NFL 2018-19

[boogielicious]

3 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Why stop at the refs, why not replace the players too?  Remember this game:

 

This was what we had in my youth before computers (I know, a dark time). There was always one player that just spun around in circles.

[JetFan1983]

7 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Why stop at the refs, why not replace the players too?  Remember this game:

 

Wow, I thought I knew of all the old school games, but I guess not. That one looks super weird.

Hey, we won't need to replace the players because medicine will be so advanced that ACL tears will only take 2-3 weeks to recover from. Now, where it'll get tricky is when the super rich start genetically enhancing their children in the zygote stage to all be elite athletes. Then I'll be on board with robot football 

2 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

This was what we had in my youth before computers (I know, a dark time). There was always one player that just spun around in circles.

Wow, was it hard playing it by candle light? 

[boogielicious]

Just now, JetFan1983 said:

Wow, was it hard playing it by candle light? 

Nah. We just made my little brother run on a hamster wheel to generate the electricity for the game and a 25 watt bulb.

It was just a matter of time.

Rams-Saints outcome fuels lawsuit seeking a Rule 17 do-over

---

A Sunday night item explaining a rule that, in theory, gives the Commissioner the power to order a do-over as the remedy for extraordinary unfair...

 

[JetFan1983]

17 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Nah. We just made my little brother run on a hamster wheel to generate the electricity for the game and a 25 watt bulb.

It was just a matter of time.

Rams-Saints outcome fuels lawsuit seeking a Rule 17 do-over

---

A Sunday night item explaining a rule that, in theory, gives the Commissioner the power to order a do-over as the remedy for extraordinary unfair...

 

Lol, hey I was all for the Lexi Thompson penalty but even for me this is a bridge too far 

Also, it looks like pass interference is going to be reviewable next year. I think I'd be fine with it. Maybe make it only a playoff rule or something so the regular season games don't get slowed down. Or maybe it's alright making it apply to all games since those games do matter.  

 

PS- Very smart use of the little brother btw. 

Edited January 22, 2019 by JetFan1983

[bkuehn1952]

Reviewing penalties would be a disaster and that would not have helped the N.O. Saints.  No penalty was called so there would be nothing to review.  Pass interference is much like holding by the offensive line.  Every play likely has some degree of interference and holding.  If there are reviews, every play has to be reviewed.

[JetFan1983]

4 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Reviewing penalties would be a disaster and that would not have helped the N.O. Saints.  No penalty was called so there would be nothing to review.  Pass interference is much like holding by the offensive line.  Every play likely has some degree of interference and holding.  If there are reviews, every play has to be reviewed.

I disagree. For one thing, holding won't be reviewable. We're mostly just talking about pass interference here, even though some other penalties are being looked at as possibly reviewable (which ones I don't know, but I doubt it's going to be holding). Second, obviously the new rule would allow a coach to challenge a no-call on a pass interference haha. And I think if a coach red flags what is mostly hand fighting, the refs probably won't give it to them. In the Saints case, it absolutely would have helped them, at least insofar as extending that drive. What would have happened after that, we'll never know.

Plus they already allow some penalties to be reviewed like twelve men on the field. I don't think it'd be a disaster.

[boogielicious]

14 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Reviewing penalties would be a disaster and that would not have helped the N.O. Saints.  No penalty was called so there would be nothing to review.  Pass interference is much like holding by the offensive line.  Every play likely has some degree of interference and holding.  If there are reviews, every play has to be reviewed.

That is not how the proposal works. The teams still only have 3 challenges as they do now, so no more delay than we already have. They can review any play and say they think it was interference or helmet to helmet or not roughing the passer and the penalty would them be called or reversed.

Belichick proposed this several years ago stating that every play is important. So in NO case, they can ask and say it was interference. In KCs case, they could ask and say Brady didn't get hit in the head.

 

[JetFan1983]

@bkuehn1952 rereading my reply, I could see how that post kind of comes off a bit condescending, so hopefully you didn’t get that at all. I respectfully disagreed of course 😄

[boogielicious]

11 minutes ago, JetFan1983 said:

@bkuehn1952 rereading my reply, I could see how that post kind of comes off a bit condescending, so hopefully you didn’t get that at all. I respectfully disagreed of course 😄

How could a guy with a Brandel Chamblee avatar ever come across as condescending?

[JetFan1983]

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

How could a guy with a Brandel Chamblee avatar ever come across as condescending?

Haha, point taken. 😄

[Golfingdad]

On 1/21/2019 at 11:30 AM, klineka said:

My wife and I were talking about this after the game last night.

The game wasn't decided by a coin toss, the Chiefs still had a chance to stop the Patriots and didn't. It's not like 8 or 9 times out of 10 the team that wins the toss marches down and scores a touchdown. Based on a reddit post, from 1974-2003 both teams had possession 72.3% of the time, and the team that won the toss won 52% of the time during that timeframe. 

Those were with the old OT rules too where just a field goal at any point in OT ended the game. So now as of like 2011 IIRC, it is even more difficult for the team that wins the coin toss to win the game without giving the other team the ball on offense, so that 72.3% number is likely even higher now.

 

But even saying all that, I do agree that both teams should have a chance with the ball. I'm a big fan of how college football does the OT, and would love to see something like that implemented in the NFL, even if they moved the starting position back a bit to like the 50 yard line or something.

I just read an article showing this information,and it goes even a step further.  Not only do NFL teams winning the toss win just a hair over half of the time but look at the stat regarding my, and many other peoples, suggested solution of doing it like college does it:

Quote

In the NFL, 52.7 percent of teams winning the overtime coin toss (and receiving) win the game at some point in overtime, according to Ross Tucker of SiriusXM NFL Radio. In college football, the team that wins the coin toss (and defers) wins 54.9 percent of the time.

So if we are trying to lessen the affects of the coin toss, it seems like we should stick with the status quo.  However, if we just forget that part, and just go for entertainment value and excitement, the college way definitely delivers that.

 

Here's the article: 

Coin toss would remain important if OT rule is tweaked

---

If the NFL tweaks its overtime rule, guaranteeing both teams a possession, the coin toss remains as important if not more important. As it stands now, the team winning the overtime coin toss has an obvious advantage. Score...

---

Now I'm trying to imagine the buzz we'd be seeing this week on this topic if the Chiefs won the toss and drove down for a touchdown.  I think it's fairly safe to say that there wouldn't be any. :)

Edited January 22, 2019 by Golfingdad

[TGMTeacher]

5 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Nah. We just made my little brother run on a hamster wheel to generate the electricity for the game and a 25 watt bulb.

It was just a matter of time.

Rams-Saints outcome fuels lawsuit seeking a Rule 17 do-over

---

A Sunday night item explaining a rule that, in theory, gives the Commissioner the power to order a do-over as the remedy for extraordinary unfair...

 

I live in New Orleans and considering who the attorney is the suit may have a hard time being taken seriously.

[bkuehn1952]

4 hours ago, JetFan1983 said:

 ..obviously the new rule would allow a coach to challenge a no-call on a pass interference ...In the Saints case, it absolutely would have helped them...

I have read that the NFL is not considering situations where no flag is thrown.  They are only considering a review when a penalty is called.  An unnamed member of the NFL Competition Committee confirmed that scenario to several sports writers.  I do not know if that is correct or not but it seems more plausible than opening up every pass play to review.

My "source"

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/reviewable-pass-interference-would-not-have-changed-outcome-for-saints/ar-BBSB5KM

 

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by bkuehn1952

[JetFan1983]

57 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

I have read that the NFL is not considering situations where no flag is thrown.  They are only considering a review when a penalty is called.  An unnamed member of the NFL Competition Committee confirmed that scenario to several sports writers.  I do not know if that is correct or not but it seems more plausible than opening up every pass play to review.

My "source"

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/reviewable-pass-interference-would-not-have-changed-outcome-for-saints/ar-BBSB5KM

 

 

Thanks for the link. That’d be hysterical if their “solution” didn’t even address the controversy 🤣

Classic NFL. 

[Buckeyebowman]

8 hours ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Reviewing penalties would be a disaster and that would not have helped the N.O. Saints.  No penalty was called so there would be nothing to review.  Pass interference is much like holding by the offensive line.  Every play likely has some degree of interference and holding.  If there are reviews, every play has to be reviewed.

I agree. How long do they want games to be? The Pats had 3 double digit leads and blew them all! Just didn't take care of business! Here's my question, when is the NFL going to hire full time, professional referees?! 

[Vinsk]

11 hours ago, boogielicious said:

This was what we had in my youth before computers (I know, a dark time). There was always one player that just spun around in circles.

So awesome you posted this. The guy that just spun around....priceless. And yeah...flicking that little foam football to hit a receiver? Lol.....ahhh memories.

2 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

when is the NFL going to hire full time, professional referees?! 

Many of those refs have their JP’s. These aren’t just guys off the street volunteering. Bad calls have happened for sure and there needs to be some improvement.  But let’s remember officiating the NFL is not an easy job.

[boogielicious]

U.S. Congressman wants Roger Goodell to testify before an antitrust subcommittee

---

Commissioner Roger Goodell probably shouldn’t worry about a lawsuit filed in New Orleans over the blown call at the end of the NFC Championship...

Quote

“What the entire nation witnessed during this past weekend’s NFC Championship game was an upset as a result of an unfair penalty, and I join Saints players, coaches, and fans far and wide over this disappointment,” Congressman Cedric Richmond (D-La.) said in a statement. “The Saints should be on their way to Atlanta to play in the Super Bowl. Instead, they are left with the memory of officials who failed to create an equal playing field and deprived them of that opportunity. Officials should not have the ability to determine the fate of a team who rightfully earned their place in NFL championship history.”

 

[mcanadiens]

12 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Congressman Cedric Richmond (D-La.)

At the risk of getting political, it's an absolute joke that any of our federal legislators are wasting time on such things.