Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago

The teams that are screwed in overtime are the teams that buckle under pressure.

Originally Posted by: porky88 


The problem with this argument is that it is fuzzy and nebulous. As a benchmark for evaluating the fairness of the overtime system, it suffers from a lack of falsifiability, which is the hallmark of any scientific hypothesis. What is your definition of a team that buckles under pressure? All one has to do is define that term as a team that happens not to be able to prevent an offense from "driving 50 yards to setup a 47-yard field goal" in an overtime situation and voilá, you win the argument by default. For that reason, it is about as useful as ranking quarterbacks by their "intangibles." It can be whatever you want it to be.

It seems to me that most of the people making the argument for a sudden-death system in football have never taken a basic statistics course. Statistically speaking, the advantage that accrues to the team winning the coinflip is huge and the correlations are undeniable. The stubborn clinging to a status quo that was chosen purely for reasons of expedience in the modern TV era must be rooted in a sort of purist philosophy, but I don't understand why it is to that particular status quo that the purists have chosen to cling. It reminds me of the way conservatives point to the "traditional family values" of the 1950s, an era that was a brief snapshot in American history, and not a very representative one at that.
UserPostedImage
porky88
14 years ago

The problem with this argument is that it is fuzzy and nebulous. As a benchmark for evaluating the fairness of the overtime system, it suffers from a lack of falsifiability, which is the hallmark of any scientific hypothesis. What is your definition of a team that buckles under pressure? All one has to do is define that term as a team that happens not to be able to prevent an offense from "driving 50 yards to setup a 47-yard field goal" in an overtime situation and voilá, you win the argument by default. For that reason, it is about as useful as ranking quarterbacks by their "intangibles." It can be whatever you want it to be.

It seems to me that most of the people making the argument for a sudden-death system in football have never taken a basic statistics course. Statistically speaking, the advantage that accrues to the team winning the coinflip is huge and the correlations are undeniable. The stubborn clinging to a status quo that was chosen purely for reasons of expedience in the modern TV era must be rooted in a sort of purist philosophy, but I don't understand why it is to that particular status quo that the purists have chosen to cling. It reminds me of the way conservatives point to the "traditional family values" of the 1950s, an era that was a brief snapshot in American history, and not a very representative one at that.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 


You overlooked the complete point of my post. The argument isn't that OT is perfect the way it is. I'm not denying that there is an advantage to winning a coin toss. Frankly, I'm not against tweaks, though I think the current postseason OT system is not the way to go. The argument is a coin toss does not decide a game. In fact, not one thing EVER decides a football game. It's as simple as that. In every scenario presented, players still decide the outcome.

The same way a coin toss doesn't decide a football game can be applied to the Aaron Rodgers fumble against the Cardinals. Rodgers isn't to blame for losing the game in that scenario. Certainly, he buckled under pressure 😝, but you can point to other factors that played a role in the outcome of the game as well.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
14 years ago



It seems to me that most of the people making the argument for a sudden-death system in football have never taken a basic statistics course.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 




Well I was going to remain silent as no one is going to change the other person's mind. For the most part we keep discussing two separate issues. You seem to think the NFL created the current OT to make the game fair. The did so to break a tie. They didn't care who won or how they won. America demanded an end to tie games and they gave it to us. I am ok with that. You and others are not. I am fine with that too.

As for statistic classes- I have had several. I understand the concept. (Did very well in the classes too.) That has no bearing on the discussion as you are not quantifying the sample size properly. From my perspective. You know and I know and many others know we can tweak the data to come up with any conclusion we want. As porky was saying make the pool larger. Add in to the OT games additional data. Tell us how many times the losing team fumbled the ball in the regulation period. Tell us how many Ints they gave up. Tell us how many dropped passes they had. Tell us how many pick 6's their DB let slip through their fingers.

All we are saying is there is a lot more to the game than the coin flip. You ignore all the rest of it and are fixated on that one portion. Sure it is a sample size. Relevant to you. Not relevant to me.

For now the NFL is going to leave the rule as is. I am fine with that. You are not. Oh well. Then who says life is fair? If they change it you will be happy I will see it as needless. Consider it more meddling which the NFL is so good at and accept it. Truth of the matter they will prob change it. Bit they are going to wait a few years and see how the new spot of the KO impacts the game and OT before they make any change. So just relax and wait 3-4 years.
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago

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.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
14 years ago


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.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



The ties you cherish in other sports (Olympic hockey world cup soccer for the most part) I find terrible and boring. There is nothing worse than watch a pool match in which one team is content to merely tie in order to advance to the next round. Boring BORING BORING. Don't get me wrong if I was the coach I would do the same thing.

I have been thinking about why I like the current OT system. What was it in the past that made me feel this way.

I decided the genesis was the Thanksgiving Day game between Chicago and Detroit Nov 27, 1980. Detroit (7-5) was the favored over Chicago (4-8). The Lions kind of bumbled along most of the game and never put away the Bears. That made for a pretty boring game. Yet with no time left on the clock the Bears scored to tie the game. They then took the kick 95 yards to win in OT. Even though I am for the most part anti Bears, I and everyone in the room, had to admit that was one heck of a fun game to watch.

Now people try and tell me that it was not fair that Detroit did not get yet another chance to win the game. I don't feel the same way. Some have even advocated doing away with the kick off all together and want to set the ball on the 20 yard line instead. I hope it never happens.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
14 years ago
I like the argument that both teams had an opportunity for four quarters, therefore don't NEED to have their offense touch the ball once in over time. I think if the rules were to say that both teams offense would get the ball, we'd see less urgency closing out games, thus less exciting finishes.

I'm against changing the rules in overtime. I love an exciting finish and I strongly feel that there will be a sense of urgency missing if the teams both know they'll get the ball in over time.
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
It is a pretty big overstatement to say that I "cherish" ties. I said seeing ties in the standings would be interesting; that is, it would make the playoff scenarios more intriguing.

By the way, anyone who finds sports that involve ties boring has never watched, for example, rugby union, which allows for ties but includes incentives to avoid them. Postseason standings are seeded by the accumulation of tournament points. In SuperRugby, for example, teams accrue 4 tournament points for each regular season victory, 2 points for each tie, 1 point for scoring at least four tries (the rugby equivalent of a touchdown) in one game, and 1 point for losing by less than 7 points.

So there is very little incentive to settle for a tie, and teams typically try their hardest to score as time expires. For this reason, the last quarter of most games tends to be far the most exciting. In fact, I see a lot more last-second scoring in rugby union than I ever do in the NFL -- and none of that silly settling for field goals, either. They go for tries.
UserPostedImage
vikesrule
14 years ago

... I love an exciting finish and I strongly feel that there will be a sense of urgency missing if the teams both know they'll get the ball in over time.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Agreed

Classic epic failure....

NFL's Worst All-Time Coaching Decisions
3. Dennis Green Gets Waaaay Too Conservative 

UserPostedImage 

The Falcons and Vikings were tied at 27 in the all-dome matchup of the '99 NFC championship with 30 seconds left. The Vikings had two timeouts left, and also had the most prolific offense to date in the history of the NFL. No wind to worry about. No snow. Forty yards would have been enough to get Gary Andersen (perfect in the regular season) into field-goal range.
But Green left the fate of his entire season to the overtime coin flip by having QB Randall Cunningham take a knee.
Atlanta won the toss, showed they are who Green THOUGHT they were, and promptly won the game without the Vikes ever seeing the ball again. Most humiliating for Green (pictured below, being consoled by Falcons coach Dan Reeves)? Being replaced by draft-day guru Mike Tice three years later.


Zero2Cool
14 years ago

Agreed

Classic epic failure....


Originally Posted by: vikesrule 



Hey, does this look familiar to you?




UserPostedImage
vikesrule
14 years ago

Hey, does this look familiar to you?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Ya know Z2C, if I had $10 for every time that I've called you an asshole...I could retire to a life of luxury on a Caribbean island.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (29m) : Harrisburg Packers
Mucky Tundra (47m) : Yes
Zero2Cool (1h) : No.
dfosterf (1h) : The man carried us a lot of the time
dfosterf (1h) : I think a Kenny Clark tribute is in order
Zero2Cool (9h) : new site, text editor gooder even on phone
beast (10h) : Oh yes, sometimes they make using a cellphone tough. I just wanted to make sure it was the correct article, & thank you for pointing it out.
jdlax (11h) : I can't believe one of my teams went out and wablammo just up and acquired one of the best players in the world overnight
dfosterf (16h) : I do very much appreciate when Beast and others pick up my slack 😊
dfosterf (16h) : I accept Beast's admonishment regarding my failure to link stuff I reference. I simply never learned to link from my cell phone.
beast (16h) : That's not what your she said 😌, she said keep going 😏
Mucky Tundra (20h) : Anything over 4 hours means he needs to get to the hospital
Mucky Tundra (20h) : Someone might want to check on Hafley and make sure his erection has gone down
Zero2Cool (21h) : LaFleur texts "bleep me I cannot sit down"
Zero2Cool (21h) : YouTube has had me last hour or two lol
Mucky Tundra (22h) : Ugh this trade happened right as my shift started and it's killing me
Zero2Cool (22h) : Parsons wore 23 in high school.
Zero2Cool (22h) : Packers just cost Lions more money with Hutchinson too huh
Zero2Cool (23h) : That is fair by me.
buckeyepackfan (23h) : Kenny Clark is the player, 2 1st rnd picks
Zero2Cool (23h) : umm... what?
wpr (28-Aug) : I am stunned
Mucky Tundra (28-Aug) : RICKEY SCOOPS WAS RIGHT AGAIN!!!
Mucky Tundra (28-Aug) : ITS HAPPENING
buckeyepackfan (28-Aug) : DEAL IS DONE
buckeyepackfan (28-Aug) : MICAH IS COMING TO GREEN BAY!!!!!!!!!
wpr (28-Aug) : Me do-ed it gooderly,
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : Bahah, I was like WTF why isn't anyone posting on PP.com ... oops no one has permissions
dfosterf (27-Aug) : tell her I reckon
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Micah Robinson cut. Probable PS player tomorrow. Has to call mom back and t
Zero2Cool (27-Aug) : New site so much better. Might make switch and deal with it.
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Mecole Hardman to our practice squad
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Nick Nieman from Texans our 5th linebacker. Special teams signing
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Looks like we signed Clayton Tune as QB3
wpr (27-Aug) : TKT people lose their minds over QB3. Point is almost none of them are ready that's why they are on the PS and other teams don't take them.
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Unfortunately he doesn't seem ready to be an emergency QB.
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : As a Canadian and a follower of Canadian University football. I am rooting for him
dfosterf (27-Aug) : I bet a lot of us will follow the Taylor Elgersma journey with interest. Personally, got a Kurt Warner vibe goin' on. I like him
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Not sure if either will be claimed though.
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Tune or Hooker would make sense
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Clayton Tune cut by the Cards? Don't know if that's the guy, we shall see
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Per Bill Huber, the Packers will not be bringing back Taylor Elgersma or Sean Clifford on the practice squad, so a new third quarterback
Mucky Tundra (27-Aug) : Schefter must have deleted his tweet
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Hopefully Jerry reaches under the seat cushions and ashtrays of his jet and scrapes up the 45 million apr and spares us further nonsense
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Have to admit the PO'd Cowboy fan videos would be fun to watch. Problem with draft picks is half their fanbase barely knows what that is
beast (27-Aug) : I think Cowboys fans are ready to get their pitch forks and burning sticks if Jerry were to trade Micah
dfosterf (27-Aug) : If Jerry traded Micah to GB, here in northern Va. they would have to quick build yet another data center to handle the internet hate traffic
Zero2Cool (27-Aug) : its signing and trades that you don't hear about, other then announced
Zero2Cool (27-Aug) : If you hear rumors about Packers sign or trade, won't happen. Not how they work
dfosterf (27-Aug) : 19 players in a contract year. Jones called loss to us worst loss in Cowboy history. Forget Parsons trade. Not happenin' Cap'n
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

28-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

28-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

28-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

27-Aug / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

27-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

27-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

25-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.