how about that Rams/Panthers game
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 01/10/04 - 21:32 Post subject: how about that Rams/Panthers game
Beating SL at SL wow.
bring em on I say
E A G L E S Eagles
|
|
|
|
|
gretriever
Hipster Doofus
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 19385
Location: A moving target in a firing range.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/10/04 - 22:08 Post subject:
And we thought the last game of the regular season for the Packers was intense (which it was). I got back just in time to see the Rams cut the 11-point deficit.
A question - In college if one team scores in O/T, the other teams gets last raps (oops, a term from my yoot) - a chance to get the ball and score. Should the NFL do this? I really do not have an opinion on this one.
|
|
|
|
|
genie
Master of Prissface
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 16194
Location: Finding serenity one day at a time
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/10/04 - 22:31 Post subject:
I only caught the last (more exciting) half and that's the first thing I thought of, was last week's Packers game. I love Jon Fox!!! He reminds me of a less excitable Bill Parcells.
But tomorrow's game is gonna be the good one....
GO PACKERS!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
GaRebelRunner
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 1097
Location: Tucker, GA
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/10/04 - 22:33 Post subject:
The first three quarters were rather boring but man o man, that fourth and the overtime theatrics certainly made up for the first three quarters.
Go Carolina!
To gretreiver - as far as overtime, I like the way they are now for both the colleges and the pros. The 25 yard line start and equal opportunity to match scores fits the colleges and their players well. At the same time for the professional players I think sudden death using the entire field is appropriate. I wouldn't want to see the NFL go to the college system or vice versa.
|
|
|
|
|
akern
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 31 May 2002
Posts: 17149
Location: CTU
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/10/04 - 23:14 Post subject:
I never thought this game would end. Yea Panthers!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
msparks
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 3182
Location: Jammin' at the Frim Fram, Frippin' in the Krotz
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 09:16 Post subject:
| gretriever wrote: | | And we thought the last game of the regular season for the Packers was intense (which it was). I got back just in time to see the Rams cut the 11-point deficit. |
I have the feeling that Coach Martz will take a beating in the press and the sports talkshows. Without having heard his explanation, it almost seems like he deserves it. Explanation? Yeah. Down by eleven and score a TD, make the two-point conversion, recover the ensuing on-side kick - with approximately 2:30 left in regulation...and go for the field goal?!?!?
| gretriever wrote: | | A question - In college if one team scores in O/T, the other teams gets last raps (oops, a term from my yoot) - a chance to get the ball and score. Should the NFL do this? I really do not have an opinion on this one. |
Should the NFL allow both teams a chance to win? Sorry, GaRebelRunner but, yes! Absolutely! The current method for resolving a tie is totally unfair. Imagine...it's the top of the tenth...the visiting team pushes across a run and the game is over...!?! How fair is that? Sorry, but selecting a team to go on offense by chance - the coin flip - is inadequate. Both teams should have a chance to be on the offense. Hockey? Hey, the ref drops the puck at center ice. Each team has a chance to get the puck. Golf? Players have equal chances. Basketball? Soccer? Baseball? They all allow both teams the opportunity to possess the ball.
In the NFL, it would be eminently fair to allow both teams the chance to score points. Have the coin toss. If the winner of the flip doesn't score, the other team gets the ball - it's this way right now! However, should the coin toss winner score points in their first possession, allow the other team one possession. If they don't score an equal number or more points, the game would be over.
The way it's done now is just not fair.
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 09:39 Post subject:
Saw the highlights on ESPN this morning, the game looked like a real nail bitter.
As for overtime. This game went into double overtime, both teams had plenty of chances to score. IMHO, I think the coin toss and first to score wins.
The Eagles lost a game in overtime a few weeks ago. They won the toss but turned the ball over on an interception, then the 49ers scored on a field goal.
|
|
|
|
|
brie k
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 5661
Location: where the wild things are
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 09:45 Post subject:
We only caught the end of the 4th and the 2 OT's, but what we saw was great. Wish we'd have tuned in sooner. Libby and I were screaming with that final TD.
Go Panthers!!
|
|
|
|
|
AlaninTX
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 6582
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 09:46 Post subject: Re: how about that Rams/Panthers game
| rtpd113 wrote: | Beating SL at SL wow.
bring em on I say
E A G L E S Eagles |
I am staying on the NFC East bandwagon.
|
|
|
|
|
GaRebelRunner
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 1097
Location: Tucker, GA
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 09:49 Post subject:
| msparks wrote: |
Should the NFL allow both teams a chance to win? Sorry, GaRebelRunner but, yes! Absolutely! The current method for resolving a tie is totally unfair. Imagine...it's the top of the tenth...the visiting team pushes across a run and the game is over...!?! How fair is that?
|
Just as fair as if a team scores with no time on the clock and wins the game. Why not give the team that was scored upon the last opportunity to tie the game? We do that in baseball in the ninth inning if the visiting team outscores the home team. Home team gets the last opportunity to win the game. I simply disagree with giving professional teams "one more opportunity". Where would you draw the line on "fairness"?
I think the current method for professional football teams is very fair.
And I don't think you can apply baseball rules to football teams. That doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Cappy
Excelent
|
|
|
Joined: 16 May 2002
Posts: 27368
Location: Spreadsheetylvania
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 09:55 Post subject:
One thing that I still can't figure out, is in the NHL, if a team loses in OT, they get a point...for losing. 
|
|
|
|
|
Floridaboiler
POTFH
|
|
|
Joined: 18 May 2002
Posts: 11322
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 10:30 Post subject:
I missed the game!!!
See my post titled Arrghhh!!! and you will see why!
|
|
|
|
|
msparks
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 3182
Location: Jammin' at the Frim Fram, Frippin' in the Krotz
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 10:39 Post subject:
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | Just as fair as if a team scores with no time on the clock and wins the game. Why not give the team that was scored upon the last opportunity to tie the game? |
Explain this, please. I'm not sure I follow exactly what you mean. How can you score with no time on the clock? If there's no time left, the game is over, right? Now, if you are talking about scoring as the clock goes to 0:00, what's the situation now? End of regulation? That would be the end of the game, team with more points wins. We're not talking about who scores last in regulation, we're talking about overtime.
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | We do that in baseball in the ninth inning if the visiting team outscores the home team. Home team gets the last opportunity to win the game. |
Exactly the point I made in my first post! But wait! You're talking about the bottom of the ninth, right? The home team bats in the bottom of the ninth, right? There are nine innings in a regulation game. What happens if the score is tied after three outs are made in the bottom of the ninth? Hmmm? Extra innings! If the visiting team scores in the top of the tenth, is the game over? Absolutely not! But why not?
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | I simply disagree with giving professional teams "one more opportunity". Where would you draw the line on "fairness"? |
I explained it in my first post but maybe it wasn't too clear. Here's how I'd do it:
At the end of a regulation NFL game, if the score is tied, there'd be a coin toss identical to the one at the beginning of the game. You win the toss, you decide whether you wish to kick or receive. For the sake of the argument, you decide to receive. I'm left with kicking it to you so I decide which goal to defend. With me so far? All righty then. I kick to you , you catch it, and you're on offense. You fail to score ANY points - FG or TD. - during your possession. You punt the ball back to me. If I cleanly field the ball and retain possession, I get a chance to score points. Hah! Just the way it's done in the NFL today! If I score points - FG or TD, I win. Game over. This is fair because you had a chance to score but didn't. I had a chance to score and I did. Game over. It's fair because we had equal opportunities to score. Now, to muddy the water a bit...at the beginning of OT, you have the ball and are on offense. If I intercept your pass or recover your fumble and return it for a TD, I win. How is that fair? You had the ball and then I had the ball. It's your fault that I benefitted from your mistake. But we at least had an equal chance to touch the ball.
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | I think the current method for professional football teams is very fair. |
I'd like to hear your explanation how this is "very fair." Actually, I'd like to hear it from an NFL official, too!
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | And I don't think you can apply baseball rules to football teams. That doesn't make sense. |
Of course it doesn't!  But my point about baseball is that both teams have an equal chance to win. What's your take on this? Why does baseball allow the home team a chance to score in the bottom of the tenth inning? Could it be because the visiting team had three outs in which to score as many runs as they could and it's fair to give the home team an equal chance to score as many runs before they make three outs?
This isn't about baseball rules vs. football rules - it's about fairness. Baseball handles it quite well. Football? What's fair about a coin toss? That's just pure dumb luck.
|
|
|
|
|
GaRebelRunner
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 1097
Location: Tucker, GA
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 12:23 Post subject:
Quite simply, it's football, not baseball.
Each team knows the rules concerning overtime. Each one knows what they have to do to stop the other team from scoring. It's fair to both sides. Thus the rules are as fair to one team as the other. The bottom line is both teams have an equal opportunity to score the first and only points necessary to win the game.
As far as teams scoring with no time on the clock, it happens a few times each year. If the play is in progress when the clock expires, the play continues until the player is tackled or scores. And it works both ways. If a team throws a pass which is intercepted with no time out the receiving team has the benefit of running it all the way down to the endzone and scoring if they can. Field goals are kicked with the ball going over the uprights with no time all the time. If a penalty occurs on the last play, despite the fact there is no time on the clock, (and depending upon which team the penalty is on) the ball is put back in play and the game continues for one more down.
And last, but not least if the officials make a mistake as they did in one of the Colorado games in 1990, a team can use a fifth down to score on after time has expired.
Thus, there are several ways to score after time has expired. Usually the play has to be in progress before the clock has expired. But as you can see, in the case of penalties, bad calls by officials, etc that is not always true.
|
|
|
|
|
genie
Master of Prissface
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 16194
Location: Finding serenity one day at a time
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 01/11/04 - 12:53 Post subject:
| GaRebelRunner wrote: | | msparks wrote: |
Should the NFL allow both teams a chance to win? Sorry, GaRebelRunner but, yes! Absolutely! The current method for resolving a tie is totally unfair. Imagine...it's the top of the tenth...the visiting team pushes across a run and the game is over...!?! How fair is that?
|
Just as fair as if a team scores with no time on the clock and wins the game. Why not give the team that was scored upon the last opportunity to tie the game? We do that in baseball in the ninth inning if the visiting team outscores the home team. Home team gets the last opportunity to win the game. I simply disagree with giving professional teams "one more opportunity". Where would you draw the line on "fairness"?
I think the current method for professional football teams is very fair.
And I don't think you can apply baseball rules to football teams. That doesn't make sense. |
I agree, GaReb! Both teams in football have equal opportunity to set themselves up for a win during the regular four quarters of the game. The play goes back and forth but even within those parameters, the other team has the chance, via interception, to regain possession of the ball and hopefully turn things around. In baseball, you play your part of the inning and do what you can with it and the play switches over at the end of three outs. Totally different setup. If you think about it, baseball is the odd sport--a lot of the others play the same way football does--the play goes back and forth for a specified period of time, and while one team is granted possession of the ball at the beginning of play, (or puck, in the case of hockey) they can lose it at any point during that play period. In baseball, they can't. Your job is to score as much as possible during your "time of possession" if you want to look at it that way, and to keep the other team from scoring during theirs. In some of the other sports, you have to do both simultaneously. Much more challenging, I think.
So, IMHO, anything "overtime" is just that....over the time parameters that have been set for completion, i.e. "winning" of the game. First team who scores wins.
|
|
|
|
| |
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
Related topics: | |
|
|
