Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet
It's funny how the talk was about the Chargers going to the SB and how good they were, while NE was spiraling down... yet the Chargers merely showed up against NE and got shownt - you're still the Chargers.

Watch NE collapse in KC.

well to be honest no reason the team with the 2nd best record in the AFC had to fly from the west coast to the east coast 2 weeks in a row. that's the issue with the NFL's playoff system

The format is stupid. Teams can have a losing record and win their division and host a playoff game while teams with a pretty good record don't get in or have to travel to the losing record team when they shouldn't even be in the playoffs.

They should change the division round - the wild card round seems to work fine - to In Conference and have the bottom teams, because of where they finished the regular season where they sit in the conference, travel. Which means 11-5 NE would've gone to 12-4 LA and Seattle would've gone to Dallas, who were both 10-6 but obviously strength of schedule or whatever happened to make Seattle higher occurred.

The NHL used to have 1 plays 16, the league, not conferences. It gave the league depth in regards to the worst playing the best and whittling it down that way, with the opportunity for a lesser winning team to get it together and throw in some kinks, like how Edmonton, who finished 14th with a losing record! at Montreal, who finished 3rd, beat Montreal in the first round.

Obviously that won't work in the NFL, although it could because someone always wins the conference but it could be 2 teams from the same conference then, which would be no more interesting than the current format, because that means it would be possible that the 2 best teams end up playing each other.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet
It's funny how the talk was about the Chargers going to the SB and how good they were, while NE was spiraling down... yet the Chargers merely showed up against NE and got shownt - you're still the Chargers.

Watch NE collapse in KC.

well to be honest no reason the team with the 2nd best record in the AFC had to fly from the west coast to the east coast 2 weeks in a row. that's the issue with the NFL's playoff system

The format is stupid. Teams can have a losing record and win their division and host a playoff game while teams with a pretty good record don't get in or have to travel to the losing record team when they shouldn't even be in the playoffs.

They should change the division round - the wild card round seems to work fine - to In Conference and have the bottom teams, because of where they finished the regular season where they sit in the conference, travel. Which means 11-5 NE would've gone to 12-4 LA and Seattle would've gone to Dallas, who were both 10-6 but obviously strength of schedule or whatever happened to make Seattle higher occurred.

The NHL used to have 1 plays 16, the league, not conferences. It gave the league depth in regards to the worst playing the best and whittling it down that way, with the opportunity for a lesser winning team to get it together and throw in some kinks, like how Edmonton, who finished 14th with a losing record! at Montreal, who finished 3rd, beat Montreal in the first round.

Obviously that won't work in the NFL, although it could because someone always wins the conference but it could be 2 teams from the same conference then, which would be no more interesting than the current format, because that means it would be possible that the 2 best teams end up playing each other.

the seedings should be based off of record. other than that I'm fine with the division winners getting in even if they have a bad record. just the top teams based on record should be the ones hosting the games

Quote
crholmstrom

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
crholmstrom

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
stickyfingers101
NFL is rigged

well my team the jets hired the guy for years now I've been saying shouldn't have a job in the nfl anymore

I kinda feel bad making fun of him over his googly-eyed press conference, but that was WEIRD. People are speculating about a medical issue or prescription drugs, but I don't know...

AHH, THE IRONY IS DELICIOUS!

LOL, what's that now? I'm seriously not getting your point.

Sorry, I put it on the wrong post! I was sneak posting at work. I will fix now, haha.

Ah, okay, that makes sense!

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet
It's funny how the talk was about the Chargers going to the SB and how good they were, while NE was spiraling down... yet the Chargers merely showed up against NE and got shownt - you're still the Chargers.

Watch NE collapse in KC.

well to be honest no reason the team with the 2nd best record in the AFC had to fly from the west coast to the east coast 2 weeks in a row. that's the issue with the NFL's playoff system

The format is stupid. Teams can have a losing record and win their division and host a playoff game while teams with a pretty good record don't get in or have to travel to the losing record team when they shouldn't even be in the playoffs.

They should change the division round - the wild card round seems to work fine - to In Conference and have the bottom teams, because of where they finished the regular season where they sit in the conference, travel. Which means 11-5 NE would've gone to 12-4 LA and Seattle would've gone to Dallas, who were both 10-6 but obviously strength of schedule or whatever happened to make Seattle higher occurred.

The NHL used to have 1 plays 16, the league, not conferences. It gave the league depth in regards to the worst playing the best and whittling it down that way, with the opportunity for a lesser winning team to get it together and throw in some kinks, like how Edmonton, who finished 14th with a losing record! at Montreal, who finished 3rd, beat Montreal in the first round.

Obviously that won't work in the NFL, although it could because someone always wins the conference but it could be 2 teams from the same conference then, which would be no more interesting than the current format, because that means it would be possible that the 2 best teams end up playing each other.

the seedings should be based off of record. other than that I'm fine with the division winners getting in even if they have a bad record. just the top teams based on record should be the ones hosting the games

You're OK with teams with a losing record making the playoffs because of winning their division and teams with a winning record not making the playoffs yet you say seedings should be based off of their records and then say teams based on record, which I'm guessing you mean the best records, not the worst, should be hosting games.

Uhhhh.... ok.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet
It's funny how the talk was about the Chargers going to the SB and how good they were, while NE was spiraling down... yet the Chargers merely showed up against NE and got shownt - you're still the Chargers.

Watch NE collapse in KC.

well to be honest no reason the team with the 2nd best record in the AFC had to fly from the west coast to the east coast 2 weeks in a row. that's the issue with the NFL's playoff system

The format is stupid. Teams can have a losing record and win their division and host a playoff game while teams with a pretty good record don't get in or have to travel to the losing record team when they shouldn't even be in the playoffs.

They should change the division round - the wild card round seems to work fine - to In Conference and have the bottom teams, because of where they finished the regular season where they sit in the conference, travel. Which means 11-5 NE would've gone to 12-4 LA and Seattle would've gone to Dallas, who were both 10-6 but obviously strength of schedule or whatever happened to make Seattle higher occurred.

The NHL used to have 1 plays 16, the league, not conferences. It gave the league depth in regards to the worst playing the best and whittling it down that way, with the opportunity for a lesser winning team to get it together and throw in some kinks, like how Edmonton, who finished 14th with a losing record! at Montreal, who finished 3rd, beat Montreal in the first round.

Obviously that won't work in the NFL, although it could because someone always wins the conference but it could be 2 teams from the same conference then, which would be no more interesting than the current format, because that means it would be possible that the 2 best teams end up playing each other.

the seedings should be based off of record. other than that I'm fine with the division winners getting in even if they have a bad record. just the top teams based on record should be the ones hosting the games

You're OK with teams with a losing record making the playoffs because of winning their division and teams with a winning record not making the playoffs yet you say seedings should be based off of their records and then say teams based on record, which I'm guessing you mean the best records, not the worst, should be hosting games.

Uhhhh.... ok.

for instance division winners
7-9
10-6
12-4
12-4

wildcards
11-5
10-6

the 12-4 teams would host games so you'd never have the 7-9 team playing a home game and the 11-5 team would have a home game . you seed the teams based off of those standings

Quote
keefriffhard4life

for instance division winners
7-9
10-6
12-4
12-4

wildcards
11-5
10-6

the 12-4 teams would host games so you'd never have the 7-9 team playing a home game and the 11-5 team would have a home game . you seed the teams based off of those standings

Ah. That makes more sense. But still... division winner shouldn't automatically make the playoffs with a lesser record than someone not making the playoffs with a better record ie WINNING record.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

for instance division winners
7-9
10-6
12-4
12-4

wildcards
11-5
10-6

the 12-4 teams would host games so you'd never have the 7-9 team playing a home game and the 11-5 team would have a home game . you seed the teams based off of those standings

Ah. That makes more sense. But still... division winner shouldn't automatically make the playoffs with a lesser record than someone not making the playoffs with a better record ie WINNING record.

i know its 68 teams and not 12 but its sorta what the ncaa basketball tournament has with conference tournament winners getting and sometimes they have a bad record and the good team from smaller conferences miss the tournament because of that one loss in the conference tournament



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-01-18 02:42 by keefriffhard4life.

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet
It's funny how the talk was about the Chargers going to the SB and how good they were, while NE was spiraling down... yet the Chargers merely showed up against NE and got shownt - you're still the Chargers.

Watch NE collapse in KC.

well to be honest no reason the team with the 2nd best record in the AFC had to fly from the west coast to the east coast 2 weeks in a row. that's the issue with the NFL's playoff system

The format is stupid. Teams can have a losing record and win their division and host a playoff game while teams with a pretty good record don't get in or have to travel to the losing record team when they shouldn't even be in the playoffs.

They should change the division round - the wild card round seems to work fine - to In Conference and have the bottom teams, because of where they finished the regular season where they sit in the conference, travel. Which means 11-5 NE would've gone to 12-4 LA and Seattle would've gone to Dallas, who were both 10-6 but obviously strength of schedule or whatever happened to make Seattle higher occurred.

The NHL used to have 1 plays 16, the league, not conferences. It gave the league depth in regards to the worst playing the best and whittling it down that way, with the opportunity for a lesser winning team to get it together and throw in some kinks, like how Edmonton, who finished 14th with a losing record! at Montreal, who finished 3rd, beat Montreal in the first round.

Obviously that won't work in the NFL, although it could because someone always wins the conference but it could be 2 teams from the same conference then, which would be no more interesting than the current format, because that means it would be possible that the 2 best teams end up playing each other.

the seedings should be based off of record. other than that I'm fine with the division winners getting in even if they have a bad record. just the top teams based on record should be the ones hosting the games

I totally agree with with you about better record hosting the games. The worst example I can think of was the 2010 season. The Saints who were the defending SB champs finished with an 11 and 5 record 2nd in their division behind the Falcon 13 and 3 record. That put them as the 5th seed in the NFC conference and they had to travel to Seattle on wild card weekend who won their division with a 7 and 9 record. The Saints lost and homefield had a lot to do with that.

As far as the the format the NHL has been using the past couple of seasons hate it and do not understand it. Use to be the 1 seed plays the 8 , 2&7, 3&6,4&5 in each conference, As it should be. Whats the benefit of playing all year for best record the way it is now . In this new format, it guarantees that at least one higher seeded team is bumped out in the 1st round and a lower seed survives.

The ‘worst’ is making the NFL team travel to England, or Mexico, or say...
anywhere other than the USA for a game during the season.

seahawks loved the england trip. the team really bonded on it. of course whilst there they got to play the raiders....

“It's time for Brees to get his second - and very likely last - Super Bowl. His time is running out fast.”

I am sure when I sit down to watch the games on Sunday,
there will be a long tear-jerky piece on him to refamilarize myself with his details.
Hope it’s not minded I dropped in for a few comments.
I’m considering gambling again

Quote
35love
“It's time for Brees to get his second - and very likely last - Super Bowl. His time is running out fast.”

I am sure when I sit down to watch the games on Sunday,
there will be a long tear-jerky piece on him to refamilarize myself with his details.
Hope it’s not minded I dropped in for a few comments.
I’m considering gambling again

I don't know how much press Brees gets nationally, other than Google Newsing the Saints or his name, but along the Gulf Coast the dude is huge. He's done a lot for the community and not just in New Orleans (his stats, even when they were 7-9 a few times, made people pay attention). It's easy to say he turned the franchise around, and in a way he did, but he had a lot of help, too. He knows that. But he also understands the hype. He's quite humble, really. He's invested in the city and surrounding areas with various things, like helping some schools out with whatever they need, making sure a school gets an updated field or proper equipment for their football team, fundraisers, charities. He's become the face of New Orleans and has done a respectable job of representing the city and the state.

Wow...horrible missed interference call in the 4th...clearly the guy was hammered! WTF?!!!

Almost ashamed to say GO RAMS!!!







Go Rams!!!

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Was rooting for the Saints..
Horrible non-call near the end of regulation, tough break.

Go Chiefs!!

hell of a game. i was rooting for saints as rams are division foe. now i'm rooting for kc. bad idea: jimmy buffett doing the banner. bit of a reach for him, haha

tony romo, overrated. he wasn't that great a player either

Wow, exciting game, not a fan of either team but good to see underdog visiting team win. I'm sure all that will be talked about was the missed call which would have pretty much given the Saints the victory.

Quote
DGA35
Wow, exciting game, not a fan of either team but good to see underdog visiting team win. I'm sure all that will be talked about was the missed call which would have pretty much given the Saints the victory.

True, but also true is they should have found a way to put the game away when they were up 13-0. They didn't and they lost.

Payton said the league office contacted him and said it was a blown call.

Gee...thanks. That almost makes it worse.

Wow, two exciting games today. What can you say about Brady and the Pats. I like listening to Tony Romo announce, it's good to hear his point of view, a lot of the plays he thinks will be called did get called.
Final play, they were saying why doesn't KC call a time out since the whole defense were tired and they had 3 time outs.

Quote
DGA35
Wow, two exciting games today. What can you say about Brady and the Pats. I like listening to Tony Romo announce, it's good to hear his point of view, a lot of the plays he thinks will be called did get called.
Final play, they were saying why doesn't KC call a time out since the whole defense were tired and they had 3 time outs.

Amazing games. The Patriots really used their running game effectively.

9 SUPER BOWLS in 19 YEARS. You'll never see this again.

What two great championship games !!

Going to be in Vegas before the Super Bowl, gotta think the pats will be favorites.
If so, gotta bet against them, but may be faster just to throw my money away..

Quote
MisterDDDD
What two great championship games !!

Going to be in Vegas before the Super Bowl, gotta think the pats will be favorites.
If so, gotta bet against them, but may be faster just to throw my money away..

I guess I'm hoping the Rams suffer humiliation like Cantlanta & it destroys the team. I can't bet on either team & i'm in LV next weekend. eesh. great games today though. they just turned out bad, haha.

Quote
Hairball
Wow...horrible missed interference call in the 4th...clearly the guy was hammered! WTF?!!!

Almost ashamed to say GO RAMS!!!







Go Rams!!!

karma for bountygate

Both great great games although if I had to boil it down it sucked that both were sorta ruined because:

1. That Saints play was ridiculous. I actually wanted the Rams to win, but not like that. It completely made it a hollow victory. Sucked all the excitement out of the bar I was in.

2. The Pats are going to the Super Bowl again. I actually don't have a hatred for them the way others do, and listen they basically deserve it that the entire time you can't count them out. I mean, thats a Super Bowl team there. I'm just so tired of them going and it becomes predictable. Not that they'll win, but it just doesn't make for fun rooting.

Was hoping for Rams-Chiefs Super Bowl and that got dashed. Would have been absolutely fine with the Saints playing the Chiefs (or Pats) as well, but this configuration, and in the way the Rams won, was my least favorite outcome. Oh well, go Rams but I'm not that happy about it.

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
Hairball
Wow...horrible missed interference call in the 4th...clearly the guy was hammered! WTF?!!!

Almost ashamed to say GO RAMS!!!







Go Rams!!!

karma for bountygate

I figured you'd say such a bunk mentality kind of thing.

Sony Michel vs Todd Gurley

Go Georgia Dawgs!

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
Hairball
Wow...horrible missed interference call in the 4th...clearly the guy was hammered! WTF?!!!

Almost ashamed to say GO RAMS!!!







Go Rams!!!

karma for bountygate

I figured you'd say such a bunk mentality kind of thing.

your man brees had a chance in OT to win the game for the saints and blew it. blown call or not the saints had the ball first in OT.

ignore the recordings, transcripts, testimony, etc all you want. the facts are brees and the saints have been to 1 SB and it was a season that is swirled in controversy.

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
Hairball
Wow...horrible missed interference call in the 4th...clearly the guy was hammered! WTF?!!!

Almost ashamed to say GO RAMS!!!







Go Rams!!!

karma for bountygate

I figured you'd say such a bunk mentality kind of thing.

your man brees had a chance in OT to win the game for the saints and blew it. blown call or not the saints had the ball first in OT.

ignore the recordings, transcripts, testimony, etc all you want. the facts are brees and the saints have been to 1 SB and it was a season that is swirled in controversy.

You're just a record that keeps skipping. Last year it was Minnesota, now it's the Rams.

I agree with you in the aspect of that they had a chance to win it. Brees' tipped ball for an INT ended their chance, which with the change of possession ended the tie aspect of field goal to field goal - but the real issue is, in regard to the game, that not called pass interference and the INT is not the real reason they lost - they didn't do enough to not have those two things be an issue. As usual in football, it comes down to one play - duh, they're all one play, right - but at the end of the clock it matters, of course, so that's why that saying exists. But each play counts more than ever in the playoffs. Not getting into a position to "keep the gas pedal down" or whatever it is they say is why they lost.

i don't need to be a broken record. they blow it every year. i actually feel bad for brees and throw in rodgers because those guys should each have 2-3 SB rings. heck rivers should have played at least in a SB



not running the ball and making the rams burn their timeouts is why they didn't win in regulation though. they were going for the kill, which is the norm for the team and coach, instead of making the rams have no chance at all of even getting into FG range to tie it.