Superbowl 51 Game day thread. - Page 58 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > National Football League > Gameday Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #571  
Old 07.02.2017, 07:36 PM
lee harris 10's Avatar
lee harris 10 lee harris 10 is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 05.09.2010
Posts: 10,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pozbaird View Post
If there is still a clear bias towards the coin toss winners, then what about my idea of not tossing a coin, but in any OT game, give the choice to receive the ball or not to the team scoring more TDs than field goals in the 60 mins, or if TDs are tied, award the choice to the team with less personal fouls against them.
whats wrong with a coin toss its a 50/50.there where 2 coin tosses on sunday and guess what Slater lost one and won one.

Belichick has twice won the coin toss since 2013 and decided to kick the ball as its sometimes tactics.in 2013 we played denver and took the wind instead of the ball and in 2015 playing the Jets we decided to put there offence on the field even though we had jusr driven the field to score but decided that we would put our defence out there to hopefully get a stop and they drove down the field for a TD.
Reply With Quote
  #572  
Old 07.02.2017, 08:23 PM
pozbaird's Avatar
pozbaird pozbaird is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 14.01.2010
Posts: 1,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rory426 View Post
Depends if you think kicking a long field goal means you were the better team. If the other team drove closer to the goal do they not deserve a win?

I think it's easier to keep it how it is. The Pats were on the other side of an OT TD in Denver in 2015 and it is what it is. We had the opportunity to stop CJ Anderson from running it in from the halfway line, but didn't, and lost. Likewise if we had and they scored a FG, we'd have a chance to win. It's not perfect but it's fine how it is IMO.
So, you think a toss of a coin is better than giving the choice to the team who scored most TDs in the preceeding sixty minutes? Remember, I only suggested 'who kicked the longest field goal' as a THIRD option to tossing a coin.
Reply With Quote
  #573  
Old 07.02.2017, 08:33 PM
pozbaird's Avatar
pozbaird pozbaird is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 14.01.2010
Posts: 1,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
whats wrong with a coin toss its a 50/50.there where 2 coin tosses on sunday and guess what Slater lost one and won one.

Belichick has twice won the coin toss since 2013 and decided to kick the ball as its sometimes tactics.in 2013 we played denver and took the wind instead of the ball and in 2015 playing the Jets we decided to put there offence on the field even though we had jusr driven the field to score but decided that we would put our defence out there to hopefully get a stop and they drove down the field for a TD.
What's wrong with the coin toss is that it still favours the team who wins it after a tied game. At the start of the game, it's 0-0, no-one has done anything, so toss a coin to get started. After 60 mins - and a tie, reward anyone who scored more TDs (if someone did) by giving them the choice. It wouldn't be difficult, wouldn't take any longer than the time it takes the zebras to give it the 'the NFL logo is heads' speech.

I don't think the NFL will do it, I'm not losing any sleep over it, but I find it strange that folk would rather go for the toss of a coin, in a situation that clearly favours the lucky coin toss winner, over rewarding play that resulted in TDs during the game....

I mean, aren't teams in the Six Nations now getting an extra point for scoring four tries? That rewards play, so would awarding an NFL team in any OT situation.
Reply With Quote
  #574  
Old 07.02.2017, 08:41 PM
AfcBOli27's Avatar
AfcBOli27 AfcBOli27 is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: 31.08.2013
Posts: 748
Default

I honestly dont think there would be as much fuss if the Falcons had won the toss and scored a TD.
Why? Because they led comfortably for half of the game (2nd and 3rd quarters as it was 0-0 at the end of the 1st) and therefore our brains tell us that they are more deserving.
We allow ourselves to believe they were hard done by. The magnitude of the game plays a part too.

I cant remember, but was there this questioning of the rules when Wilson threw a bomb to Baldwin against the Packers in the NFC CG in 2014? They won that game with 1st possession in OT having been outplayed for the majority of the regulation 60 mins.
Reply With Quote
  #575  
Old 08.02.2017, 12:24 AM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AfcBOli27 View Post
For the people questioning whether the OT rules should be changed, on the basis its been a shootout (due to defences being dominated) and therefore both offences should be given the ball.
What if its been a low scoring game, say 10-10 or 14-14 or 6-6 (Hawks @ Cards)?
Should both defences be given a chance to "stop"?

You have to have a rule that suits as many situations and circumstances, whilst still being fair. The current rules are about as fair as you can get imo. The win % of teams who win the coin toss is ~60% so there is a little bias but not a huge bias.

On sundays game the Falcons were outscored 25-7 over the second 30 mins. That was sufficient time to make a stop or put more points on the board imo. They also had drives inside the Pats 30 (FG range) and managed to be pushed back.
a rule of matching would be fair, it might be hard to come up with a perfect rule but there are better options that the current system.


Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
think i watched the 3 overtime games that went to the tie or settled on the last second(chiefs @ broncos) and they lasted nearly 4 hours each.the TV networks dont really want that as it messes with there schedule.Yes we could like the NHL have different overtime rules for regular season/play-offs but surely the near drama of sudden death with a TD or defensive score makes it better saying lets play another full 15 minutes.
with some games maybe but i'm sure in the playoffs they would love the chance for the extra viewers.

even in the regular season, networks like live events and pay a lot for the rights, so getting more probably wont sound too bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AfcBOli27 View Post
I honestly dont think there would be as much fuss if the Falcons had won the toss and scored a TD.
Why? Because they led comfortably for half of the game (2nd and 3rd quarters as it was 0-0 at the end of the 1st) and therefore our brains tell us that they are more deserving.
We allow ourselves to believe they were hard done by. The magnitude of the game plays a part too.

I cant remember, but was there this questioning of the rules when Wilson threw a bomb to Baldwin against the Packers in the NFC CG in 2014? They won that game with 1st possession in OT having been outplayed for the majority of the regulation 60 mins.

tbh i think the fuss would of been even bigger, Brady red hot and then not getting the shot to reply.

people felt the same way after the Cards-Packers last year.

i always bring it up, even in the regular season, it just feels silly that a coin toss can play such a huge part, its giving a team an extra possession based on luck.
Reply With Quote
  #576  
Old 08.02.2017, 09:55 AM
PavlovsDog's Avatar
PavlovsDog PavlovsDog is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 06.11.2004
Posts: 18,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AfcBOli27 View Post
I honestly dont think there would be as much fuss if the Falcons had won the toss and scored a TD.
Why? Because they led comfortably for half of the game (2nd and 3rd quarters as it was 0-0 at the end of the 1st) and therefore our brains tell us that they are more deserving.
We allow ourselves to believe they were hard done by. The magnitude of the game plays a part too.

I cant remember, but was there this questioning of the rules when Wilson threw a bomb to Baldwin against the Packers in the NFC CG in 2014? They won that game with 1st possession in OT having been outplayed for the majority of the regulation 60 mins.
Surely by definition a team can't have been outplayed if they have forced a game to overtime?
Reply With Quote
  #577  
Old 08.02.2017, 10:04 AM
nick_chicane's Avatar
nick_chicane nick_chicane is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 10.09.2006
Posts: 6,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AfcBOli27 View Post
I honestly dont think there would be as much fuss if the Falcons had won the toss and scored a TD.
Why? Because they led comfortably for half of the game (2nd and 3rd quarters as it was 0-0 at the end of the 1st) and therefore our brains tell us that they are more deserving.
We allow ourselves to believe they were hard done by. The magnitude of the game plays a part too.
Nonsense, I'd have said the same if the Falcons had won. A Superbowl shouldn't be decided on a coin toss. Had the Falcons had the chance to respond to the Patriots TD, and failed, then you have a worthy winner.
Reply With Quote
  #578  
Old 08.02.2017, 10:14 AM
Jenni Kohoutova's Avatar
Jenni Kohoutova Jenni Kohoutova is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: 01.02.2012
Posts: 830
Default

They've tweaked it relatively recently to take field goal on first possession sudden death away in OT, so I don't see why they couldn't tweak it again to remove the coin toss element from it. I agree that it would be an improvement.

This issue might get more focus, now that a first superbowl has been decided in OT. Atlanta's offence is much lauded, so it does seem unfortunate that they didn't get a chance to operate at all in OT, just because a coin toss dictated that it be so.
Reply With Quote
  #579  
Old 08.02.2017, 03:13 PM
AfcBOli27's Avatar
AfcBOli27 AfcBOli27 is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: 31.08.2013
Posts: 748
Default

That would be the lauded Atlanta offence that had 14 snaps (9 throws and 5 rushes) after scoring their 4th TD, had the ball inside the Pats 30 inside the last 5 mins and went backwards.
Reply With Quote
  #580  
Old 08.02.2017, 03:17 PM
Jenni Kohoutova's Avatar
Jenni Kohoutova Jenni Kohoutova is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: 01.02.2012
Posts: 830
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AfcBOli27 View Post
That would be the lauded Atlanta offence that had 14 snaps (9 throws and 5 rushes) after scoring their 4th TD, had the ball inside the Pats 30 inside the last 5 mins and went backwards.
I don't believe that any OT game has been won by an offence that went backwards, so I'd say it's unlikely they'd have tried to pull the backwards stunt again in OT, if they'd had the opportunity.
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


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 05:43 PM.