Author Topic: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy  (Read 1501 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #60 on: January 23, 2019, 05:16:36 PM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25038
  • Tommy Points: 1149
  • What a Pub Should Be
The Chiefs had the best offense, but also the worst defense.  They lost a playoff game because they lost a coin flip.

You aren't really making a strong case here for 'unfairness'.

We can easily just say: They lost a playoff game because they have the worst defense.



The point does still remain, though, had the Chiefs won the coin toss it is exceedingly likely they'd be in the SB.

The NFL has set up the rules to heavily favor offenses over defenses, so it's kind of just common sense both offenses should get an equal chance.
No it really isn't likely they would have scored a TD and won.

The Rams and Saints both have amazing offenses, the 2nd best and 8th best in the league. But the Rams, the 19th best defense in the league, were able to stop Brees and the vaunted Saints offense.

There is nothing unfair to an entire team in a coin flip. Both teams have a 50% chance to get their offense on the field and score a TD. If you lose the coin flip, go out and play defense, like what happened in the NFC Championship game.

I think there would've been a decent chance that they would've, though. 

KC's last three possessions of regulation were TD, TD, FG.  And the only reason they probably settle for a FG there was because of time constraints.    You could certainly argue KC had the Pats defense on the ropes there.   They sorta figured it out in that 2nd half.   Points on 5 of 7 possessions.
But not likely. Any team has a decent chance of scoring a TD to start OT. Every team has a decent chance to stop teams from scoring a TD as well. Proof, the Rams earlier that day.

Well, now its just semantics now, isn't it?  What's "not likely" or "decent" to mean?  Neither New Orleans or LA had the offensive momentum rolling into overtime that the Pats & Chiefs had.  I certainly wasn't seeing that.  A combined 3 FGs in that 4th quarter where you had 5 TDs and a FG in the 4th quarter of the AFC game.

It sure seemed to me that KC was figuring out that Pats defense at the end.  Just like the Pats had the KC defense figured out in the 4th quarter.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #61 on: January 23, 2019, 06:24:00 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37006
  • Tommy Points: 6040
The Chiefs had the best offense, but also the worst defense.  They lost a playoff game because they lost a coin flip.

You aren't really making a strong case here for 'unfairness'.

We can easily just say: They lost a playoff game because they have the worst defense.



The point does still remain, though, had the Chiefs won the coin toss it is exceedingly likely they'd be in the SB.

The NFL has set up the rules to heavily favor offenses over defenses, so it's kind of just common sense both offenses should get an equal chance.
No it really isn't likely they would have scored a TD and won.

The Rams and Saints both have amazing offenses, the 2nd best and 8th best in the league. But the Rams, the 19th best defense in the league, were able to stop Brees and the vaunted Saints offense.

There is nothing unfair to an entire team in a coin flip. Both teams have a 50% chance to get their offense on the field and score a TD. If you lose the coin flip, go out and play defense, like what happened in the NFC Championship game.

I think there would've been a decent chance that they would've, though. 

KC's last three possessions of regulation were TD, TD, FG.  And the only reason they probably settle for a FG there was because of time constraints.    You could certainly argue KC had the Pats defense on the ropes there.   They sorta figured it out in that 2nd half.   Points on 5 of 7 possessions.
But not likely. Any team has a decent chance of scoring a TD to start OT. Every team has a decent chance to stop teams from scoring a TD as well. Proof, the Rams earlier that day.

Well, now its just semantics now, isn't it?  What's "not likely" or "decent" to mean?  Neither New Orleans or LA had the offensive momentum rolling into overtime that the Pats & Chiefs had.  I certainly wasn't seeing that.  A combined 3 FGs in that 4th quarter where you had 5 TDs and a FG in the 4th quarter of the AFC game.

It sure seemed to me that KC was figuring out that Pats defense at the end.  Just like the Pats had the KC defense figured out in the 4th quarter.
Okay, likely, decent...yes semantics.

But if the C's and Cleveland go to overtime tonight, it's likely the Celtics will win because they have the much better offense. Should the NBA change OT rules because teams with good offenses are more likely to win in OT?

If Baltimore was going into OT versus Arizona, would it be fair to Arizona if Baltimore won the toss and elected to kick because Baltimore has the best defense and Arizona the worst offense and so Baltimore was likely to stop Arizona and get the ball in good position and score? Do we change the rules because it was likely Baltimore had a good enough defense to stop Arizona?

I don't know. Call me old school. It's a coin flip. Coin flip means fair odds to get to choose what you want to do. And if you lose the coin flip, it doesn't matter if the team is likely to score or has a decent chance to score or very little chance to score, you still need to play the other half of the game. You have to play defense and do your job so that the offense can get the ball and do their job.

New Orleans after winning the coin toss was likely to score a TD. They threw an interception and lost. Know why? Because the Rams' defense did their job. A defense that was ranked 19th in the league.

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #62 on: January 25, 2019, 02:39:09 PM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25038
  • Tommy Points: 1149
  • What a Pub Should Be
Ummm... so this happened...in the US Senate. Not photoshopped, apparently.



2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #63 on: January 27, 2019, 11:54:13 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21623
  • Tommy Points: 1027
The Chiefs had the best offense, but also the worst defense.  They lost a playoff game because they lost a coin flip.

You aren't really making a strong case here for 'unfairness'.

We can easily just say: They lost a playoff game because they have the worst defense.



The point does still remain, though, had the Chiefs won the coin toss it is exceedingly likely they'd be in the SB.

The NFL has set up the rules to heavily favor offenses over defenses, so it's kind of just common sense both offenses should get an equal chance.
No it really isn't likely they would have scored a TD and won.

The Rams and Saints both have amazing offenses, the 2nd best and 8th best in the league. But the Rams, the 19th best defense in the league, were able to stop Brees and the vaunted Saints offense.

There is nothing unfair to an entire team in a coin flip. Both teams have a 50% chance to get their offense on the field and score a TD. If you lose the coin flip, go out and play defense, like what happened in the NFC Championship game.

I think there would've been a decent chance that they would've, though. 

KC's last three possessions of regulation were TD, TD, FG.  And the only reason they probably settle for a FG there was because of time constraints.    You could certainly argue KC had the Pats defense on the ropes there.   They sorta figured it out in that 2nd half.   Points on 5 of 7 possessions.
But not likely. Any team has a decent chance of scoring a TD to start OT. Every team has a decent chance to stop teams from scoring a TD as well. Proof, the Rams earlier that day.

Well, now its just semantics now, isn't it?  What's "not likely" or "decent" to mean?  Neither New Orleans or LA had the offensive momentum rolling into overtime that the Pats & Chiefs had.  I certainly wasn't seeing that.  A combined 3 FGs in that 4th quarter where you had 5 TDs and a FG in the 4th quarter of the AFC game.

It sure seemed to me that KC was figuring out that Pats defense at the end.  Just like the Pats had the KC defense figured out in the 4th quarter.
Okay, likely, decent...yes semantics.

But if the C's and Cleveland go to overtime tonight, it's likely the Celtics will win because they have the much better offense. Should the NBA change OT rules because teams with good offenses are more likely to win in OT?

If Baltimore was going into OT versus Arizona, would it be fair to Arizona if Baltimore won the toss and elected to kick because Baltimore has the best defense and Arizona the worst offense and so Baltimore was likely to stop Arizona and get the ball in good position and score? Do we change the rules because it was likely Baltimore had a good enough defense to stop Arizona?

I don't know. Call me old school. It's a coin flip. Coin flip means fair odds to get to choose what you want to do. And if you lose the coin flip, it doesn't matter if the team is likely to score or has a decent chance to score or very little chance to score, you still need to play the other half of the game. You have to play defense and do your job so that the offense can get the ball and do their job.

New Orleans after winning the coin toss was likely to score a TD. They threw an interception and lost. Know why? Because the Rams' defense did their job. A defense that was ranked 19th in the league.
Come on, basketball overtime is still basketball where both teams possess the ball and they play 5 minutes of actual basketball.  Can you imagine if the NBA playoff overtime rule was a coin flip for possession and then if that team hits a 3 the game is over but if they only score 1 or 2, the other team gets a possession and a chance to win before straight up sudden death for the rest of the game.  I mean that is the equivalent, not some weird hypotheticals that you are talking about. 

The fact that a coin flip can disproportional determine the outcome of a playoff game is ridiculous (frankly it is ridiculous in the regular season as well, but at least that doesn't end a team's season directly).  It has always been ridiculous.  It was 2 years ago when the Patriots won the Superbowl over the Falcons, it was last weekend when both games went to overtime, but only 1 ended without a team touching the ball, it will be ridiculous in the current Superbowl if it happens again, and it will be ridiculous until they actually change the rule. 

Not even ending a soccer or hockey game on a shoot out is as ridiculous as the NFL coin flip.  And the NHL only does that for the regular season and in the playoffs they just play hockey until there is a winner.  They also don't have coin flips and on some measure is decided on the field with both teams having an equal number of chances at both offense and defense (which is why the NFL rule is still the most ridiculous game ending rule of any sport). 

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #64 on: January 27, 2019, 03:50:46 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37006
  • Tommy Points: 6040
Teams winning the coin flip win 52% of the time. The current rules with a coin flip are delivering almost perfect 50/50 chances of winning in overtime.

Wanna win an OT game in the NFL? Have every part of your team playing their best and your team stands an even chance of winning. And remember these rules were set up for every NFL game because teams with bad offenses, bad special teams and good defenses might have to play OT too.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2019, 05:21:39 PM by nickagneta »

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #65 on: January 27, 2019, 04:18:21 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9498
  • Tommy Points: 414
Teams winning the coin flip win 52% of the time. The current rules with a coin flip are delivering almost perfect 50/50 chances of winning in overtime.

Wanna win an OT game in the NFL? Have every part of your team playing their best and your team stands an even chance of winning. And remember these rules were set up for every NFL game because teams with bad offenses, bad special teams and good defenses might have to play OT too.
People keep making it out as if getting possession in OT is comparable to serving in tennis or something, where it really isnít. Nobody even cared about OT rules after the New Orleans v LA game, lol
« Last Edit: January 27, 2019, 05:21:52 PM by nickagneta »

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #66 on: January 27, 2019, 05:23:14 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37006
  • Tommy Points: 6040
Teams winning the coin flip win 52% of the time. The current rules with a coin flip are delivering almost perfect 50/50 chances of winning in overtime.

Wanna win an OT game in the NFL? Have every part of your team playing their best and your team stands an even chance of winning. And remember these rules were set up for every NFL game because teams with bad offenses, bad special teams and good defenses might have to play OT too.
People keep making it out as if getting possession in OT is comparable to serving in tennis or something, where it really isnít. Nobody even cared about OT rules after the New Orleans v LA game, lol
Yeah, the unfairness of the coin toss really had a major effect on that Saints-Rams game

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #67 on: January 27, 2019, 05:32:58 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14521
  • Tommy Points: 1575
I like the OT rule in the NFL.  Not perfect but I think as fair as you can get without falling down a rabbit hole.  If you lose the coin toss you have a very decent chance to get the ball ó just prevent a touchdown.  And then you actually have an advantage ó 1) you can end the game with a FG, or 2) if youíre down a FG you have full use of 4 downs for the entire drive. 

Way better than the old sudden death and feels more like actual football than the NCAA process or creating something like the NHL shootout. 

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #68 on: January 27, 2019, 08:35:17 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21623
  • Tommy Points: 1027
Since the rule changed there have been 5 OT playoff games, 4 of them ended on the 1st possession in OT with the team winning the toss not letting the other team get the ball.  The Rams/Saints is the only exception.  So, sure if you count the regular season where dregs are playing you get a more even result, but when you are dealing with the best teams (and best offenses), they end the game more times then they don't in the games that really matter. 

Prior to that the OT games were under the FG rule, the most recent of those went back and forth a couple of times, but the 2 before that both ended on the first possession.  So of the last 8 playoff games to go to overtime, 6 of the games ended with only 1 team possessing the ball in overtime.  That is problematic given it is entirely chance on who gets the ball first.

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #69 on: January 27, 2019, 08:42:56 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11395
  • Tommy Points: 1339
Since the rule changed there have been 5 OT playoff games, 4 of them ended on the 1st possession in OT with the team winning the toss not letting the other team get the ball.  The Rams/Saints is the only exception.  So, sure if you count the regular season where dregs are playing you get a more even result, but when you are dealing with the best teams (and best offenses), they end the game more times then they don't in the games that really matter. 

Prior to that the OT games were under the FG rule, the most recent of those went back and forth a couple of times, but the 2 before that both ended on the first possession.  So of the last 8 playoff games to go to overtime, 6 of the games ended with only 1 team possessing the ball in overtime.  That is problematic given it is entirely chance on who gets the ball first.

And with the way the league is trending, I expect these numbers to hold.

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #70 on: January 27, 2019, 08:50:48 PM »

Offline SparzWizard

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7471
  • Tommy Points: 430
Interestingly, there were a lot of flags today in the Pro Bowl.

And actually, PASS INTERFERENCE calls were being made! They were one week too late.

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #71 on: January 27, 2019, 09:19:29 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21623
  • Tommy Points: 1027
Since the rule changed there have been 5 OT playoff games, 4 of them ended on the 1st possession in OT with the team winning the toss not letting the other team get the ball.  The Rams/Saints is the only exception.  So, sure if you count the regular season where dregs are playing you get a more even result, but when you are dealing with the best teams (and best offenses), they end the game more times then they don't in the games that really matter. 

Prior to that the OT games were under the FG rule, the most recent of those went back and forth a couple of times, but the 2 before that both ended on the first possession.  So of the last 8 playoff games to go to overtime, 6 of the games ended with only 1 team possessing the ball in overtime.  That is problematic given it is entirely chance on who gets the ball first.

And with the way the league is trending, I expect these numbers to hold.
Yeah, I think the league realized the FG rule was super unfair and tried to help it along with the TD rule, but I suspect they will do something else as a coin flip should never really decide who wins a game, but especially a playoff game. 

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #72 on: January 27, 2019, 09:37:25 PM »

Online csfansince60s

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5861
  • Tommy Points: 2139
 An interesting report today surfaced on the non-call for the interference from CBS News.

4 of the officials directly involved in the non-call were all from  Southern California.

Quote
But in a league constantly trying to safeguard the integrity of the game, there are some privately wondering how four officials with Southern California roots wound up officiating a conference championship game that involved a Los Angeles team.
There is a perception of bias that the league either ignored or was blind to when it assigned this crew to this game. It ultimately could wind up influencing officiating assignments in the future, according to a league source, to make sure a scenario like this does not happen again.

The report says that neither the Saints nor the NFL feel that anything untoward happened,  but rather that any hint of impropriety impacts negatively on the NFL product.

Re: NFL playoffs - Replay and OT controversy
« Reply #73 on: January 27, 2019, 09:57:52 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37006
  • Tommy Points: 6040
An interesting report today surfaced on the non-call for the interference from CBS News.

4 of the officials directly involved in the non-call were all from  Southern California.

Quote
But in a league constantly trying to safeguard the integrity of the game, there are some privately wondering how four officials with Southern California roots wound up officiating a conference championship game that involved a Los Angeles team.
There is a perception of bias that the league either ignored or was blind to when it assigned this crew to this game. It ultimately could wind up influencing officiating assignments in the future, according to a league source, to make sure a scenario like this does not happen again.

The report says that neither the Saints nor the NFL feel that anything untoward happened,  but rather that any hint of impropriety impacts negatively on the NFL product.
I don't think anything untoward occurred but when you aren't sending a whole crew who have officiated all year together to do the game and the officiating crew is an All-Star crew from across the whole realm of officiating, is it really that hard to make sure any of the officials you choose don't live in any of the two team's cities that are playing in the game?

The NFL shouldn't want even a hint of impropriety. 4 LA based refs in a game with the Rams playing just does not look good.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required