The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm Posts: 6932
I'm resurrecting this thread title from the old forum, as I want to get one of these on the record before it might sound like sour grapes:
In the NFL, I think it's absolute bullshit that a team can have the second best record in a conference, but get stuck in the #5 seed and be forced to play three road games to get to the Super Bowl if the one team that had a better record was a division rival. It's likely that either the Broncos or the Chiefs are going to get screwed by this rule this year.
I'm resurrecting this thread title from the old forum, as I want to get one of these on the record before it might sound like sour grapes:
In the NFL, I think it's absolute bullshit that a team can have the second best record in a conference, but get stuck in the #5 seed and be forced to play three road games to get to the Super Bowl if the one team that had a better record was a division rival. It's likely that either the Broncos or the Chiefs are going to get screwed by this rule this year.
Feel free to add more, I might do so later on.
thats really one of the worst IMO ( not counting all the new saftey rules that gets a 15 yard penalty for grazing the QBs helmet with your hand) and to continue it, to let a division winner into the playoffs even though they dont have a winning record and there are other teams with better records left out, even though seattle won the game a few years ago, they had no business being there in the first place
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm Posts: 6932
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
I'm resurrecting this thread title from the old forum, as I want to get one of these on the record before it might sound like sour grapes:
In the NFL, I think it's absolute bullshit that a team can have the second best record in a conference, but get stuck in the #5 seed and be forced to play three road games to get to the Super Bowl if the one team that had a better record was a division rival. It's likely that either the Broncos or the Chiefs are going to get screwed by this rule this year.
Feel free to add more, I might do so later on.
thats really one of the worst IMO ( not counting all the new saftey rules that gets a 15 yard penalty for grazing the QBs helmet with your hand) and to continue it, to let a division winner into the playoffs eve though they dont have a winning record and there are other teams with better records left out, even though seattle won the game a few years ago, they had no business being there in the first place
Yeah, I thought about mentioning that as well, especially since the NFC East has been flirting with this for the last few seasons. I can live with an 8-8 team, but definitely not a 7-9 team.
The Targeting rule in college football. The ejection part of it. And the part about the ejection being review able but the penalty standing no matter what.
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm Posts: 6932
Monkey_Driven wrote:
The Targeting rule in college football. The ejection part of it. And the part about the ejection being review able but the penalty standing no matter what.
They should replace the ejection with a sort of "penalty box" that only takes the player out for, say, 4-5 plays. This is something that I've long advocated giving a try for all personal fouls in football.
The Targeting rule in college football. The ejection part of it. And the part about the ejection being review able but the penalty standing no matter what.
They should replace the ejection with a sort of "penalty box" that only takes the player out for, say, 4-5 plays. This is something that I've long advocated giving a try for all personal fouls in football.
I'd be ok with that. Maybe they have to sit out that possession or something? The penalty is way too harsh for what is usually an accidental high hit.
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm Posts: 6932
Another college rule that needs to go away is forcing players to sit out a play if their helmet falls off, and especially get rid of the 15-yard penalty for not giving yourself up if your helmet comes off. I really despise the second part of that rule. It goes completely against one of the fundamentals of football that you play until the whistle blows.
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm Posts: 6932
doug rr wrote:
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
doug rr wrote:
not so much a rule and maybe its because I'm old but I sure hated living on the east coast and having 830pm kickoff times
the 10am kickoff times in the west probably suck too, though it might be nice to still have a few hours of the day left once the late games are over
I think the 10am is a god send..its possibly my favorite thing out here
I LOVE having football start in the morning. When I was out east last month it made me think that people over there stay up a lot later, because it was difficult for me at times to adjust to such a late start for a primetime game.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 85 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum