The same way a coin toss doesn't decide a football game can be applied to the Aaron Rodgers fumble against the Cardinals.
Originally Posted by: porky88
I am not sure how useful it is to cite this game in this context, however, as that game is a prime example of a situation in which both teams touched the ball. True, it supports your contention that the defense should be able to make a play to stop the offense, but in this case, Rodgers had already lost the ball before contact was made, and he furthered the damage of what was in many ways a freak play by subsequently kicking a ball that should have been dead the moment it hit the ground, thereby prolonging the play and giving the defender a chance to retrieve it. So while it was an opportunistic play on the part of the defender, it was also primarily a failure on the part of the offense -- specifically, the quarterback.
Of course, had Aaron Rodgers managed to connect with Greg Jennings earlier in the drive, this game would probably have been yet another classic case of a game in which the opposing team never got to touch the ball. 🖐
You seem to think the NFL created the current OT to make the game fair.
"wpr" wrote:
No, I most certainly do not. I wrote in my post above that the current OT format was chosen out of expedience given the constraints of the modern TV era. In other words, it was chosen not to be fair, but to end games more quickly. And given that fairness is usually a prized attribute of sporting competition, I expressed surprise that a lot of the purists cling to such a system that is self-consciously
not based on principles of fairness.
Add in to the OT games additional data.
"wpr" wrote:
Leaving out the fact that some of your suggestions (dropped INTs by DBs, for example) are inherently subjective, what would the introduction of these additional data points prove?
If they change it you will be happy I will see it as needless.
"wpr" wrote:
Again, you miss my point. I have stated repeatedly in the past that I consider the current system "needless," as you put it. I do not understand why the league and fans are so dead-set on ensuring that ties do not happen. I personally would not be at all bothered if the old system were brought back and we saw more ties in the standings. I personally think it would be more interesting.
Like you, I get tired of the incessant rule changes in football. One of the nice things about baseball is that one can make pretty relevant comparisons between eras, because for all practical purposes, the rules and the schedule format have been static for over 100 years. It is impossible to do that with professional football. For one thing, the length of the season has steadily increased over the decades; for another, the rules change every single year; for yet another, the postseason format has continued to evolve. Season and career records are not just all that meaningful in the NFL when compared to a sport like baseball.