2020 NFL Season

[Sport]

This season is a farce and what the league did to the Broncos and Kendall Hinton was abuse. 

 

I saw someone make the point that the current Broncos ownership situation means they didn't have a stern voice to lobby the league for the same treatment the Ravens are getting, which is why there's inconsistencies in how these two similar situations are being handled. That's madness! But it also kind of shows how the league operates - if you have vocal ownership that the league desires to protect, then Goodell and co will bend over backwards to help you out, if you're Mike Brown and the Bengals they don't really give a fart. Figure your stuff out until we like you, then you'll start getting some favorable calls/schedules/treatment from HQ. 

[JayMac]

38 minutes ago, Sport said:

This season is a farce and what the league did to the Broncos and Kendall Hinton was abuse. 

 

I saw someone make the point that the current Broncos ownership situation means they didn't have a stern voice to lobby the league for the same treatment the Ravens are getting, which is why there's inconsistencies in how these two similar situations are being handled. That's madness! But it also kind of shows how the league operates - if you have vocal ownership that the league desires to protect, then Goodell and co will bend over backwards to help you out, if you're Mike Brown and the Bengals they don't really give a fart. Figure your stuff out until we like you, then you'll start getting some favorable calls/schedules/treatment from HQ. 

Agreed. This pandemic-ridden season has told us all one thing...not all franchises are created equal.

[OnWis97]

I think it's pretty obvious that the NFL makes stuff up as they go and tends to shift based on fan and media outcry. And most of the rationales I've heard for the Ravens and Broncos being treated differently seem a bit flimsy.

 

That said, I'm almost surprised by it.  Not because of the Broncos and Ravens but but because of the Steelers.  You'd think the NFL would love to see the Steelers get a game somewhat akin* to the game the Saints just got.

 

*I believe the Ravens would have an actual QB, though, so it would not be quite as bad.

 

The NFL was kind of on the edge of a cliff early in the year and then they seemed to be leveling of.  But the league is back on the edge now. I can cut them some slack due to everything being unprecedented but that Broncos situation was a disaster.  Thank goodness there were no fans (right) paying for that nonsense, but this was dangerous to Hinton and probably the RBs, too. A forfeit would have been better; the game went exactly how everyone knew it was going to go, so I don't think the free win for the Saints would have been any more unfair to the other NFC South teams than this was, anyway.

[Sport]

21 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

I think it's pretty obvious that the NFL makes stuff up as they go and tends to shift based on fan and media outcry. And most of the rationales I've heard for the Ravens and Broncos being treated differently seem a bit flimsy.

 

That said, I'm almost surprised by it.  Not because of the Broncos and Ravens but but because of the Steelers.  You'd think the NFL would love to see the Steelers get a game somewhat akin* to the game the Saints just got.

 

*I believe the Ravens would have an actual QB, though, so it would not be quite as bad.

 

 

The favoritism is on the Ravens end here, but it's sort of a stew involving the Steelers too. They don't want to lose a Steelers-Ravens game to forfeit or noncompetitive play because that's the hot rivalry right now. Nobody gives a honk about the Broncos and Saints matchup so they didn't feel it necessary to postpone it for competitive integrity reasons. 

 

Now, If there was a similar covid outbreak with the Bengals in the days leading up to a Bengals-Steelers game, they would've played it as scheduled and the Bengals would've been in the same situation as the Broncos because the league's official stance regarding the Bengals is Sorry Deal With It. 

[schlim]

1 hour ago, Sport said:

This season is a farce and what the league did to the Broncos and Kendall Hinton was abuse. 

 

I saw someone make the point that the current Broncos ownership situation means they didn't have a stern voice to lobby the league for the same treatment the Ravens are getting, which is why there's inconsistencies in how these two similar situations are being handled. That's madness! But it also kind of shows how the league operates - if you have vocal ownership that the league desires to protect, then Goodell and co will bend over backwards to help you out, if you're Mike Brown and the Bengals they don't really give a fart. Figure your stuff out until we like you, then you'll start getting some favorable calls/schedules/treatment from HQ. 

#BlahFranchisesMatter

 

Next we'll get a bunch of nice Patriots fans to politely tell you #AllFranchisesMatter.

 

 

[Sport]

4 minutes ago, schlim said:

#BlahFranchisesMatter

 

Next we'll get a bunch of nice Patriots fans to politely tell you #AllFranchisesMatter.

 

 

I don't think consistent treatment for all 32 teams is an unreasonable ask.

[schlim]

2 minutes ago, Sport said:

 

I don't think consistent treatment for all 32 teams is an unreasonable ask.

I'm all for it! The league's track record does say otherwise.

[BBTV]

The league's policy is that games don't get moved for competitive reasons, only for safety reasons.  Since the Broncos positive tests were limited to those guys and not spreading throughout the team, the league decided that it was safe to play.

 

With the Ravens, there's guys testing positive left and right, so it's not safe for them to even be practicing, let alone put another team at risk.  So it wasn't that the rule was applied inconsistently - it's that it's a bad rule.

 

Under normal circumstances it's a good rule because you could theoretically petition the league to give you an extra day for your star player's ankle to heal, and it's not fair for the other team who's ready to play to be asked to wait so that you can get a key guy healthy.  But these aren't normal times and there needs to be either zero-tolerance or uniformly-applied leeway.

 

If you can't play, you should forfeit.  OR, if one team is allowed extra time to control their outbreak, all teams should be allowed extra time in clearly worded situations - like if every single active QB has covid and just needs one or two more days.  There's a difference between not having any QBs vs not having good RBs or any other position.

 

Ideally, I'd say that Baltimore should forfeit - no ifs, ands, or buts about it, and Denver should have been given the option (which I guess they technically did.)  But, since the league is trash, Denver should have been given an exception as long as it didn't force the Saints into a Monday-Thursday or Tuesday-Thursday situation.

[GDAWG]

49ers will play next two home games at State Farm Stadium - ProFootballTalk (nbcsports.com)

 

 

[GDAWG]

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

The league's policy is that games don't get moved for competitive reasons, only for safety reasons.  Since the Broncos positive tests were limited to those guys and not spreading throughout the team, the league decided that it was safe to play.

 

With the Ravens, there's guys testing positive left and right, so it's not safe for them to even be practicing, let alone put another team at risk.  So it wasn't that the rule was applied inconsistently - it's that it's a bad rule.

 

Under normal circumstances it's a good rule because you could theoretically petition the league to give you an extra day for your star player's ankle to heal, and it's not fair for the other team who's ready to play to be asked to wait so that you can get a key guy healthy.  But these aren't normal times and there needs to be either zero-tolerance or uniformly-applied leeway.

 

If you can't play, you should forfeit.  OR, if one team is allowed extra time to control their outbreak, all teams should be allowed extra time in clearly worded situations - like if every single active QB has covid and just needs one or two more days.  There's a difference between not having any QBs vs not having good RBs or any other position.

 

Ideally, I'd say that Baltimore should forfeit - no ifs, ands, or buts about it, and Denver should have been given the option (which I guess they technically did.)  But, since the league is trash, Denver should have been given an exception as long as it didn't force the Saints into a Monday-Thursday or Tuesday-Thursday situation.

 

The NFL will probably create a "Week 18" for this very situation.  Ravens won't forfeit.

[Luigi74]

3 hours ago, Sport said:

 

The favoritism is on the Ravens end here, but it's sort of a stew involving the Steelers too. They don't want to lose a Steelers-Ravens game to forfeit or noncompetitive play because that's the hot rivalry right now. Nobody gives a honk about the Broncos and Saints matchup so they didn't feel it necessary to postpone it for competitive integrity reasons. 

 

Now, If there was a similar covid outbreak with the Bengals in the days leading up to a Bengals-Steelers game, they would've played it as scheduled and the Bengals would've been in the same situation as the Broncos because the league's official stance regarding the Bengals is Sorry Deal With It. 

The Ravens-Steelers being a division game is also a reason it was treated differently than the inter-conference Broncos-Saints game, don't be shocked to see the Ravens-Steelers booted to this coming weekend if the Ravens can't play tomorrow, with their scheduled games against Dallas & Washington being the ones that are cancelled. Sure four teams only playing 15 games isn't great but getting in the divisional games then conference games would seem to be a bigger priority than the inter-conference ones.

[GDAWG]

28 minutes ago, Luigi74 said:

The Ravens-Steelers being a division game is also a reason it was treated differently than the inter-conference Broncos-Saints game, don't be shocked to see the Ravens-Steelers booted to this coming weekend if the Ravens can't play tomorrow, with their scheduled games against Dallas & Washington being the ones that are cancelled. Sure four teams only playing 15 games isn't great but getting in the divisional games then conference games would seem to be a bigger priority than the inter-conference ones.

 

If the NFL has it their way, Steelers and Ravens will play all 16 games, just that the game would move to a rumored Week 18.  No way the NFL is going to cancel a Cowboys game, it's one of their premiere franchises despite the way they have played this year.

[Dynasty]

Are they gonna flex DEN-KC out of SNF or are we just going to be subjected to a complete Chiefs annihilation?

[Sec19Row53]

41 minutes ago, Dynasty said:

Are they gonna flex DEN-KC out of SNF or are we just going to be subjected to a complete Chiefs annihilation?

Denver's QBs are exxpected to be cleared by then - possibly by later today if I recall the timeline properly.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

39 minutes ago, Dynasty said:

Are they gonna flex DEN-KC out of SNF or are we just going to be subjected to a complete Chiefs annihilation?

 

Lots of crap next week, but of the meager options, I think Cleveland/Tennessee would be the most compelling swap to the night game.

 

These are the other options:

New Orleans at Atlanta

Detroit at Chicago

Cincinnati at Miami

Jacksonville at Minnesota

Las Vegas at New York Jets

Washington at Pittsburgh

Indianapolis at Houston

Los Angeles Rams at Arizona

New York Giants at Seattle

Philadelphia at Green Bay

New England at Los Angeles Chargers

 

The Monday games are Dallas at Baltimore and Buffalo at 49ers (wherever that's supposed to be).

 

I think the NFL should postpone the week until the end of the season.

[CS85]

 

[rams80]

1 hour ago, Dynasty said:

Are they gonna flex DEN-KC out of SNF or are we just going to be subjected to a complete Chiefs annihilation?

 

Denver can have Jared Goff for their 1st Rounder.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

12 minutes ago, CS85 said:

 

 

While I'm on the record saying Baltimore should forfeit, I also believes the Ravens would be absolutely right to strike. The NFL completely botched the Titans infections and Tennessee got a boost on their season as a result. If the NFL isn't going to give the Titans treatment to everyone (and Denver shows clearly they're not), players are right to complete that they aren't being treated fairly. Because they're not.

[CS85]

14 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

While I'm on the record saying Baltimore should forfeit, I also believes the Ravens would be absolutely right to strike. The NFL completely botched the Titans infections and Tennessee got a boost on their season as a result. If the NFL isn't going to give the Titans treatment to everyone (and Denver shows clearly they're not), players are right to complete that they aren't being treated fairly. Because they're not.

It continues:

 

 

[goalieboy82]

40 minutes ago, CS85 said:

It continues:

 

 

so what happens if it doesn't happen on Wednesday. at this point, who knows since its the NFL.