Game Day Thread: 2021 SUPERBOWL - RAMS VS. BENGALS!!!

[kwitt]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

This post reeks of alpha.

Explain sir. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, kwitt said:

Explain sir. 

 

Your post is awfully judgemental of people based on the fact that they don't love the current rules set up.

 

Rules are rules and it ended fair and by the rules.

 

I've always disliked NFL OT. 

 

I dislike college OT, too.

 

Don't want to get in a big discussion about this because it results in people slinging names at each other. But there has to be a better solution to OT than immediate sudden death. 

[PolarExpress]

8 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

8 hours ago, PolarExpress said:

I was there.  It was a fun game at the end.  Brady seemed totally off the entire game.  TB has great fans.  Place was packed.

wow I bet that was a fun experience 

It was great.  I live near DC, and had never been to a game in Tampa. 
 

I will say, IMO, that the club level experience at FedEx is much better.  But the Bucs fans were great…they love Brady….seems everyone had on a Brady jersey.

[kwitt]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Your post is awfully judgemental of people based on the fact that they don't love the current rules set up.

 

Rules are rules and it ended fair and by the rules.

 

I've always disliked NFL OT. 

 

I dislike college OT, too.

 

Don't want to get in a big discussion about this because it results in people slinging names at each other. But there has to be a better solution to OT than immediate sudden death. 

I had an opinion on a message board?  They don't love the OT rules and I don't love the whining.  

[tshile]

If your defense can’t stop a drive the full length of the field for a TD with the game on the line, you don’t deserve a chance to give your offense the ball. 
 

OT is about ending the game when neither team could win after 4 quarters of regulation. 
 

it’s not about creating a perfectly fair system to determine a winner such that people don’t belly ache when the game they just watched didn’t end the way they wanted. 

That’s what the previous 4 quarters were for. 

Also in regards to this very specific instance, the issue was not that unfair overtime rules prevented Allen from getting the ball with the game on the line. 
 

The issue is a ****ty defense let Kansas City tie the game when they started from their own 25 with 13 seconds left in a game. 
 

and, then that same ****ty defense let KC go the length of the field for a TD with the game on the line. 
 

the answer is not to change over time rules or use this as your soap box on how the OT rules are bad. 
 

the answer is to fire the bills DC. 

[FrFan]

14 minutes ago, tshile said:

the answer is to fire the bills DC. 

The Giants are interviewing him

[srtman04]

All I know is, this game between the Bills and KC showed me exactly how badly we need a true Franchise QB.   I don't think we'll get one with Dan Snyder as the owner.  

[Brixtion_skin]

Bills v Chiefs

 

Great game.  However I would say the defensive play was very poor. 

 

Tired defence= Poor defense.  The lines spent most of the game trying to get a hand on Mahmoes & Allen.  The LBs and CB spent most of time trying to stay near receivers when the play broke down.  Mentally and physically that is tough.  At the end it told with some God awful play by the both D's.

 

I was not 100% convinced by Allen before the game. I knew he was good, but not this good.  I feel very sorry for him, because I am not really not sure what more he could have done.   Allen is a beast. 

 

AFC is gonna have some great games going forward.  Add in Borrow, L Jackson, Herbert. 

 

OT: Leave it alone. No system is perfect.

[Voice_of_Reason]

9 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Speaking of competitive balance. What would be the reaction if the Bills DC instructed his team to grab every Chiefs WR and hold them for the entire duration of every play on the final drive? Or just outright tackle them in their routes? They would give up 5 yards and burn 5-6 seconds each play, ending the Chiefs final drive. They wouldn’t have been able to get in FG range. Sort of the NFL equivalent of fouling before a team can attempt a game tying 3 in the NBA. 
 

I hate that that would be legal as someone that is a competitor. It’s wrong. I’m sure as offenses get more prolific this will occur at some point and it will be awful. 

I actually said they should mug the receivers off the line to one of my buddies because a holding penalty costs you nothing while a completed pass costs you everything.

 

I didn’t go so far as to say they should INTENTIONALLY foul, but if a WR was about to get by you, tackle his ass, and don’t let him. 
 

If they did this, they most likely only have to do it once.  From 13 to 8 seconds in one play.  With 8 seconds, the Chiefs would need 40 yards in one play.  That’s tough.  
 

What they did allowing all the receivers a free release was criminally stupid and conservative defense.  
 

I’m not sure which is a worse offense (no pun intended), the way the Bills played that 13 seconds or what Kyle and the Falcons did in the SB to blow the lead.  

[justice98]

11 hours ago, hail2skins said:

The move away from total sudden death was supposed to address this. I think it was acknowledged that it was too easy for offenses to get into FG range, thus the move to at least have the team with the first possession have to score a TD to win immediately.

 

Perhaps the league should think about changing the rules back to where its not AS offensive friendly. Did anyone really think the league was boring in the 70s and 80s?

 

I have no sympathy for the OT rules.  I am wholeheartedly against jerryrigging OT like they do. Defenses are expected to get stops every other time, but in OT, there's no expectations they do their job?  It's not a foregone conclusion the offense gets in FG range every other time in the game.  Buffalo was clearly having issues with the KC offense, but that’s their problem. Like, "we know you cant play defense, so we're gonna throw you a bone in OT."  

 

But that's my basic rant on OT.  But for arguments sake, if they are gonna make it so both teams get the ball, both teams should get the ball.  Buffalo shoulda got the ball regardless of whether KC scored a TD or not. Not a fan of the "TD ends the game" element.  

[tshile]

[Mooka]

 

 

Diggs aint messing around!   

[Momma There Goes That Man]

3 minutes ago, Mooka said:

 

 

Diggs aint messing around!   

Best part of that is the Bills OL ripping off his shoe and tossed it into the stands 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

28 minutes ago, tshile said:

that’s funny but nobody is asking for that.

 

many of the people fine with the OT rules are the same people that don’t like the offense oriented rules of the modern NFL. Defense is always at a disadvantage already so you are giving one team a massive advantage by getting the ball on offense. 
 

sure the defense could have stopped them in regulation. That applies to both teams yet only one gets to take advantage of that in OT. 
 

no other sport’s OT results in one team not being able to have the chance to score. But the toxic macho mentality of the NFL, evidenced above by people wanting fairness and competitive balance being called “fairees”, means a disadvantage shouldn’t matter and the other team just need to be manlier than the offense and stop them. 
 

it’s absurd 

[tomwvr]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

If your defense can’t stop a drive the full length of the field for a TD with the game on the line, you don’t deserve a chance to give your offense the ball. 
 

OT is about ending the game when neither team could win after 4 quarters of regulation. 
 

it’s not about creating a perfectly fair system to determine a winner such that people don’t belly ache when the game they just watched didn’t end the way they wanted. 

That’s what the previous 4 quarters were for. 

Also in regards to this very specific instance, the issue was not that unfair overtime rules prevented Allen from getting the ball with the game on the line. 
 

The issue is a ****ty defense let Kansas City tie the game when they started from their own 25 with 13 seconds left in a game. 
 

and, then that same ****ty defense let KC go the length of the field for a TD with the game on the line. 
 

the answer is not to change over time rules or use this as your soap box on how the OT rules are bad. 
 

the answer is to fire the bills DC. 

The bills have one of the best defenses in the league.

What lost them the game was a deep kick off into the end zone. If they had done a squib kick or a short kick to the 5-10 needing a return 5-6 seconds would have run off and then there is no chance to tie it up.

12 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

that’s funny but nobody is asking for that.

 

many of the people fine with the OT rules are the same people that don’t like the offense oriented rules of the modern NFL. Defense is always at a disadvantage already so you are giving one team a massive advantage by getting the ball on offense. 
 

sure the defense could have stopped them in regulation. That applies to both teams yet only one gets to take advantage of that in OT. 
 

no other sport’s OT results in one team not being able to have the chance to score. But the toxic macho mentality of the NFL, evidenced above by people wanting fairness and competitive balance being called “fairees”, means a disadvantage shouldn’t matter and the other team just need to be manlier than the offense and stop them. 
 

it’s absurd 

Sure it does 

in the NHL if you win the opening face off that team can and does maintain possession and win many times.

[purbeast]

3 hours ago, kwitt said:

If people are so unhappy about how the rules are now then how about this for an option?  Place the ball at the own 5 or 10 yard line.  Winner of the coin toss can either take the ball pinned deep in their own territory or choose to start on defense.  First score wins.  There ya go.  No more whining.

This is probably the dumbest thing I've read on the internet in 2022.

[Dan T.]

11 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Here is another thought, if you are someone saying that the league is catering to offense too much, imagine how unfair it is that a defense could potentially be on the field for 5-6 straight minutes for a game tying TD drive and then also have to immediately go right back on the field based on the OT coin flip? The existing rules mean that unit is kinda ****ed and their offense won’t have a chance to make up for them. 
 

sure sure, they should stop them, but in many cases, they are doing back to back drives which defenses never have to do 

 

Fatigue effects defense much more than offense, and both defenses were dog tired by the end of that game.

 

29 minutes ago, Mooka said:

 

 

Diggs aint messing around!   

 

 

Maybe Diggs should have been playing D in overtime.

[purbeast]

8 minutes ago, tomwvr said:

in the NHL if you win the opening face off that team can and does maintain possession and win many times.

In the NHL, they have different rules for OT in the playoffs and regular season.

 

What you are talking about only applies to the regular season.

 

if you are comparing the NHL and NFL, why can't the NFL change the rules in the playoffs to something different?

 

Like soccer has abandoned sudden death, why can't the NFL just do that for the playoffs?  Give one more quarter of 15 minutes and at the end of the quarter whoever has the highest score wins.  If they are still tied, then start another 15 minutes and the next score wins.  There would be no new coin toss or anything.  Just whoever has the ball at the end of the first 15 minutes keeps it, like at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

[Koolblue13]

27 minutes ago, purbeast said:

Give one more quarter of 15 minutes and at the end of the quarter whoever has the highest score wins.  If they are still tied, then start another 15 minutes and the next score wins.  There would be no new coin toss or anything.  Just whoever has the ball at the end of the first 15 minutes keeps it, like at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

This is my opinion as well as to what it should be and not just because I wanted to see more of that game.

[No Nonsense]

2 hours ago, srtman04 said:

All I know is, this game between the Bills and KC showed me exactly how badly we need a true Franchise QB.   I don't think we'll get one with Dan Snyder as the owner.  

People are slamming Rodgers this morning. Even calling him a regular season QB. We’ll gladly take him in DC. 

[zCommander]

43 minutes ago, purbeast said:

This is probably the dumbest thing I've read on the internet in 2022.

 

 

This was actually brought up by the Ravens last year. Kwitt didn't want to give credit to them...lol

 

According to a copy of the proposals obtained by The Baltimore Sun, the rule change would replace the overtime kickoff with a “spot and choose” concept.” The team that wins the coin toss would have two options: choose whether to start the period on offense or defense, or choose where to spot the ball to start the period — and the end zone to be defended.

 

40 minutes ago, purbeast said:

In the NHL, they have different rules for OT in the playoffs and regular season.

 

What you are talking about only applies to the regular season.

 

if you are comparing the NHL and NFL, why can't the NFL change the rules in the playoffs to something different?

 

Like soccer has abandoned sudden death, why can't the NFL just do that for the playoffs?  Give one more quarter of 15 minutes and at the end of the quarter whoever has the highest score wins.  If they are still tied, then start another 15 minutes and the next score wins.  There would be no new coin toss or anything.  Just whoever has the ball at the end of the first 15 minutes keeps it, like at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

 

Ha. I was going to post the same idea then I saw your post. 🙂

 

The only thing I would change is that if still a tie then the other teams gets the ball in sudden death. This puts the pressure on the team that has the ball to score as that might be their last chance to do so.

[hail2skins]

Being a Skins fan for close to 50 years (hopefully there are still some on here who are as old), I still remember the most devastating loss being the 35-34 one to the Cowboys at the end of 1979 that knocked us out of being in the playoffs. We were up 34-21 and had the ball around the Dallas 40 with 4.5 min left and fumbled, leading to Staubach throwing two late TDs, and then us being denied at least a shot at a 60 yard FG attempt at the end.

 

I'm just trying to imagine how completely gutted Bills fans feel today. Up 3 with 13 seconds left. The second guessing over whether you should've squibbed the kickoff. But even still, you allow the Chiefs to get into FG range? 1979 pales in comparison, IMO.

[88Comrade2000]

You go into overtime because neither team can finish with a lead. Both teams should get one crack at the ball and then sudden death. Both teams offenses get one chance to score and both teams get one chance to stop you on defense.   Now, it depends on who wins a coin flip.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

2 hours ago, tomwvr said:

in the NHL if you win the opening face off that team can and does maintain possession and win many times

Meh we are talking real sports not a glorified weekend hobby like hockey 

[hail2skins]

56 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

You go into overtime because neither team can finish with a lead. Both teams should get one crack at the ball and then sudden death. Both teams offenses get one chance to score and both teams get one chance to stop you on defense.   Now, it depends on who wins a coin flip.

But it's delusional to think that if, in your scenario, if KC had scored on its second OT possession to win, that there'd be any less complaining about the Bills not getting an equal chance to score again.