Around The NFL - 2008

Started by Diomedes, January 21, 2008, 08:44:30 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Diomedes

Quote from: ice grillin you on March 27, 2008, 01:20:32 PM-- the ability to defer to the 2nd half if you win a coin toss - UNLESS I DONT UNDERSTADN IT I THOUGHT THEY ALREADY HAD THIS

Quote from: Wingspan on March 27, 2008, 01:21:19 PM
Quote from: BigEd76 on March 27, 2008, 01:15:45 PM
-- the ability to defer to the 2nd half if you win a coin toss
I always thought you could do this anyway...


Quote from: PFTNFL ADOPTING MADDEN KICKOFF RULE?
Posted by Mike Florio on March 27, 2008, 1:22 p.m.

One of the things that has always bugged me about the Madden video game is that it incorrectly uses the college rule regarding the coin toss.

Put simply, the NFL rule is that the team that wins the toss gets to choose whether to kickoff or receive.  The team that loses the toss gets to make that decision at the start of the third quarter.

There is no ability at the NFL level to defer the decision to kick or to receive until the third quarter.  If the team that wins the toss chooses to kick to start the game, the team that loses the toss then can choose to receive to start the third quarter.

Madden has had the rule wrong from its inception.  But now, Madden could end up being right.  But only because the owners might adopt the Madden version of the rule.

The proposal is mentioned in an item from Mark Curnutte of the Cincinnati Enquirer, in which many of the various proposals are identified.

Now, we'll sit back and wait for all the comments to be posted insisting that NFL teams currently have the ability to defer the decision as to whether to receive the kickoff until the second half.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

ice grillin you

interesting

the college rule is better
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Diomedes

I could care less.

regarding the other four points BigEd posted

-- a wildcard team would host a first-round game if they had a better record than a division winner - No.

-- forceouts on WRs would be eliminated unless the WR was carried out of bounds - Agreed

-- instant replay for field goals - Yes. 

-- 5-yard face mask penalties would be eliminated, making all face mask penalties 15 yards - no.  this rule works very well as is
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

troyhstewart

QuoteSeahawks | New turf installed at Qwest Field
Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:01:36 -0700

Clare Farnsworth, of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, reports new turf is being installed at Qwest Field, the home of the Seattle Seahawks, Thursday, March 27. Qwest Field will become one of nine NFL stadiums to use FieldTurf.



General_Failure

I like the proposed wildcard change. Under no mathematical circumstances should it be possible for a team to finish 14-2 and have to travel to the stadium of a team that went 7-9. Or even more outlandish, 3-13.

The man. The myth. The legend.

Cerevant

I disagree.  If that becomes the rule, they should just eliminate the divisions because they become meaningless under that scheme.
An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that someone's argument is wrong and/or he is wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the person or those persons cited by him rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself.

Don Ho

make it like the NHL were 3/4 of the teams make the playoffs.
"Well where does Jack Lord live, or Don Ho?  That's got to be a nice neighborhood"  Jack Singer(Nicholas Cage) in Honeymoon in Vegas.

Munson

Quote from: Cerevant on March 28, 2008, 01:55:55 AM
I disagree.  If that becomes the rule, they should just eliminate the divisions because they become meaningless under that scheme.

No, because a divsion crown is the only way to guarentee a playoff spot. Otherwise you gotta get in with the wildcard.

I have no problem with a divsion winner with a record of 9-7 or 10-6 having to go on the road if the wildcard team is 11-5 or 12-4. YOu had the better year then the division winner, but were stuck behind some insane team that won 13+ games.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 01, 2008, 05:10:48 PM
perhaps you could explain sd's reasons for "disliking" it as well since you seem to be so in tune with other peoples minds

ice grillin you

Quote from: Cerevant on March 28, 2008, 01:55:55 AM
I disagree.  If that becomes the rule, they should just eliminate the divisions because they become meaningless under that scheme.



yup...division winners should be rewarded with something that other playoff teams dont get...otherwise just scrap the division format
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Sgt PSN

Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2008, 08:00:35 AM
Quote from: Cerevant on March 28, 2008, 01:55:55 AM
I disagree.  If that becomes the rule, they should just eliminate the divisions because they become meaningless under that scheme.

yup...division winners should be rewarded with something that other playoff teams dont get...otherwise just scrap the division format

Agreed.  Sure, it's annoying if you win 11 games but finish 2nd in your division and have to travel to play a division winner who won 10 games but that's just the nature of the beast.  It's pretty simple really, if you want to gaurantee yourself atleast 1 home playoff game then go out and win your division.  And if you don't win it, then stfu and go on the road and take care of your business.



QB Eagles

Amen. Don't do anything to weaken the importance of winning a division. A team's division rivals should be their main competition throughout the regular season. Wildcards are just a backdoor way into the playoffs. The NFL shouldn't make it easier for teams that couldn't take care of business in their division.

ice grillin you

also the reason sometimes a division winner ends up with 'only' 10 or 11 wins is because all four teams in the division are good....and they shouldnt be punished for that
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Sgt PSN

Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2008, 08:40:32 AM
also the reason sometimes a division winner ends up with 'only' 10 or 11 wins is because all four teams in the division are good....and they shouldnt be punished for that

Had thought about editing my post and adding that to it.  If you've got a division where the teams are beating each other up all year and basically splitting all of their games, that's 4 losses right there.  Hell, even if the teams arean't all that great, division games can often be unpredictable because of the rivalries.  It's not that uncommon to see a last place team beat the first place team in the same division even if there is clear advantage to the division leader (see Eagles @ Cowboys, Dec 2007).  :evil

Munson

I still think it's a reasonable change. Look at 2003 as an example. The Titans finished 12-4 behind the Colts, and had to travel to the 10-6 Ravens for their first round game. And the AFC North sucked that year, the remaining teams went 8-8, 6-10, and 5-11. I think in cases like that, the Titans deserve to have home field advantage over the Ravens.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 01, 2008, 05:10:48 PM
perhaps you could explain sd's reasons for "disliking" it as well since you seem to be so in tune with other peoples minds