Rochesterfan Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Thats not an adavantage though. That’s the first team failing to score, in other words blowing their chance. And college is different, ball starts in scoring range, NFL ball I kicked off. First team doesn’t capitalize on their chance, then they should lose more often. I understand that it does seem an advantage, but the overall records show that it is as much or more of an advantage than the coin toss in the NFL. I do not have an issue either way, but there is an advantage to being the second team and it is significant. It would be even more so in an NFL match-up.
Mr. WEO Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Thats not an adavantage though. That’s the first team failing to score, in other words blowing their chance. And college is different, ball starts in scoring range, NFL ball I kicked off. First team doesn’t capitalize on their chance, then they should lose more often. No that’s not true. Defense is part of every possession. So saying both teams deserve a possession directly includes the defense. No one is ignoring it, it’s built into the statement already. Both teams should be on the field. One possession in OT means only half of both teams contributed to OT, one offense and one defense. Football is a team game, they got to OT as a team. Seems silly to have only half that team and a coin determine a winner without the other half of both teams also being put on the field as well. Of course it's true. Coin flip winner's O vs the flip loser's D, straight up. If the O imposes it's will on the D for a TD (not a cheap FG), that's it. Why should that matchup be stepped aside, just so the other team's Offense can erase the failure of the D? In other words, if the D stopped the coin flip O, then they have earned their O a chance to score and win. If the D just let the coin flip winner walk down the field and score a TD, but the loser of the flip still gets another chance then, yeah, that pretty much negates the significance of Defense in the OT. Yes it's a team game, and both teams WERE on the field in OT. Your assumption is that the coin flip winner will more likely than not score a TD to end the OT, when that is not true.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 I don't understand why it can't simply be each team gets at least 1 possession. I understand the thinking of you got to stop them, but it's not fair, especially today when rules favor offense. 1
Alphadawg7 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said: I understand that it does seem an advantage, but the overall records show that it is as much or more of an advantage than the coin toss in the NFL. I do not have an issue either way, but there is an advantage to being the second team and it is significant. It would be even more so in an NFL match-up. Youre also over looming the fact college the ball starts in scoring range, NFL is a kickoff. Massive difference.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) you have to calculate the real OTs under this new rule regime, put as many variables that make it finer as you want the sudden death option for decades gave a less than 1% advantage for the team winning the coin toss, but everyone is a big baby when their team loses Edited January 21, 2019 by row_33
Buffalo_Stampede Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, row_33 said: you have to calculate the real OTs under this new rule regime, put as many variables that make it finer as you want the sudden death option for decades gave a less than 1% advantage for the team winning the coin toss, but everyone is a big baby when their team loses Advantage shouldn't exist. If that's the case then something other than a coin toss should decide who gets the ball. Maybe whoever has the most yards in the game or something. Edited January 21, 2019 by TheTruthHurts
Alphadawg7 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Of course it's true. Coin flip winner's O vs the flip loser's D, straight up. If the O imposes it's will on the D for a TD (not a cheap FG), that's it. Why should that matchup be stepped aside, just so the other team's Offense can erase the failure of the D? In other words, if the D stopped the coin flip O, then they have earned their O a chance to score and win. If the D just let the coin flip winner walk down the field and score a TD, but the loser of the flip still gets another chance then, yeah, that pretty much negates the significance of Defense in the OT. Yes it's a team game, and both teams WERE on the field in OT. Your assumption is that the coin flip winner will more likely than not score a TD to end the OT, when that is not true. Here is the issue. Tom Brady vs KC defense. Who has the advantage? Massive NE advantage, and a coin decided that. Mahomes and KC offense vs Pats defense? Who has the advantage? Easy KC. Again coin decides that advantage had they won it. If a chance based procedure (the coin flip) can result in giving either team any kind of significant advantage, it’s not a fair and balanced system IMO.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 11 minutes ago, TheTruthHurts said: Advantage shouldn't exist. If that's the case then something other than a coin toss should decide who gets the ball. Maybe whoever has the most yards in the game or something. you can't eliminate advantages the problem is people perceive it as grossly unfair, and they won't listen to actual facts of outcome for 40 years of a rule oh, good luck in your pursuit of removing advantages, you should be appointed the Czar of making everything fair in football....
LSHMEAB Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) I don't have a problem with the OT rules as they exist, but the AFC Championship was one of those games where the coin toss was likely going to decide the winner. Unfortunate for Chiefs fans, but hardly a reason to overhaul the format. The idea that @Steptidepresented was intriguing; an 8 minute period where the team that's ahead wins the game. It's not out of the question and you could expand that to 15 minutes in playoff games. There are already different OT rules for the playoffs considering the game cannot end in a tie. I'd rather keep the current rules in place, but that's one I hadn't heard. Edited January 21, 2019 by LSHMEAB 1
NoHuddleKelly12 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 16 hours ago, row_33 said: They just have to change it to when the team I’m cheering for takes the lead, then the game is over They get a million chances until they take the lead then the game is over and I win Well, as long as you and I are talking about the same team, then I'm all for it.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 9 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said: Well, as long as you and I are talking about the same team, then I'm all for it. maybe this is the true Mandela Effect, fans don't really watch football closely but they watch one game a year where it went to sudden death OT and their team lost the toss and the game on a FG on the first possession. so they think this happens all the time, when it didn't at all 2
Mr. WEO Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Here is the issue. Tom Brady vs KC defense. Who has the advantage? Massive NE advantage, and a coin decided that. Mahomes and KC offense vs Pats defense? Who has the advantage? Easy KC. Again coin decides that advantage had they won it. If a chance based procedure (the coin flip) can result in giving either team any kind of significant advantage, it’s not a fair and balanced system IMO. NE D held KC to 7 points for 3 Qs. It's not a given that KC would have scored a TD on the next possession, especially with Andy Reid in late playoff game mode against the patriots.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, row_33 said: you can't eliminate advantages the problem is people perceive it as grossly unfair, and they won't listen to actual facts of outcome for 40 years of a rule oh, good luck in your pursuit of removing advantages, you should be appointed the Czar of making everything fair in football.... What do you have against each offense getting their chance? 1% advantage or whatever it is shouldn't be OK.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 10 minutes ago, TheTruthHurts said: What do you have against each offense getting their chance? 1% advantage or whatever it is shouldn't be OK. the rules were almost perfect with the sudden death situation but crybabies gonna crybaby
Alphadawg7 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: NE D held KC to 7 points for 3 Qs. It's not a given that KC would have scored a TD on the next possession, especially with Andy Reid in late playoff game mode against the patriots. Its never a given. Rules aren’t about what’s a foregone conclusion, it’s about whether or not it creates an imbalanced advantage. Brady vs KC gives Pats a significant advantage. Just like Mahomes vs Pats D would be an advantage. Pats O > KC D KC O > Pats D To let a coin decide who gets to play from their teams strength (in both cases it’s their offense) and which team plays from their weakness (both teams it’s their D) is not a fair and balanced solution unless both teams have to field their O and D once in OT by giving each team a guaranteed 1 possession. Edited January 21, 2019 by Alphadawg7
SoCal Deek Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 How about switching from a Coin Flip to... Rock, Paper, Scissors? Now THAT would be cool!
Buffalo_Stampede Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, row_33 said: the rules were almost perfect with the sudden death situation but crybabies gonna crybaby Almost? How could they be perfect in your opinion?
Mr. WEO Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 19 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Its never a given. Rules aren’t about what’s a foregone conclusion, it’s about whether or not it creates an imbalanced advantage. Brady vs KC gives Pats a significant advantage. Just like Mahomes vs Pats D would be an advantage. Pats O > KC D KC O > Pats D To let a coin decide who gets to play from their teams strength (in both cases it’s their offense) and which team plays from their weakness (both teams it’s their D) is not a fair and balanced solution unless both teams have to field their O and D once in OT by giving each team a guaranteed 1 possession. It's a poor argument that a rule applied fairly across all games should be changed when it was applied fairly in one game.....and some people didn't like the fairly arrived at outcome...... 2 1
The Frankish Reich Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said: It reminded me of an argument I had with board members and OT that's all. To the BOLD - this brings up the in season threads we've seen (and recently) - Defense wins Championships. In the regular season Scoring wins out as entertaining (and the obvious W) But in the playoffs. It all comes down to the Defense. Dude, regulation ended 31-31. The average points per game this year was 23.3. And yet someone will always say "defense wins." EDIT: and if you want to prove your point that defense wins, shouldn't the Chiefs get the ball so the Pats can have a chance to show how superior their defense is? How does giving one team the ball prove anything about the superiority of that same team's defense? Edited January 21, 2019 by The Frankish Reich
Alphadawg7 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: It's a poor argument that a rule applied fairly across all games should be changed when it was applied fairly in one game.....and some people didn't like the fairly arrived at outcome...... I have been saying this same argument over 20 years, has nothing to do with yesterdays game. I’m only citing that game as that’s the one in discussion. Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Montana, Elway, Kelly, Manning, Warner, Marino, etc almost always had an advantage having the ball first vs most defenses. It’s a rare defense when those guys aren’t on an offense that is Better than the opposing defense. Again, anytime a random event can determine an advantage it’s not a fair and balanced sysytem. Both teams getting the ball once, is 100% of the time fair. Coin flip, not always a fair outcome. Brady bs Chiefs D not a fair competition as Pats O > Chiefs D. So only way to balance is give both teams one possession, then always fair and results are based on contributions of the full teams, not one unit of it. Edited January 21, 2019 by Alphadawg7 1
Recommended Posts