The Whole "Two Challenges Only" Thing?· Page 2

Greg C.
Registered

14 years ago

It's not challenges are free. You lose a timeout, I don't really agree with the theory that suddenly coaches would start throwing out challenges left and right.

If the above is true that if you get both right you get a third but not a fourth. Then if you get two challenges right, its a playoff game. You get a third right. Then in the 4th quarter something extremely obvious happens, I just don't see the logic that you get punished and you could lose the game because the NFL doesn't want more breaks. I just assumed if your going to have instant replay in a sport, its main purpose is to make sure the right call is called.

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:

Well-said. Losing a timeout is not something that coaches take lightly. There would not be that many extra challenges if they changed the rule in the way we are suggesting.

blank

Cheesey
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#12

That's why a challenge is like "gold". Use them wisely, or lose them for when you might really need them.

Oh.....and Montana Bob......you missed ONE thing......"Seats 12,000......and STILL can't get sold out!" LOL!

istanbulpacker
Registered

14 years ago

#13

I don't think it's a major time issue for the networks because they can run commercials during challenges, then eliminate commercial breaks later in the game as necessary.

"Greg C." wrote:

Agreed.

I can't believe that the networks AND the League would settle for a situation where the Overtime game in progress gets switched to the Late game. Can you imagine if you are sitting in your living room in Wisconsin watching the Pack on the early game. Game tied going into overtime....errr...we interrupt this broadcast to bring you the San Francisco 49ers vs. the Carolina Panthers. WHAT! YGBFKM!!

Seems to me they should be able to manage their commercials in the first 3 quarters so they could play the entire 4th quarter nearly w/o commercials. If they go into OT, there is time before the next game to show it. If there isn't, then more commercials to fill the time until the next game starts.

After all, the game is only 60 minutes long with half time at 12 minutes. Timeouts are only 40 sec or 1 m 50s if used for commercials. 2 minutes between 1st/2nd and 3rd/4th quarters. Should be plenty of time left for the network to get their revenue during play stoppages, etc or get creative w/sideline advertising similar to soccer games.

blank

Greg C.
Registered

14 years ago

#14

I don't think it's a major time issue for the networks because they can run commercials during challenges, then eliminate commercial breaks later in the game as necessary.

"istanbulpacker" wrote:

"Greg C." wrote:

They will not cut off the end of a game if you are in the home market of one of the teams involved. But if your team plays the late game and the early game runs late, they will cut off the end of that one. It happens only occasionally, and I don't think an extra replay challenge or two would have a substantial impact on game lengths anyway.

blank

Porforis
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#15

It's not challenges are free. You lose a timeout, I don't really agree with the theory that suddenly coaches would start throwing out challenges left and right.

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:

If it's going to cost you a timeout, why not challenge the previous play everytime you want to take a timeout and get a few more minutes of rest? That's the dumb crap I'm afraid would come up.

Greg C.
Registered

14 years ago

#16

It's not challenges are free. You lose a timeout, I don't really agree with the theory that suddenly coaches would start throwing out challenges left and right.

"Porforis" wrote:

If it's going to cost you a timeout, why not challenge the previous play everytime you want to take a timeout and get a few more minutes of rest? That's the dumb crap I'm afraid would come up.

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:

They can do that under the current system if they want to, but they don't, because it would be ridiculous. Why would they challenge a play where nothing controversial happened? Do you think coaches are just standing around on the sidelines thinking of all the silly things that they can do just for the heck of it?

blank

4PackGirl
Registered

14 years ago

#17

bottom line here is people are stupid - even nfl coaches. they'll do whatever it takes to benefit their team. you bet your sweet ass they'd work the system like crazy given unlimited challenges. rules were put in place to stop the nonsense that was likely to ensue. much like stupid people force the gov't to make stupid laws to protect their stupid asses.

Greg C.
Registered

14 years ago

#18

"4PackGirl" wrote:

I'm not suggesting unlimited challenges. I'm suggesting that when you get two challenges wrong, you don't get any more. That way teams are protected if the refs screw up more than two calls, but coaches would still have plenty of incentive not to use frivolous challenges. This would not be as big a deal as some people are making it out to be.

blank

RedSoxExcel
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

#19

A change that a CORRECT call would not change your right to challenge more than two times would have little or no effect.

This whole thing about coaches calling timeouts to get extra long timeouts, why don't they just do that now in the 4th quarter if they havn't used a challenge?

Fine, if you only get two challenges, even if you get one correct is to make people be more mindful of timeouts, I still don't get the two challenges correct, you get a third but not a fourth. I don't see the logic. Why a third and not a fourth?

It will come and bite someone in the arse as these things always do. That's one of the beauties of sports, whenever there is something strange like this it ALWAYS comes back and has some impact at some point. And when it happens, it will have twice in two weeks. And then they will change the rule.

blank

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (29m) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (4h) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (6h) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (8h) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious

beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere

beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.

beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.

beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...

beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered

wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.

wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.

wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet

beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury

beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State

beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Oh snap!!!

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Even Stevie Wonder can see that.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Nah, you see Lions OC leaving to be HC of Bears is directly related to Packers.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22