chargers vs raiders

[JoPoy88]

3 hours ago, Bferra13 said:

This was brought up on One Bills Live. Why would Mark Davis even take that call after what they did to Gruden in a supposed Redskins investigation? Id love to see this pan out. If the Colts lose, take knees boys. This happens because of a 17 game odd schedule and greed from rodg.

I never said i wouldn’t want to see it. I hate Goodell I would welcome a nationally televised embarrassment like that.

[stuvian]

I'd rather face the Raiders or Chargers in post season than the Colts

[Nextmanup]

6 hours ago, FireChans said:

Someone explain to me how this is different than resting your starters or tanking?

Tanking or resting starters still involves 11 guys on the field going 100%, trying to put on a football game.

 

2 teams taking a knee every snap does not.

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, stuvian said:

I'd rather face the Raiders or Chargers in post season than the Colts

Raiders would be my No. 1 wish; New England (who I think it will be in reality) is No. 2.

 

At least in the first game.  We are going to be going through KC regardless IMO, so it doesn't really matter who we play in first game.

 

 

 

 

[BananaB]

If the Jags somehow keep the game close the NFL officials will make sure the Colts get the game changing calls to help win the game. 

[Doc Brown]

Steelers would also have to beat the Ravens I believe.  If the goal is to get the Super Bowl why wouldn't you rest your starters for a week and kneel it so a tie is guaranteed so you make the playoffs?  It would be hilarious to see.

 

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

So here's the fascinating Nash Equilibrium element to this. 

 

Let's assume for a second that the Colts and Ravens lose AND that the front offices of the Raiders and Chargers have a clandestine conversation where they decide to tie but make it look good so that the NFL competition committee can't reasonably stick them with any punishment.

 

In this scenario both teams would still have the power to break the agreed upon game script, betray the other one late in the game, and deny them the playoffs.  Knowing that the other team could betray you would lead you to wanting to get the drop on them and be the betrayer yourself. 

 

According to Nash, if the teams could play out infinite iterations of this scenario they would eventually learn to honor their agreement every time as it's the most mutually beneficial to every person involved.  But given just one iteration neither team would trust the other to play cooperatively and it would turn back into a competition.

[machine gun kelly]

12 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

 

meh old news.  

 

Kyle on GMGB has been talking this up all week.   

if they “throw away the game” for a Tie 

It will be a stain on the shield. 
 

Yeah, but the point is it would be funnier than hell.  Painful to watch, but funny.  Set the ball at the 50 and not even punt, just keep taking the knee.

[Since1981]

On the last kneel down of this epic tied game…Raiders guy runs it to the end zone! Bahahaha. We can only dream

[fergie's ire]

10 hours ago, Motorin' said:

Something similar happened in the World Cup in the 80's. Now they play all the final games at the same time to avoid the motivation.

 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gijón

 

I watched that game.  It was awful.

[SoCal Deek]

I honestly don’t see why this would the slightest bit controversial. Neither team is purposefully losing. They are both trying to make the playoffs with ZERO risk. How is that not the goal from the start of training camp? I say…play for the tie! Screw the Shield.

[bills6969]

Lol the Jags are not beating the Colts.

[Mr. WEO]

12 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

the shield has turned a blind eye no doubt 

how many times has Belicheat gotten away work crap. 
 

Ya never know what straw will break the camels back.
 

If they want continued viewership they need to acknowledge this 

 

Stains perpetuate viewers.  All of the scandals/controversies (spygate, deflategate, CTE, Kaepernick/kneeling, etc) have only led to increased revenue/viewers/TV contracts.

 

The owners don't care about "stains"--they are in the entertainment business. 

[FireChans]

6 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

Tanking or resting starters still involves 11 guys on the field going 100%, trying to put on a football game.

 

2 teams taking a knee every snap does not.

 

 

 

 

Raiders would be my No. 1 wish; New England (who I think it will be in reality) is No. 2.

 

At least in the first game.  We are going to be going through KC regardless IMO, so it doesn't really matter who we play in first game.

 

 

 

 

Tanking player are NOT going 100% lol

[chongli]

7 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

 

At least in the first game.  We are going to be going through KC regardless IMO, so it doesn't really matter who we play in first game.

 

 

 

Well, maybe KC loses in the first round, say to the Chargers or Colts. That also guarantees us a home divisional round game (assuming we win the East and finish in the 3 seed, as Cincy is resting their starters).

[947]

FWIW- the Raiders coach has said they are playing to win.

[TBBills]

Just now, 947 said:

FWIW- the Raiders coach has said they are playing to win.

Darn I was hoping would say "playing to lose"

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

A tie no longer gets BOTH teams into the playoffs 

 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

20 hours ago, 947 said:

FWIW- the Raiders coach has said they are playing to win.

Remember the time Herb Tarlek's coworkers had the same preset answer about Herb for his appearance on 'Real Families'?

"Hard worker, loyal husband, and all around fine person."

[Boatdrinks]

1 hour ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

A tie no longer gets BOTH teams into the playoffs 

 

It does , IF JAX beats IND. Same scenario as it was heading into week 18. If Colts win only the winner advances . 

[The Frankish Reich]

Fun take on this from a game theory perspective:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/raiders-chargers-tie-nfl-playoff-scenarios-11641516938?st=tbw2bd32ppk8g5f&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

 

I think what everyone is missing here is that even if the collusion solution doesn't happen (it won't), it still may matter at the margin. Example: Final drive of the game. Raiders score a TD to make it Chargers 21, Raiders 20. Do the Raiders go for 2 to try to win it in regulation? The "tie and both teams are in" situation says "no" - the possibility of a tie after OT is as good as a win. And if so, how do the teams play it in OT? I would expect less risk taking by both sides.

 

So the NFL is banking heavily on the Jags being the Jags. Otherwise this scheduling decision was pretty stupid.