Predict the NFL Super Bowl Champ. Win Big, Big Prizes*!

@Cycloptichorn,

They're going to have to play a hell of a lot better than they played today, that's for sure. Sloppy, sloppy plays and they need to just fall on the ball when it's bouncing around rather than trying to pick it up. They could have recovered at least two of those fumbles if they'd just fallen on the ball.

Gonna enjoy this one though. It's a great feeling to get this far, for sure.

0 Replies

It was 3.30 am when I got my head down.

I hope Tico has broad shoulders.

Why don't they allow one play each from the 20 on a tie break? Tossing a coin is a bit daft.

0 Replies

wow is there no stopping me, just like i predicted, the saints and the colts in the superbowl

unbelievable, of course everyone knows what this means

colts are gonna run away with it (get it, run away with it, they're horses, get it) (oh you got it) (and you didn't like it) (i see)

final score colts 265, saints 2

i know, it's a bold statement, but i've got a feeling, of course it could just be gas, but for now i'm gonna call it a feeling

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

They won because they took care to completely smash Brett Favre every chance they got (and damn the personal fouls). A smashed-up Brett Favre tried to keep going and couldn't quite do it.

So close.

Haven't read any morning-after stuff, hope he's physically OK. (I'm sure he's mentally a wreck.)

edit:

OK, not just that. Fumbles from Peterson, Harvin and Berrian too. Plus the 12th man -- the Superdome crowd. If this had been played in neutral territory or at the Metrodome, the Vikings would've won. But they had their chance even in those circumstances, and messed it up. Sigh.

Congrats to the Saints.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

I agree with the ESPN dudes who proclaimed that the Vikings gave it away at the end of regulation. 12 men in a huddle? Come on... And, all they had to do to win was pick up a couple yards to get back into field goal range but he went with the hero/goat play and ended up on the side of the goat.

Spendius, I disagree about eliminating the coin toss and sudden death overtime. Football is made up of an offense and DEFENSE (and special teams, and fans, etc.). If the Viking defense had done it's job and not allowed two third down conversions then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

3 Replies

@JPB,

One thing I don't like is all the reviews at the end of the game (regulation and/or OT). Let 'em play football!

0 Replies

@JPB,

Quote:

Spendius, I disagree about eliminating the coin toss and sudden death overtime. Football is made up of an offense and DEFENSE (and special teams, and fans, etc.). If the Viking defense had done it's job and not allowed two third down conversions then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

With respect JP that doesn't answer the point. When the game ends in a tie the situation is at it is. What preceded that is neither here nor there. I know how important it is to have possession in your game. It hardly matters in our game at the kick off. Turnovers are constant in that. The toin coss is a large advantage in a first to score situation. Too large in my opinion to pay due respect to the efforts and risks the players have been involved in. It both our game, and in tennis and darts and snooker, there are processes to minimise the effect of a coin toss and I can think of no good reason, unless it's commercial or police and transport arrangements, or getting you all to bed, why your game eschews it.

I daresay the bookies went from evens before the toss to, say, 6 gets you 1 after it.

3 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
Spendius, I disagree about eliminating the coin toss and sudden death overtime. Football is made up of an offense and DEFENSE (and special teams, and fans, etc.). If the Viking defense had done it's job and not allowed two third down conversions then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

With respect JP that doesn't answer the point. When the game ends in a tie the situation is at it is. What preceded that is neither here nor there. I know how important it is to have possession in your game. It hardly matters in our game at the kick off. Turnovers are constant in that. The toin coss is a large advantage in a first to score situation. Too large in my opinion to pay due respect to the efforts and risks the players have been involved in. It both our game, and in tennis and darts and snooker, there are processes to minimise the effect of a coin toss and I can think of no good reason, unless it's commercial or police and transport arrangements, or getting you all to bed, why your game eschews it.

I daresay the bookies went from evens before the toss to, say, 6 gets you 1 after it.

You'll be happy to know that in College Football, the situation is exactly as you describe.

One of the reasons the NFL tries to keep games short, is that the chance of injury really ramps up in overtime - everyone is tired yet still pushing hard and it leads to accidents and avoidable injuries. The NFL is protecting it's assets.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@JPB,

I dunno, the Vikings did a pretty good job on defense. Several of those calls were iffy and I think the pass interference one -- that made the difference between a 52-yard field goal and a 40-yard field goal -- was outright wrong. Ball wasn't catchable and the contact was incidental, on the way down.

Ah well.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

I dunno, the Vikings did a pretty good job on defense. Several of those calls were iffy and I think the pass interference one -- that made the difference between a 52-yard field goal and a 40-yard field goal -- was outright wrong. Ball wasn't catchable and the contact was incidental, on the way down.

Ah well.

That was on first down - they would have had a few more opportunities to move the ball.

It was the 12 men in the huddle - never shoulda happened, never. Vikes gave that game away big time.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@spendius,

To be truthful, I think that's where the crowd comes in to being a factor. If the Vikings had won the toss going into OT the crowd would have cheered the defense on and taken away some of the advantage that goes with possession. The Vikings offense allowed the game to go into OT, the Vikings defense didn't stop them from getting into field goal range. I'm a huge Saints fan, but I don't think the Saints won that game so much as the Vikings lost it.

0 Replies

JPB and Cyclo-

I think that you are, to some extent, trying to justify a procedure which I don't think, and I know that doesn't matter more than most, is justified in view of the easiness of the alternative I have suggested.

I'm sure that if I was A Vikings supporter, which I wasn't, I would have felt let down after all that struggling, not least with the crowd, to get to the end even and then the toss of a coin reduces the chances of a Vikings win to the sort of odds I took a guess at.

The odds I suppose would reflect the number of teams winning a tied game which had won the toss over a few seasons records as there are not many games which go to OT.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

JPB and Cyclo-

I think that you are, to some extent, trying to justify a procedure which I don't think, and I know that doesn't matter more than most, is justified in view of the easiness of the alternative I have suggested.

I'm sure that if I was A Vikings supporter, which I wasn't, I would have felt let down after all that struggling, not least with the crowd, to get to the end even and then the toss of a coin reduces the chances of a Vikings win to the sort of odds I took a guess at.

The odds I suppose would reflect the number of teams winning a tied game which had won the toss over a few seasons records as there are not many games which go to OT.

Well, let's examine this:

In College football, it works pretty much like you suggest: first one team gets a shot at the goal in overtime, then the other team does. If the score is tied after the end of the 1st overtime, they go into another - then another. Starting with the third overtime period, each team must attempt a 2-point conversion after scoring a touchdown instead of kicking the extra point.

The record in College football is 7 overtimes, the overtime period lasted longer than the game itself. 6 1/2 hours of play or something like that. Epic. But very dangerous for the atheletes, bad for TV programming and not something the NFL is interested in.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

not something the NFL is interested in.

Maybe they ought to be Cyclo if they are serious about taking the game global as they seem to be intending to do. There are games at Wembey and strong rumours that one franchise is going to be based here. The 49 ers and the Jags are most mentioned.

I'm not sure a global audience of fans will like a coin toss to have the effect it does in NFL after a tie. It might happen in the Superbowl itself.

And the NFL ought to be interested in people being interested in it. Isolationists like Tico will say they don't care about international opinion with some superior witticism and that the US will "do it my way" but the future is not their's I'm afraid.

You will have to sell the game to a very critical audience. Not ram it up their cokehole. A Federation of International American Football world cup, like the FIFA world cup, would be a dream for an enterprising businessman. And a Foreign Office coup of momentous proportions.

Unless there's a fear of international competition of course.

Think big. Think dynamic.

How about field goal attempts taken in turns from the 50, 40, and 30 until one side has a lead after an equal number of shots. With time limits.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

I'm not sure a global audience of fans will like a coin toss to have the effect it does in NFL after a tie. It might happen in the Superbowl itself.

Other than yourself, I haven't seen any evidence that anyone really considers this to be a problem. It is a long-standing rule that Defense wins championships. If your defense can't stop the other team in overtime, you deserve to lose - period.

Quote:

How about field goal attempts taken in turns from the 50, 40, and 30 until one side has a lead after an equal number of shots. With time limits.

We consider such actions to be an inferior way to decide a game. While field goals are important, they are secondary to typical play.

Besides. Why are you trying to turn this fine sport into Soccer? That's a move in the wrong direction.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Besides. Why are you trying to turn this fine sport into Soccer?

Why doesn't soccer change its rules to shootouts instead of penalty kicks? You know, give the player the ball at the top of the penalty box and let him go 1 on 1 with the keeper? Or how about moving one of the goals up to midfield and playing 5 a side for 10 minutes? Maybe pull the goalies during overtime?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

If your defense can't stop the other team in overtime, you deserve to lose - period.

We are talking about tied games Cyclo. The defenses have proved even theoretically. If the Saints deserved to win their defense had a full (ahem!) hour to stop the Vikings scoring.

I'm not trying to turn your game into our's. I'm being pro-American here. I'm being an evolutionist too. If I'm maladapted I'll fade away but imagine having no mutations because the original got indignant at the changes because it thought they were set in stone. Or engraved on titanium sheets.

Having no relegation system is ridiculous. As is chaps with serious beer bellies setting an example to impressionable minds.

Still--it was nice to know that you're a conservative at heart Cyclo. Anybody can pretend to be a socialist with macro-economic pontifications about an arcane art they know nothing about and have no influence on or responsibilty for. It's a great way of getting a good conversation going and being the centre of it.

When it comes to it you're as conservative as Lord Rosebery and it's fair to assume that if you were fixed like he is you would be just as bad as his great grandfather was. I can easily imagine him saying "We consider such actions to be an inferior way to decide a game." He would have meant any actions he disagreed with.

There are going to be a bunch of guys at the Superbowl who will spend the rest of their lives without a medal for winning. One can dine out a lot with a winner's medal and get a lot of drinks bought one. I've heard people boast that they once bought Len Hutton a pint. And the losing side, hopefully the Saints, may never get another chance of that and you want to risk them getting the wrong end of the stick of a crucial advantage on the toss of a coin. I think that is disrespectful to the players and the first thing I tell everybody about sport is that respect for the players at the top level is where to start. Then all you need is Sky Sports, a few cans, a housemaid and a pub to go to to thrash out the whys and wherefores.

I have tried and I have tried to practice what I preach in relation to basketball but alas I cannot overcome the utter stupidity of it. Evolution theory would suggest somebody was trying to grow a race of people 8 ft tall. Which I think is stupid because all the houses would need to be altered for a start and all the cars. And you can't really celebrate when you've just scored once out of 40 or so and your opponents have got the ball back and usually score back. Not like celebrating the only goal in the 119th minute of a Cup Final I mean.

The "somebody" is Lamarkian. A Darwinian would say "something".

Basketball is said to be taking over from Cricket in the West-Indies because it pays more money in the US for a sporting type who gets good at it than Cricket. And you talk about me trying to influence another country's sport with an itsy-bitsy thing like the toss of a coin.

So I have it in for basketball. No more fast bowlers from the West Indies to frighten the English batsmen. Dearie, dearie me. What is the world coming to?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Nah; I'm not against changes in general, just ones which I think would be bad for the game. I supported recent changes such as the adding of the two-point conversion and changes in various penalties and their yardage.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

Why doesn't soccer change its rules to shootouts instead of penalty kicks? You know, give the player the ball at the top of the penalty box and let him go 1 on 1 with the keeper? Or how about moving one of the goals up to midfield and playing 5 a side for 10 minutes? Maybe pull the goalies during overtime?

I will presume Tico that you are not taking the piss for which presumption I cite as evidence your carrying the list of players upon your back. Not that I think that is conclusive mind you. It could be just bad luck.

No 1--There would be too much arguing about who fouled who, who dived and who acted like an outraged lesbian. You always have to go to the existential moment to get the rules right or you run the risk of a riot. So it's World Cup final at the North Pole Stadium and the US are playing Great Europe and half the stadium is red and the other green and they are arguing about fouls after two hours shouting themselves bananas. Diplomatic incidents after the fisticuffs in the VIP suite.

They are still arguing about England's third goal in the 1966 World Cup final at Wembley. There is new video footage recently published which is said to prove that the ball did not cross the line. One A2ker is still upset about it.

No 2-- Penalty kicks have evolved as best choice yet. You would have to remark the pitch for 5-a-side or else have the lines already in place. Which would confuse the officials even more than they already are. I think both are unacceptable. Don't forget we are discussing the big occasion. In a knock-out competition. End of the season. Cup winners Cup cup Cup. No replays. Season's finished. No shared points.

And you would have to move both goals equidistant from each end because it is known to be an advantage to shoot into the goal at the end where the fans are. Think of the space. It would probably come down to your first suggestion from end to end.

And it wouldn't have the drama of a penalty shoot out. Not by a long way.

How would you see the game going with professionals when the goalies have been pulled. What tactics would you adopt? If you can suggest something that wouldn't bring the game into disrepute you might have an interesting solution to what is a difficult problem.

What is a goalie Tico? He is a nominated player who has permission to use his hands. Within the penalty area. There is no rule he has to take up the usual position in the goals. He's just the one permitted to use his hands and the goals are the best place to position him. Or her if it's a ladies match. Outside the penalty area he is forbidden to use his hands. If he goes up field for a last minute corner when his side is one down he can't use his hands. So you don't need to pull the goalie. You just say no hands at all during OT.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

. I supported recent changes such as the adding of the two-point conversion and changes in various penalties and their yardage.

I'm not expert enough on NFL to comment on penalties and yardage. But what were your reasons for supporting the 2-point conversion?

0 Replies

Predict the NFL Super Bowl Champ. Win Big, Big Prizes*!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know