Reply With Quote
Some Laker fans might be, but i'm not one of them, unlike you, I can stick with my team. Who was you're team before last year anyways?
It was 3rd and 15, but yes, 1nd and 2nd resulted in loss of yardage, and ALL the momentum was going NE's way. Keller also redeemed himself for dropping the wide-open endzone catch in regulation by catching 3 straight in overtime.
I still think Bellichick should have gone for 2 after Moss scored the TD. A successful attempt would have absolutely ripped the heart out of the Jets franchise and send them back into misery. Thank God he wasn't his coldblooded self last night
Some Laker fans might be, but i'm not one of them, unlike you, I can stick with my team. Who was you're team before last year anyways?
Yeah considering how wildly inconsistent the defense had been, going for two would have been a good choice. Plus, he's Bill Belichick, not Herm Edwards, so nobody would have called him an idiot for doing it.
Laker fan = bandwagoner
That's the best you could do? Weak. Just cause you're a band wagon pussy ot.
You forgot:
lol, 38-34
lol, blown 18 point first half lead
lol, peyton
lol, addai walks into endzone
lol, bigger choke job than super bowl 42
Weak is bringing up bandwagoning talk in the first place you little . There is no bigger pussy got move than to try and talk bandwagoner . Especially when you're a ing Lakers fan.
Yeah, I was going to do all that too, but figured the Giants game was enough. lolYou forgot:
lol, 38-34
lol, blown 18 point first half lead
lol, peyton
lol, addai walks into endzone
lol, bigger choke job than super bowl 42
You forgot:
lol, 38-34
lol, blown 18 point first half lead
lol, peyton
lol, addai walks into endzone
lol, bigger choke job than super bowl 42
lol 24-14 2004 afc le game
lol 20-3 2005 afc divisional game
lol Peyton Manning throwing picks vs Pats D in those games
lol Mike Vanderjagt
lol Tony Dungy
lol chargers
lol Billy Volek
lol Anthony Gonzalez
lol Jim Sorgi
lol, case in point
lol, insecure
lol, spygate
lol, 18-1
lol, eli
lol, tyree
lol, 17-14
lol, plaxico's prediction
lol, brady's laugh
lol, brady's sack
lol, biggest chokejob in sports history
lol raiders
lol al davis
lol 16-13 2002 divisional game
lol David Patten's 4th down OT catch in 2002 divisional game
lol Charles Woodson
lol Tampa Bay
lol 48-21
lol Rich Gannon
lol Rich Gannon in the superbowl
lol Jerry Rice yelling "WTF is going on!" in the superbowl
But it really isn't. Since 1974, only 28 percent of games are won on the first possession by the team that wins the coin toss. That means both teams get a chance the majority of the time, so poof goes your complaint.
Teams at the end of close games play for overtime anyway, so if you change the format, teams are still going to play for the tie. That's why the college overtime requires you to go for two at some point because coaches will almost always play the odds, which means being conservative, which means a thousand overtimes until someone makes a mistake. The last thing the NFL wants is for someone to get hurt playing garbage time in an extended overtime period.
So you're telling me 1 out of every 4 teams don't get a fair chance in overtime.
nah, there would be a lot of ties.
lol Robert Gallery
lol Aaron Brooks
lol 2-14
lol Art S
lol Tom Cable
lol Mike Williams
lol 48-21
lol no playoff games since
lol 17 game division losing streak
lol Jarrod Page
lol D'Angelo Hall
lol Bill Romanowski
lol Jeff George
lol Randy Moss succeeding in NE
lol Daunte Culpepper
lol 2-7
lol maybe next year
you forgot Jamarcus Russel LMAO
And I'm not one of those weak ass band wagon fans. I'll stick with my team through the ter. Now, what was you're team before last year, pussy.
No, I'm telling you that your statement that "for the most part, the game is decided by the coin flip" is completely wrong. In no way is 1 out of 4 anywhere close to "for the most part".
If it's so completely unfair, then why didn't the Greatest Coach in NFL History go for two after Moss' touchdown? He had the game to win on one play, and he decided that his odds were better in overtime.
If you're trying to make it more fair, you can't do that. First of all, if you make the play clock shorter, then teams will have trouble making subs utions and getting plays in because they practice the entire year for that play clock. It also gives some teams advantages over others simply based on their personnel. You could say that you can only run out of the shotgun or the I formation in overtime and it wouldn't be any less unfair.
Fine, then just an entire 15 minute period. Its the farest and most unbiased way possible.
College format is the best, imo. Both teams get chances to score, then you have to start going for two. It would be nice if they pushed the line of scrimmage to start it at like the 40.
It really is, but I don't think the players union would go for having to beat the out of themselves for an extra quarter. You'd almost be better off eliminating overtime altogether or counting only a half a win for an overtime victory.
Overtime as it is is a gut-check. It's like the kick at the end of a distance run. It's the ultimate in pressure. It's 60 minutes of back breaking work that can be for nothing in a single play. That's why you feel so ing lousy about your team losing it. You'd feel equally great if they'd won, and you know it.
That's what makes it great.
The raiders' line of "lol maybe next year" was the best one thus far LOL.
That's what 31 teams go in saying at the end of the year.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
