I got the NFL OT rules thing wrong and I apologize

[Garion_55]

one thing i hate about arguing with the teabaggers is they never admit when they were wrong and adjust their arguments accordingly.

cant have an honest discussion unless everyone agrees on the facts.

when someone gets facts wrong they should be willing to stand up and admit it

yesterday i was under the impression that the nfl went back to sudden death OT rules. first team to score any points wins. i checked on the nfl website and they have old outdated information on there which still has the old sudden death rules on it.


turns out the rules changes in 2012 was to adopt the rules for regular season games that now existed in the playoffs.

if the seahawks had only kicked a FG, the pack would have been given a chance to tie / win the game. but since the hawks scored a TD, the pack was SOL. game over.

IMO the team who allows a TD but is not given a chance to get a TD themselves to tie it back up IS getting robbed of a fair chance to win the OT period.

current rules are like half sudden death/ half each team gets a chance depending on the first score.

still makes no sense. sudden death makes even less.

NFL should make some more changes to the rules and get this straightened out. no playoff game should end like that. (id be saying the same thing if the pack had won in the same way btw)

[Warren Stupidity]

1. I was stupider for reading the first thread.

Now we are going to have the same exact discussion over again?

[Garion_55]

3. nah. just making sure there is closure from the last post

feel free to move on 8-)

[Capt. Obvious]

4. Your response

would have been more appropriate as a new thread.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. Good point. The stupid should be spread far and wide!

Long Live Idiocracy!

[Capt. Obvious]

9. This thread interrupted me when I was watching Ow My Balls

[Whiskeytide]

13. "Ow My Balls" ...

... say what you want, but that is a freakin' brilliant idea for a reality TV show!!!

I would never miss an episode of "Ow My Balls"!

[pokerfan]

17. You're going to have to wait 500 years

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Probably because they want some finality and as the game goes on fatigue sets in ...

Probably because they want some finality and as the game goes on fatigue sets in and more opportunity for injury.

[Garion_55]

5. thats been kind my thought too

plus the fact that its week 18 or 19 whatever and these guy have to be worn out.

[MohRokTah]

7. And multiple injuries.

They all get injured, even minor injuries, and it all wears them down.

[MohRokTah]

6. The Packers had a chance to win on its first score, too.

Had the Packers forced a safety, it would have been game over. No opportunity for the free kick and a chance to counter the score for the Seahawks.

This is professional football. Touchdowns are difficult to come by, as are safeties. Both can be easier in college ball.

[brush]

10. It's Seattle's offense against Greenbay's defense

Since Seattle won the coin flip their offense was challenged to score and Greenbay's defense was challenged to stop them from scoring.

Mano a mano. Whoever prevails wins.

It's hard but somehow fair.

[Garion_55]

11. that relies too much on luck and

football teams are made up of offensive and defensive squads with two different purposes.

defense is typically there to stop the other guy. offense their job is to either score or get close enough for the score.

because the packers defense failed shouldnt mean the whole team loses. the offense should get at least one set of downs to redeem their defense.


coin flips end up too often with the guy winning the flip winning the game. thats about chance not skill.

coin flip in OT should only decide whose offense gets the first shot at scoring

[brush]

15. That's the seemingly fair way to look at it, but . . .

Last edited Mon Jan 19, 2015, 11:09 PM - Edit history (1)

imo, a team's defense, with it's coordinator and position coaches and — a season of games and practices and hours of film study of the current opponent's offense, is there to stop said offense. And they are paid to produce a defensive stop, as they did for most of Sunday's game.

They we're called upon to earn their money when it counted most. They couldn't make a play to stop Seattle, or even hold them to a field goal and thus enable their offense to get a shot.

Seattle's offense, with identical credentials — a season of games and practices and hours of study of the current opponent's defense — were able to make plays to score a touchdown, thus they won.

Like I said, it's hard but it was fair.

It's the NFL, not peewee league football where everybody gets a trophy.

[pnwmom]

12. Adherence to the same rulebook handed the previous game to the Packers over Dallas

in the last few minutes.

Did you object to that rule, too?

[AgingAmerican]

14. Under the old rule

...there was no reason to score touchdowns in OT, which made OT less exciting. Now, TDs rule in OT, plus both teams get a shot if a FG. Vast improvement, IMHO.

[pokerfan]

16. I think it's a fair compromise

College OTs, while exciting, can extend to three, four or more OTs which seems ridiculous to me. Plus they don't have to drive the length of the field.