The_Admiral Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 WHY WONDER WHY ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintsfan Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 THE GOAL OF THE GAME IS NOT TO GET FIRST DOWNS. Why not decide possession by who has the most completed passes? Or who's cheerleaders are hotter?The point is that its a bit more to do with the game than simply tossing a coin, so when teams complain 'we didn't get an overtime possession' the reason would be football related, 'well you didn't get enough first downs in the game!', than 'well you didn't call the toss of a coin correctly'. It wouldn't HAVE to be first downs, but some football related criterion. (First downs seems the most logical to me mind!)And that says it all.Explain to me then why it is such a stupid suggestion? It keeps the game as it is, and the result of overtime is fixed into a goal of the game. (It may not be THE goal of the game, but every team wants first downs). I get that perhaps we have different ways of looking at the game, you being resistant to any slightly outlandish suggestions, me perhaps being more open to slightly revolutionary changes, but I think there are times where you have been incredibly rude and have not argues the issues of a case, but have thought 'oh its Saintsfan, hes a , so I don't even need to consider what he said. I'll just be rude and belittle his idea without even considering it.' I don't think I have ever been rude to you. 2011/12 WFL Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 In Saintsfan's tenuous defense, I will say that since games are just constructs, a goal of the game becomes amassing first downs as soon as you say it is. Why do you have four attempts to gain ten yards? Because we said so. Nevertheless, using number of first downs is retarded because that rewards poor field position and short gains, making it preferable to start from inside the 20 and grind out a long march rather than chucking it deep, something counterintuitive to an NFL that would so much rather you chuck it deep that they call defensive interference for gazing upward. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintsfan Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 In Saintsfan's tenuous defense, I will say that since games are just constructs, a goal of the game becomes amassing first downs as soon as you say it is. Why do you have four attempts to gain ten yards? Because we said so. Nevertheless, using number of first downs is retarded because that rewards poor field position and short gains, making it preferable to start from inside the 20 and grind out a long march rather than chucking it deep, something counterintuitive to an NFL that would so much rather you chuck it deep that they call defensive interference for gazing upward.But if you did that, you would be less likely to get the tie that would be required for overtime to matter. I am sure that occasionally a game situation might occur where racking up a first down count would be preferably to scoring as quickly as possible, but I can't immediately think of one. And it might actually encourage teams to have a go for the win at the end, rather than just playing out the last 90 seconds, as that might involve getting a couple of extra first downs which could make all the difference. 2011/12 WFL Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 THE GOAL OF THE GAME IS NOT TO GET FIRST DOWNS. Why not decide possession by who has the most completed passes? Or who's cheerleaders are hotter?The point is that its a bit more to do with the game than simply tossing a coin, so when teams complain 'we didn't get an overtime possession' the reason would be football related, 'well you didn't get enough first downs in the game!', than 'well you didn't call the toss of a coin correctly'. It wouldn't HAVE to be first downs, but some football related criterion. (First downs seems the most logical to me mind!)This is the equivalent of saying that a soccer tie should be broken by number of corner kicks. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintsfan Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 THE GOAL OF THE GAME IS NOT TO GET FIRST DOWNS. Why not decide possession by who has the most completed passes? Or who's cheerleaders are hotter?The point is that its a bit more to do with the game than simply tossing a coin, so when teams complain 'we didn't get an overtime possession' the reason would be football related, 'well you didn't get enough first downs in the game!', than 'well you didn't call the toss of a coin correctly'. It wouldn't HAVE to be first downs, but some football related criterion. (First downs seems the most logical to me mind!)This is the equivalent of saying that a soccer tie should be broken by number of corner kicks.But it isn't breaking a tie. Its deciding who gets choice of first possessions in overtime, rather than using a coin toss for that. It would be more like deciding who gets the choice of going first in a penalty shoot out on who had the most corner kicks. FWIW I wouldn't be against that either. 2011/12 WFL Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted February 1, 2010 Author Share Posted February 1, 2010 THE GOAL OF THE GAME IS NOT TO GET FIRST DOWNS. Why not decide possession by who has the most completed passes? Or who's cheerleaders are hotter?The point is that its a bit more to do with the game than simply tossing a coin, so when teams complain 'we didn't get an overtime possession' the reason would be football related, 'well you didn't get enough first downs in the game!', than 'well you didn't call the toss of a coin correctly'. It wouldn't HAVE to be first downs, but some football related criterion. (First downs seems the most logical to me mind!)And that says it all.Explain to me then why it is such a stupid suggestion? It keeps the game as it is, and the result of overtime is fixed into a goal of the game. (It may not be THE goal of the game, but every team wants first downs). I get that perhaps we have different ways of looking at the game, you being resistant to any slightly outlandish suggestions, me perhaps being more open to slightly revolutionary changes, but I think there are times where you have been incredibly rude and have not argues the issues of a case, but have thought 'oh its Saintsfan, hes a , so I don't even need to consider what he said. I'll just be rude and belittle his idea without even considering it.' I don't think I have ever been rude to you.Oh I considered it. After careful consideration, I think it's beyond stupid. I've explained to you why it's stupid. You don't agree, even though every single other person who has commented has agreed that it's stupid. This is like arguing with Tank 2.0.Posting stupid comments in my threads is being rude to me, so yes - you have been rude to me. Sorry if I become defensive when people don't treat me with respect. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 THE GOAL OF THE GAME IS NOT TO GET FIRST DOWNS. Why not decide possession by who has the most completed passes? Or who's cheerleaders are hotter?The point is that its a bit more to do with the game than simply tossing a coin, so when teams complain 'we didn't get an overtime possession' the reason would be football related, 'well you didn't get enough first downs in the game!', than 'well you didn't call the toss of a coin correctly'. It wouldn't HAVE to be first downs, but some football related criterion. (First downs seems the most logical to me mind!)And that says it all.Explain to me then why it is such a stupid suggestion? It keeps the game as it is, and the result of overtime is fixed into a goal of the game. (It may not be THE goal of the game, but every team wants first downs). I get that perhaps we have different ways of looking at the game, you being resistant to any slightly outlandish suggestions, me perhaps being more open to slightly revolutionary changes, but I think there are times where you have been incredibly rude and have not argues the issues of a case, but have thought 'oh its Saintsfan, hes a , so I don't even need to consider what he said. I'll just be rude and belittle his idea without even considering it.' I don't think I have ever been rude to you.Oh I considered it. After careful consideration, I think it's beyond stupid. I've explained to you why it's stupid. You don't agree, even though every single other person who has commented has agreed that it's stupid. This is like arguing with Tank 2.0.Posting stupid comments in my threads is being rude to me, so yes - you have been rude to me. Sorry if I become defensive when people don't treat me with respect.Vet do you ever wonder if this guy is just pulling a WillMorris? You know, posting a bunch of really stupid just to see if we'll respond to it. I almost think that has to be the case here. There's just no way that someone who claims to be a sports fan can be this clueless about sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 I am sure that occasionally a game situation might occur where racking up a first down count would be preferably to scoring as quickly as possible, but I can't immediately think of one.Probably because the best possible outcome to any play is a score. Number of first downs is a pretty meaningless statistic. Third down conversion rate tells you more about what a team did, and even that can be misleading. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.