NFL 2021

[ilikecheese]

If you cheat, it shouldn’t be counted. He’s is a serial cheat. I’m sure he did it on multiple occasions throughout his career. I have ZERO respect for cheats. Other athletes in sports have been stripped of their achievements. I do realize that is not possible in this case, as the entire Patriot organization was involved, as were probably hundreds of officials, NFL people and many others!

You are like Fox News with your facts.

 

[Acrobat]

You are like Fox News with your facts.

How’s your friend Trump doing?

 

[ilikecheese]

How’s your friend Trump doing?

I don't usually root for death but in his case I might give a golf clap...even if I really wanted to join a mosh pit of celebrators.

 

[Kev The Rat]

Chiefs all the way baby

I don’t like saying guaranteed blow out but all the ingredients are there.

Sieve like o line for Cincy, not scoring many points, the Chiefs O playing as well as I’ve ever seen them even by their all time great standards, having just crushed the best d in the game

 

[Martin Alvito]

Apparently it is possible for a league to be an even bigger clown show than the Prem:

NFL changed rules on Bengals just hours before their last AFC Championship game appearance in January 1989

Somehow, I missed that story at the time. Changing the rules midseason is bad. That is way worse. That's like saying, right before the world championship of chess, "Yo dudes, your rooks can move diagonally now."

 

[Kev The Rat]

Apparently it is possible for a league to be an even bigger clown show than the Prem:

NFL changed rules on Bengals just hours before their last AFC Championship game appearance in January 1989

Somehow, I missed that story at the time. Changing the rules midseason is bad. That is way worse. That's like saying, right before the world championship of chess, "Yo dudes, your rooks can move diagonally now."

The no huddle offense was ridiculous. The Bills abused it as well and that’s why it was rightfully removed as a potential strategy

 

[Martin Alvito]

The no huddle offense was ridiculous. The Bills abused it as well and that’s why it was rightfully removed as a potential strategy

I make an argument. You assert an opposing position, offer no evidence and expect me to believe you.

You are 100% my ex-wife, right?

 

[davek]

Bengals v 49rs Super Bowl.

 

[Kev The Rat]

Bengals v 49rs Super Bowl.

Don’t think so

 

[Hogwild]

As a long suffering fan of the New York Jets, Brady has been my public enemy number one for the past 20 years (spot he shared with Belichick). That said, Brady is undoubtedly the best to ever lace em up. Respect where respect is due.

 

[davek]

Don’t think so

I hate all the razzmatazz around Mahomes. Hope the Bengals beat them. Dont bet against the 49rs.

 

[Kev The Rat]

I hate all the razzmatazz around Mahomes. Hope the Bengals beat them. Dont bet against the 49rs.

Hope is all you have

 

[Kev The Rat]

I make an argument. You assert an opposing position, offer no evidence and expect me to believe you.

You are 100% my ex-wife, right?

Why does a tactic that prevents the defense from substituting in players or even getting defensive play calls in, need any serious analysis as to its unfairness ?

 

[Martin Alvito]

Why does a tactic that prevents the defense from substituting in players or even getting defensive play calls in, need any serious analysis as to its unfairness ?

You would need to explain how and why it is unfair.

It changes the game. The rules are, however, symmetrical. The opponent could introduce the same liabilities for your defense, if they had the desire and ability.

If you want to argue that banning the tactic makes the game a better watch, I would buy that as a reason for a rule change. I tend to think that making football faster makes it a better watch, but you could easily argue that giving defenses time to substitute and set up makes for a more interesting positional game of physical chess. I would counterargue that Walsh et al more or less solved the game and that it's now a purely physical contest. We could agree that we have different preferences and beliefs, and agree to disagree over those things.

If you're arguing that Wyche's tactics were unfair, though, I would demand an explanation since the rules are symmetrical. Your argument is not self-evident for that reason, and your answer so far is grounded in your preferences over what you want to watch as best I can tell, rather than whether or not it's unfair.

 

[Kev The Rat]

You would need to explain how and why it is unfair.

It changes the game. The rules are, however, symmetrical. The opponent could introduce the same liabilities for your defense, if they had the desire and ability.

If you want to argue that banning the tactic makes the game a better watch, I would buy that as a reason for a rule change. I tend to think that making football faster makes it a better watch, but you could easily argue that giving defenses time to substitute and set up makes for a more interesting positional game of physical chess. I would counterargue that Walsh et al more or less solved the game and that it's now a purely physical contest. We could agree that we have different preferences and beliefs, and agree to disagree over those things.

If you're arguing that Wyche's tactics were unfair, though, I would demand an explanation since the rules are symmetrical. Your argument is not self-evident for that reason, and your answer so far is grounded in your preferences over what you want to watch as best I can tell, rather than whether or not it's unfair.

The rules aren’t symmetrical for the defense though are they? The o gets a very large advantage - the only thing that would work against them is that they won’t be spending very long on the field and thereby tiring out their own d.

Football is a game of strategy - ask Andy Reid if it isn’t his schemes in large part via creating mismatches that give his teams a huge edge.