AFC Championship. Patriots @ Chiefs. - Page 8 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo

Go Back   NFL UK Forums > National Football League > Gameday Forum

Sponsored Links

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 24.01.2019, 10:38 AM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by godsy1985 View Post
Well you actually need to score points to win games and you do realise you can score on defence?! The pats shut out the chiefs in the first half and whilst there is an advantage to having the ball, it doesn't mean the first team to possess will always win. Both championship games went to OT. One team scored a TD on their first possession and the other threw a pick. I don't see anyone moaning about the rams winning by kicking a field goal. Shouldn't they have to score a TD as well or should the saints have a chance to respond? If you can't play defence then you won't win a game. The only way to get away from this scenario would be to play another 10 or 15 minute period to its conclusion but then people would still find reasons to moan! The pats controlled the time of possession and I ultimately think that is what killed the chiefs (along with staying in cover 2) as their D was gassed on the OT drive but this is the disadvantage to having a quick scoring offence. Chiefs will come again and if they can keep this group together, they will make it to the superbowl very soon.



thats beyond nonsense, the Saints won the toss and got the ball, they got there chance, then the Rams theres.



in this the Pats got there chance and the Chiefs didnt.


if the Saints have driven into FG range and got to 4th down, they would of also kicked a FG.


in the playoffs playing another full period would again make more sense.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #72  
Old 24.01.2019, 06:41 PM
lee harris 10's Avatar
lee harris 10 lee harris 10 is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 05.09.2010
Posts: 9,635
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
thats beyond nonsense, the Saints won the toss and got the ball, they got there chance, then the Rams theres.



in this the Pats got there chance and the Chiefs didnt.


if the Saints have driven into FG range and got to 4th down, they would of also kicked a FG.


in the playoffs playing another full period would again make more sense.
How come rule's are "only broken" after the Patriots win.why wasn't there a push to change the unfairness of scoring a TD to win the game in OT after 2014 & 2015 when Rodgers and the Packers went out of both post-seasons in OT without ever getting on the field(the Packers where the road team so called the coin flip but lost the coin toss in both games).

adding another full quarter with both teams having 3 TO's could easily have made both games on Sunday 4 hour plus marathons and by the end it could more be about players been mentally/physically exhausted more than the best team winning.also if you are playing another full quarter do you need another half time stoppage rather than just playing straight on??
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 24.01.2019, 07:40 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
How come rule's are "only broken" after the Patriots win.why wasn't there a push to change the unfairness of scoring a TD to win the game in OT after 2014 & 2015 when Rodgers and the Packers went out of both post-seasons in OT without ever getting on the field(the Packers where the road team so called the coin flip but lost the coin toss in both games).

adding another full quarter with both teams having 3 TO's could easily have made both games on Sunday 4 hour plus marathons and by the end it could more be about players been mentally/physically exhausted more than the best team winning.also if you are playing another full quarter do you need another half time stoppage rather than just playing straight on??

before you won i had posted in this threat and there was after Rodgers, i pretty much recall the same feeling and coverage about him not getting another shot.



a 5/10 minute stoppage would make sense but i would favour a matching system but playing as a normal game (rather than college positioning.)
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 24.01.2019, 09:10 PM
lee harris 10's Avatar
lee harris 10 lee harris 10 is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 05.09.2010
Posts: 9,635
Default

watched the NFL Films mic'ed up stuff today.Edelman telling Brady "he's too old" after the Dorsett TD was great.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 25.01.2019, 01:06 AM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by godsy1985 View Post
Well you actually need to score points to win games and you do realise you can score on defence?! The pats shut out the chiefs in the first half and whilst there is an advantage to having the ball, it doesn't mean the first team to possess will always win. Both championship games went to OT. One team scored a TD on their first possession and the other threw a pick. I don't see anyone moaning about the rams winning by kicking a field goal. Shouldn't they have to score a TD as well or should the saints have a chance to respond? If you can't play defence then you won't win a game. The only way to get away from this scenario would be to play another 10 or 15 minute period to its conclusion but then people would still find reasons to moan!
Is it really that hard to see the difference between (1) a game where both teams had a possession in overtime, and the team who fared the best on their possession won, and (2) a game where only one team had a possession and the other team did not get the chance to match it (or exceed it, if they went for 2)?

As for safeties in overtime, this should not end the game either in my opinion. If the defense scores a safety, they get 2 points. Or if you want to look at it from an offensive angle, the offense scored -2 points. In the unlikely event of a safety on the opening drive of overtime - it has only ever happened twice I believe - the scoring team's offense should still get the ball and be tasked with doing better than scoring -2 points. As it is still possible to score -6 points via a defensive touchdown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
How come rule's are "only broken" after the Patriots win.why wasn't there a push to change the unfairness of scoring a TD to win the game in OT after 2014 & 2015 when Rodgers and the Packers went out of both post-seasons in OT without ever getting on the field(the Packers where the road team so called the coin flip but lost the coin toss in both games).

adding another full quarter with both teams having 3 TO's could easily have made both games on Sunday 4 hour plus marathons and by the end it could more be about players been mentally/physically exhausted more than the best team winning.also if you are playing another full quarter do you need another half time stoppage rather than just playing straight on??
Nothing to do with the Patriots, I have criticised the overtime rule for years. I favour a college-style system of matched possessions round-for-round, except start from further back than they do in college. Maybe your own 40 yard line.

They should do away with the clock completely in overtime. I mean what purpose does it serve? The game lasts 60 minutes. If that doesn't sort them out, why do we need to time it further? In the playoffs, you need a winner so who cares. In the regular season, I simply do not get this idea of having ties after 75 (now 70) minutes. If a tie is fine after 70 minutes, just call it a tie at 60 minutes. If you don't like ties, play until you get a winner, in which case why do we need the clock? Play a series each, swap ends if you need to repeat, until one team outscores the other. If the teams match each other, be that TD, field goal, safety or nothing at all, keep playing.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 25.01.2019, 01:11 AM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
watched the NFL Films mic'ed up stuff today.Edelman telling Brady "he's too old" after the Dorsett TD was great.
Yeah, they're the underdogs, man. Nobody ever believed in 5-time winning Super Bowl and 8-time consecutive Championship game quarterback Tom Brady and his equally successful coach.

It's so tiresome. Pretty much every team does it.

Now, I wonder if Jason Kelce is getting ready to do another speech this February on the steps in Philadelphia about how everyone believed in them this time but they let everyone down? No? Oh.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 25.01.2019, 03:02 AM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by European Bob View Post
Is it really that hard to see the difference between (1) a game where both teams had a possession in overtime, and the team who fared the best on their possession won, and (2) a game where only one team had a possession and the other team did not get the chance to match it (or exceed it, if they went for 2)?

As for safeties in overtime, this should not end the game either in my opinion. If the defense scores a safety, they get 2 points. Or if you want to look at it from an offensive angle, the offense scored -2 points. In the unlikely event of a safety on the opening drive of overtime - it has only ever happened twice I believe - the scoring team's offense should still get the ball and be tasked with doing better than scoring -2 points. As it is still possible to score -6 points via a defensive touchdown.



gotta say you lost me on this one, as 0 is also better than -2 so they could just kneel it out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by European Bob View Post
Yeah, they're the underdogs, man. Nobody ever believed in 5-time winning Super Bowl and 8-time consecutive Championship game quarterback Tom Brady and his equally successful coach.

It's so tiresome. Pretty much every team does it.

Now, I wonder if Jason Kelce is getting ready to do another speech this February on the steps in Philadelphia about how everyone believed in them this time but they let everyone down? No? Oh.

indeed, some teams have a right to it but the Pats just take the pee with it, its down to there inability to take any negative comment at all.


people are bored of them because they think they will win not because they think they are garbage.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 25.01.2019, 09:35 PM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
gotta say you lost me on this one, as 0 is also better than -2 so they could just kneel it out?
Yes, you could and indeed would. But you should still play the series so each team has had a go even if it is just taking knees. In regulation, you take knees as you must see the clock out; here you would take knees to see your turn out (since there is no game clock, only a play clock). In reality you would probably see that happen once in a decade. And the defense can channel their inner Greg Schiano as that's how they do things at Rutgers.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 25.01.2019, 09:51 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by European Bob View Post
Yes, you could and indeed would. But you should still play the series so each team has had a go even if it is just taking knees. In regulation, you take knees as you must see the clock out; here you would take knees to see your turn out (since there is no game clock, only a play clock). In reality you would probably see that happen once in a decade. And the defense can channel their inner Greg Schiano as that's how they do things at Rutgers.

it would be rare to get a safety on the first drive.


but pretty sure that part wouldnt pass mustard in terms of getting out of the rules committee and the old cheap shots on a kneel down can cause injuries.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 25.01.2019, 10:13 PM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
it would be rare to get a safety on the first drive.


but pretty sure that part wouldnt pass mustard in terms of getting out of the rules committee and the old cheap shots on a kneel down can cause injuries.
There have only been 2 ever, I believe. One was for the Vikings against the LA Rams in 1989, a blocked punt after the first possession that probably should have been a defensive TD but for poor handling and the ball going out the back of the end zone, hence a safety. Then in 2004 the Bears sacked the Titans QB in the end zone on the first possession.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 09:13 AM.