs and the NFL in the bag for NO.

 

Like I said... I wanted the Saints to win... What a sucky way to win though... It was pretty obvious that the refs were in the bag for NO.

[MarkAF43]

That is not the point... Of course they made their mistakes and still could have won even with the refs and the NFL in the bag for NO.

 

Like I said... I wanted the Saints to win... What a sucky way to win though... It was pretty obvious that the refs were in the bag for NO.

 

Come on.... it was a good game, and you can talk about bad calls all day long, but the facts are that when it mattered most, the Vikings made mistakes. 2 fumbles inside the NO ten yard line, and then Favre throwing across his body when all he had to do was run into the open field ahead of him so Longwell could have had a chance to win it in regulation. I don't buy this crap the league wanted NO in it more than MIN. Either way you had great storylines to write about, and a great matchup. Bad calls or not, it was quite apparant that MIN was unable to complete the job.

[Mr. WEO]

Come on.... it was a good game, and you can talk about bad calls all day long, but the facts are that when it mattered most, the Vikings made mistakes. 2 fumbles inside the NO ten yard line, and then Favre throwing across his body when all he had to do was run into the open field ahead of him so Longwell could have had a chance to win it in regulation. I don't buy this crap the league wanted NO in it more than MIN. Either way you had great storylines to write about, and a great matchup. Bad calls or not, it was quite apparant that MIN was unable to complete the job.

Despite the errors on the Vikes' part the game did end in a tie in regulation, you know. The Saints, therefore, were the ones literally handed the ball on many occasions and they were "unable to complete the job".

 

So for this inablilty to put the Vikes away the Saints should get a reward in the OT with 3 bad calls on a single drive?

 

WTF??

[truth on hold]

Come on.... it was a good game, and you can talk about bad calls all day long, but the facts are that when it mattered most, the Vikings made mistakes. 2 fumbles inside the NO ten yard line, and then Favre throwing across his body when all he had to do was run into the open field ahead of him so Longwell could have had a chance to win it in regulation. I don't buy this crap the league wanted NO in it more than MIN. Either way you had great storylines to write about, and a great matchup. Bad calls or not, it was quite apparant that MIN was unable to complete the job.

thats all true but what sucks is at crunch time officials call ticky tack nonsense, instead of letting them play. and it effects the outcome of the game

[MarkAF43]

Despite the errors on the Vikes' part the game did end in a tie in regulation, you know. The Saints, therefore, were the ones literally handed the ball on many occasions and they were "unable to complete the job".

 

So for this inablilty to put the Vikes away the Saints should get a reward in the OT with 3 bad calls on a single drive?

 

WTF??

 

 

So with the times the Saints were "handed the ball" and they failed to produce, at the end of the game, the Vikings had the setup they wanted, and Favre made a horrible decision and it cost his team the game. Say what you will about any of the other calls during the game, the Vikes had chances to win it and they blew it. As Bills fans we really should try to get away from these conspiracy theories, it makes us look dumb. Facts are, there were bad calls against both teams, but in the end the team that was able to bury their chance moves on

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

The NFL should do like Hockey institute 20 minute overtimes. If score is still tied than another after a 10 minute intermission. This way each team should get the ball and is forced to try to score the most TDs vs FGs

[papazoid]

The NFL should do like Hockey institute 20 minute overtimes. If score is still tied than another after a 10 minute intermission. This way each team should get the ball and is forced to try to score the most TDs vs FGs

 

 

a period in hockey is 20 minutes......a quarter in football is 15 minutes.........i think OT in football should be for 1 Qtr / 15 min, then another if needed.

[MarkAF43]

thats all true but what sucks is at crunch time officials call ticky tack nonsense, instead of letting them play. and it effects the outcome of the game

 

 

Joe,

 

I totally agree with this comment, they should let them play, I am amazed that people want to blame the refs instead of the fact that in crunch time on 3 different occasions if the Vikes hold onto the ball and Favre makes a good decision at the end, we are looking at a Manning Vs. Favre Super Bowl, but due to the fact they couldn't deliver when needed and some ticky tack perhaps non calls that were called, the combination can be what did them in. It's totally unrealistic to only lay the outcome on the officials.

[SDS]

[This is an automated response]

 

As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate.

 

Thank you.

[sharper802]

how about the hit where Favre got hurt? where one guy had him high and another guy took at least 2 steps after Favre had passed, and hit him low in the legs from behind. was that legal? awfully dangerous if it is

It's not legal. It's the Brady rule. QB can't be hit below knee. Refs probably didn't call it because it would have been essentially back to back roughing the QB calls. Although I agree with Aikman Hargrove's hit should not have been a penalty.

[MarkAF43]

It's not legal. It's the Brady rule. QB can't be hit below knee. Refs probably didn't call it because it would have been essentially back to back roughing the QB calls. Although I agree with Aikman Hargrove's hit should not have been a penalty.

 

 

I didn't dvr the game, but it almost appeared that as the DE who hit Favre below the knee was pushed from behind by the OL trying to block him, and it knocked him off balance. I COULD BE WRONG, but when I saw it, that's the only reason I can see why they didn't throw a flag on the play

[Cash]

The NFL should do like Hockey institute 20 minute overtimes. If score is still tied than another after a 10 minute intermission. This way each team should get the ball and is forced to try to score the most TDs vs FGs

 

I agree. Also, like in hockey, overtime should be played on ice.

[reddogblitz]

Joe,

 

I totally agree with this comment, they should let them play, I am amazed that people want to blame the refs instead of the fact that in crunch time on 3 different occasions if the Vikes hold onto the ball and Favre makes a good decision at the end, we are looking at a Manning Vs. Favre Super Bowl, but due to the fact they couldn't deliver when needed and some ticky tack perhaps non calls that were called, the combination can be what did them in. It's totally unrealistic to only lay the outcome on the officials.

Also on a play there at the end before the FG, Brees threw a pass that bounced off one of his recievers and into the hands of a Vikes DB. If he could have held onto that they would have gotten the ball.

 

Aints came through when it counted and Vikes did not. Bottom line. That WAS a catch and if the DB hadn't been holding up the receiver he likely could have gotten to the ball or at least very close.

[Russ 'Em]

Despite the errors on the Vikes' part the game did end in a tie in regulation, you know. The Saints, therefore, were the ones literally handed the ball on many occasions and they were "unable to complete the job".

 

So for this inablilty to put the Vikes away the Saints should get a reward in the OT with 3 bad calls on a single drive?

WTF??

 

 

You mean 1 bad call. The pass interference. The "disputed catch" was, after replay, obviously a catch. His hand was clearly underneath the ball. You do know that the ball can touch the ground if the receiver maintains possession right? And the spot on the "fumble" is also another non issue. He never lost control of the ball! Which means its not a fumble! The original stretch of his hand was the correct spot. Hating on refs is one of my favorite past times and NFL Conspiracy touches my heart, see BruskiBowl, but the Vikings fumbled that game away. Win the turnover battle, go to the SuperBowl.