PittsburghSucks

2020 NFL Season

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, BBTV said:

So I was right (as usual) and the draft system encouraged a team to tank and potentially alter the playoff landscape. Saying otherwise is basically saying that 2 + 2 = 5.  It's 4, and we all know that.  It was no worse than 50/50 that they would have beaten WFT even with the players they had out there to start the game, regardless of whether they were backups or not.

 

Yeah and so what? Either a bad WFT team gets in or a bad Giants team gets in. If the Giants have gripes with what the Eagles did then they should've won more than 6 dang games. It's not a problem! 

 

The Jets tanked for almost the entire season, the Jaguars have been handing out free wins to every opponent this season, but the Eagles do it one time and we get a dozen posts about an overhaul of a draft system that doesn't need an overhaul. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sport said:

 

Yeah and so what? Either a bad WFT team gets in or a bad Giants team gets in. If the Giants have gripes with what the Eagles did then they should've won more than 6 dang games. It's not a problem! 

 

The Jets tanked for almost the entire season, the Jaguars have been handing out free wins to every opponent this season, but the Eagles do it one time and we get a dozen posts about an overhaul of a draft system that doesn't need an overhaul. 

 

 

But the Iggles are picking three spots earlier than they should if they hadn't tanked [/sarcasm] - which assumes that they would have won the game (and thus another flaw in BBTV's coud yelling moment).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem is NBC chose a crap game for the last SNF of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

The biggest problem is NBC chose a crap game for the last SNF of the year.

 

It's not like there were any obvious better options, though. I guess they could have picked Steelers/Browns, but people would have complained about Mason Rudolph just like they're complaining about Sudfeld.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing the Khans should be hands-on with is their wrestling promotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Lights Out said:

 

It's not like there were any obvious better options, though. I guess they could have picked Steelers/Browns, but people would have complained about Mason Rudolph just like they're complaining about Sudfeld.

 

Houston/Tennessee had similar "win and they're in" connotations and while you couldn't have known the game would end up with the finish it had, there was at least a marquee QB on Houston's side and a guy chasing 2,000 yards on Tennessee's side. And, as far as I know, CBS protected Arizona/LA Rams. As always, dfwabel would know more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

Houston/Tennessee had similar "win and they're in" connotations and while you couldn't have known the game would end up with the finish it had, there was at least a marquee QB on Houston's side and a guy chasing 2,000 yards on Tennessee's side. And, as far as I know, CBS protected Arizona/LA Rams. As always, dfwabel would know more.

 

Yeah, it's too bad he ended up being a legit crazy person. Having somebody who knew and cared about such intricacies was nice. Without knowing the details, it certainly feels like Washington-Philly was the night game just because of the power of NFC East markets or whatever.

 

The Broncos managed to lose to the Raiders despite winning the takeaway battle 4-0, so that was really cool and doesn't make me think that everybody should be fired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sport said:

If the Giants have gripes with what the Eagles did then they should've won more than 6 dang games. It's not a problem! 

 

That's the same as the "if you didn't want to lose because of a bad penalty, you should have scored 20 more points".  It's basically an admission of an uneven playing field, and that some teams have to win fewer games or score fewer points than others.  It's flawed.

 

2 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

But the Iggles are picking three spots earlier than they should if they hadn't tanked [/sarcasm] - which assumes that they would have won the game (and thus another flaw in BBTV's coud yelling moment).

 

You seem to be irrationally upset about a proposal to change the draft in order to reduce tanking.  

 

Fact: we don't know who would have won.

Fact: the Eagles didn't start 10 or more starters.

Fact: the game was very much still hanging in the balance when the QB switch was made, and there were a few other uncharacteristic coaching decisions made earlier (punting on 4th and short, going for it on 4th and medium vs kicking FG, etc.)

 

If you don't mind that there was a game played that wasn't on the level and that the Giants may have been screwed out of a playoff game, then cool - you don't think the system is flawed.  That's your opinion and you have a right to it.  It's not unreasonable.  But there's a lot of people that do think it's BS that last night unfolded like it did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Red Wolf said:

 

Yeah, it's too bad he ended up being a legit crazy person. Having somebody who knew and cared about such intricacies was nice. Without knowing the details, it certainly feels like Washington-Philly was the night game just because of the power of NFC East markets or whatever.

 

The Broncos managed to lose to the Raiders despite winning the takeaway battle 4-0, so that was really cool and doesn't make me think that everybody should be fired.

 

The league knew that by scheduling the Eagles/WFT game last, they would have captive audiences in 1) PHL, 2) WSH, and 3) either NY or DAL.  So three of the biggest markets.  On paper, it's a goldmine game.  The only other way to get three markets of that size involved would have been to play Dallas vs NYG at 1, and Phila vs WFT at 4:25, but then it runs opposed in some markets.

 

There were clearly better games (even if it was played on the level) but I'm not sure if there was any that could have had three markets of that size interested in the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skins/Eagles was the only game with playoff implications that wasn't affected by the outcomes of other games. Every other game with a playoff team could have had them resting starters if the right teams won earlier in the day. They had no other choice of games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lights Out said:

 

It's not like there were any obvious better options, though. I guess they could have picked Steelers/Browns, but people would have complained about Mason Rudolph just like they're complaining about Sudfeld.

Except Cleveland would have been playing to win, and Pittsburgh would have been playing to knock them out of the playoffs. Pittsburgh wouldn't have sat Rudolph and have Dobbs run pitches and screens for a quarter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Philadelphia-WTF game was the only game all week that was guaranteed to be "win and in" (or at least "win and clinch the division") without other backup scenarios.  That made it the best candidate for SNF since the league prefers to have games played simultaneously when they affect each other.

 

If the Titans-Texans game was played on SNF, there was a chance of it being meaningless if the Colts lost earlier in the day.  Meanwhile, most of the 1:00 games also involved "____ win OR _____ loss OR ____ loss" clinching scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ManillaToad said:

Skins/Eagles was the only game with playoff implications that wasn't affected by the outcomes of other games. Every other game with a playoff team could have had them resting starters if the right teams won earlier in the day. They had no other choice of games

 

I swear I hadn't read this before typing.  😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That all makes sense. I get it.

 

It really just comes to Washington and the NFC East collectively living down to expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Giants lost 4 games by 4 or fewer points this season.  As much as I don't like what the Eagles did relying on another team to get into the playoffs is just dangerous because of the element outside of your control.  I'll say this for the Giants though, unlike their stadium mates they appear to be trending in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam Darnold has a chance to resurrect his career now that he's no longer being coached by Adam Gase.  He could look at Ryan Tannehill.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

Oh dear.

 

"For now" really means "don't even think about drafting anyone other than Trevor."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

That's the same as the "if you didn't want to lose because of a bad penalty, you should have scored 20 more points". 

 

I hate when people say "if you didn't want to lose because of a bad penalty, you should have scored 20 more points", but I don't think this is analogous. Reasons: 

 

This is a special circumstance. The Giants only won six games. Six wins in any other division in almost any other year would've had them eliminated already. It's sort of understood that 9 wins is the bare minimum for playoff expectancy before every season. Anything less than that and it's hard to feel bad for any team who didn't make it.  And It's only because of a confluence of weird events that they even had a shot. Your ref analogy would be apt if a team lost on a bad call in a well-played game where the only reason they lost and the opponent won was the bad call. That's not the Giants. The Giants are more like a team who only scored 6 points, turned the ball over 5 times and then, thanks to the fortune of playing another bad team, found themselves at the end hoping the opposing kicker misses a short field goal. If a bad call by the refs cost them that game then yeah they should've done more than score 6 dang ass points.

 

Over the course of a season where you have months to recognize your own deficiencies and course correct to overcome a bad stretch of play is a much different proposition than overcoming a bad call or two in a single game.

 

There's better examples of what you're talking about where an actual deserving playoff team missed out because they needed the Colts to win and then they rested Peyton Manning in Week 17 and lost. In cases like that, tough luck sorry

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

It's basically an admission of an uneven playing field,

 

The Teamers just won a division and will host a home playoff game by winning 7 out of 16 games. There's a handful of teams throughout the league with better records who didn't make the playoffs. It's always been an uneven playing field. 

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

and that some teams have to win fewer games or score fewer points than others. It's flawed.

 

Nobody's arguing that. It's always been flawed, but when you can only play 16 games in a season and there's 32 teams in the league, this is how it has to be. It'll never be a single table system. It's not possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lights Out said:

 

It's not like there were any obvious better options, though. I guess they could have picked Steelers/Browns, but people would have complained about Mason Rudolph just like they're complaining about Sudfeld.

 

Rudolph gives Pittsburgh a better chance of winning after the last month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.