That Tie

[The Gipper]

There has been a discussion in the last couple of days on Mike and Mike about the fact that Denver tried to win the OT game vs. KC Sunday by attempting a 62 yard FG that fell short.

 

They said that the Broncos had 3 options when they did that: A. try for a 1st down on 4th and 10 B. Try to kick the winning FG C. Punt....and play for a tie.

 

The Broncos chose B...and lost because missing that FG put the Chiefs in great field position and they only had to go a short way to get into good FG position...which they did and they made the FG.

 

Greenburg argued that the Broncos should have gone for a tie rather than risk losing the game. All the jocks however: Golic, Gruden, Herman etc. said, no, "you play to win the game".

 

Although....in my opinion, while you play to win the game....actually you "play to make the playoffs".

So, figure this out:

 

Losing the game put the Broncos at 7-4. Having a tie would have put them at 7-3-1. If you saw my "Who would be in the playoffs if they started today" thread, you saw that now, at 7-4 also, the Miami Dolphins would actually make the playoffs over the Broncos....who would be shut out...but who would have been in at 7-3-1

 

My question is: if, at the end of the season this situation plays out: that Miami or some other team beats out the Broncos, where they would not have if the Broncos had accepted the tie, would the opinion of all those jocks still be the same?

Will the Broncos rue the day they did not just play for the tie?

 

I am actually cheering for that situation to happen for a couple of reasons: A. Fuck the Broncos, let them sit out. B. I like the fact that the whole gestalt of this situation would turn this thing into chaos, with a lot of handwringing and what if discussions going on.

 

How say you all?

[bbedward]

I like that situation because of reason A

 

But I hate that a tie is even a possible outcome in the NFL - I'd suspect more people will talk about that rather than that they should have played for a tie.

[The Gipper]

I like that situation because of reason A

 

But I hate that a tie is even a possible outcome in the NFL - I'd suspect more people will talk about that rather than that they should have played for a tie.

I am OK with the occasional tie. If Denver loses a playoff bid because they didn't want to play for the tie, do you think they would regret it?

 

Too many ties is not good. I mean, look at this: http://www.mlssoccer.com/standings

 

Some teams have more ties than wins or losses.

 

This isn't as bad:

http://www.espn.com/nhl/standings

 

But...I hate fucking gimmicks to break a tie. Shootouts is a useless concept. So is the college OT rules which may be as bad or worse.

 

But, those 2-3 ties in a season in the NFL, I got no problem with.

[jrb12711]

The entire idea of a tie in the NFL is fucking beyond stupid. If the MLB with its 162 games can work out having a team every once in a while playing 19 innings these guys can play into double OT if required (which is basically never).

 

Each team gets a shot at the ball, no first score wins bullshit. I'm fine with first score wins after each team gets a shot with the ball though (say if both punt). That's literally all you need and just let the mofos play. I simply don't understand why the hell it has to be more complicated than that for no reason.

[The Gipper]

The entire idea of a tie in the NFL is fucking beyond stupid. If the MLB with its 162 games can work out having a team every once in a while playing 19 innings these guys can play into double OT if required (which is basically never).

 

Each team gets a shot at the ball, no first score wins bullshit. I'm fine with first score wins after each team gets a shot with the ball though (say if both punt). That's literally all you need and just let the mofos play. I simply don't understand why the hell it has to be more complicated than that for no reason.

Its not complicated. You just want to gripe. By the way, there have been ties in MLB. I think one occurred this year....iirc.

[Tour2ma]

MLB has ties, too. Had one this year.

 

Even has had them in the World Series... albeit long, long ago... as in even before my time... or my parents for that matter.

 

I like that situation because of reason A

 

Agree... at this point I'll settle for taking a little schadenfreude away from this season.

[Babernakle]

Punting and playing for the tie is the smart choice but one I doubt anyone on the sideline was considering at the time. I would have done the same play for the win it was a divisional game and if they win it might get them a home game in the playoffs, and if you didn't win defense travel and they got a good one. But as far as ot I would like to see them go the college style ot but move the ball back to the 50 to start. The problem with the way it is not by playing another quarter the teams that do statistically lose the next game more often than not.... not that we have to worry about that

[hoorta]

Punting and playing for the tie is the smart choice but one I doubt anyone on the sideline was considering at the time. I would have done the same play for the win it was a divisional game and if they win it might get them a home game in the playoffs, and if you didn't win defense travel and they got a good one. But as far as ot I would like to see them go the college style ot but move the ball back to the 50 to start. The problem with the way it is not by playing another quarter the teams that do statistically lose the next game more often than not.... not that we have to worry about that

 

Personally- I hate college OT rules. Much prefer pro OT- with one exception. Both teams get a chance to possess the ball, not first team scores a TD game over.

 

I like that situation because of reason A

 

But I hate that a tie is even a possible outcome in the NFL - I'd suspect more people will talk about that rather than that they should have played for a tie.

 

Hmmmm... if the Broncos had just gone for it on 4th and hadn't made it- they probably wouldn't have given up the extra seven yards on a missed FG. & BB ties have always been a part of the NFL. Probably before your time- there wasn't even a pro OT. 4 quarters, game tied = game over.

[Bob806]

Yes Gipper, fuck the Broncos.

 

But my 2 cents, they should have punted. Yeah the game was in Denver, where kickers have an edge with the altitude, but even in a dome, 62 yards is a long way. I believe the record is still 63 yards (done twice), so it was a dumb coaching move (that I enjoyed in the end, fuck Kubiak too).

 

I didn't like it when the NFL ended the tie in 1974. The Browns went 7-5-2 in '73, nothing wrong with it. I think Oakland and San Diego tied all the time when I was a kid. Teams desperately tried to use a 2 minute drill to break ties then, as they do now.

 

Different sport, but the Philadelphia Flyers went 17-35-24 in 1970.

[Unsympathetic]

There's no excuse for every NFL team to not have gameplanned all playoff scenarios for the purpose of informing the coach of the risk/reward scenarios during the next game.

 

Yes, everything looks good if it works out.... but the coach should be expected to know that punting actually is the best choice, because the chance of success from that ridiculous FG was much lower than the chance of success from punting and playing D.

 

 

Similarly... I could call up Kate Upton and ask her out -- but that's not something I'll be doing, because the CHANCE OF a bad outcome far outweighs the CHANCE OF any rewards.

[Zombo]

Yes Gipper, fuck the Broncos.

 

But my 2 cents, they should have punted. Yeah the game was in Denver, where kickers have an edge with the altitude, but even in a dome, 62 yards is a long way. I believe the record is still 63 yards (done twice), so it was a dumb coaching move (that I enjoyed in the end, fuck Kubiak too).

 

I didn't like it when the NFL ended the tie in 1974. The Browns went 7-5-2 in '73, nothing wrong with it. I think Oakland and San Diego tied all the time when I was a kid. Teams desperately tried to use a 2 minute drill to break ties then, as they do now.

 

Different sport, but the Philadelphia Flyers went 17-35-24 in 1970.

 

I kinda liked the Tie too.

 

I liked the older OT system better than the new one, and the college system is the worst.

 

They keep making it convoluted .. it is not football.

 

If I recall, and I will check this, the first overtime game was Denver and Pittsburgh ... and it ended in a 35-35 tie.

 

Zombo

[The Gipper]

Punting and playing for the tie is the smart choice but one I doubt anyone on the sideline was considering at the time. I would have done the same play for the win it was a divisional game and if they win it might get them a home game in the playoffs, and if you didn't win defense travel and they got a good one. But as far as ot I would like to see them go the college style ot but move the ball back to the 50 to start. The problem with the way it is not by playing another quarter the teams that do statistically lose the next game more often than not.... not that we have to worry about that

Fuck that going to the college style and anyone who would even think it.

[Pumpkin Eater]

I am OK with the occasional tie. If Denver loses a playoff bid because they didn't want to play for the tie, do you think they would regret it?

 

Too many ties is not good. I mean, look at this: http://www.mlssoccer.com/standings

 

Some teams have more ties than wins or losses.

 

This isn't as bad:

http://www.espn.com/nhl/standings

 

But...I hate fucking gimmicks to break a tie. Shootouts is a useless concept. So is the college OT rules which may be as bad or worse.

 

But, those 2-3 ties in a season in the NFL, I got no problem with.

 

Soccer is gay.

[The Gipper]

Soccer is gay.

Get rid of offsides....it would open the game up....and you would not have these absurd ties.

[LondonBrown]

Haha

[Tour2ma]

I don't mind ties, but I really like Thai...

 

Get rid of offsides....it would open the game up....and you would not have these absurd ties.

 

Same can't be said for our "football"...

[hoorta]

Get rid of offsides....it would open the game up....and you would not have these absurd ties.

 

Ha Gip, there's offsides in hockey too. But in regard to soccer- which I've grown to appreciate- you get rid of offsides, you'd just have guys continually parking in front of the goal (same deal in hockey). Doubtless it would increase scoring exponentially- but then you could hardly call it soccer.

 

To those who say soccer is gay- you have your heads in the sand. All you need to do is look at the TV coverage now, as opposed to 5 years ago. Popularity of the sport is increasing dramatically. Heck 15 years ago, I seriously doubt the US- Mexico qualifier would have even made it to television. It wasn't that long ago even the World Cup (yeah that event that gets the highest TV ratings worldwide) didn't even make it to US television. I said years ago that soccer would take off as the kids who played soccer instead of football in grade school and high school became adults. Now they're coaches - and the US is finally producing players that are legitimate stars on the world stage.

[Tour2ma]

Ha Gip, there's offsides in hockey too.

 

But not as much as there used to be... no more redline in play... no more "2-line pass" calls... just blue line offsides.

[The Gipper]

 

Ha Gip, there's offsides in hockey too. But in regard to soccer- which I've grown to appreciate- you get rid of offsides, you'd just have guys continually parking in front of the goal (same deal in hockey). Doubtless it would increase scoring exponentially- but then you could hardly call it soccer.

 

Well....WTF is a shootout...nothing but the same thing. Just have your shootout in the course of the game, rather than at the end using it as a gimmick.

 

To those who say soccer is gay- you have your heads in the sand. All you need to do is look at the TV coverage now, as opposed to 5 years ago. Popularity of the sport is increasing dramatically. Heck 15 years ago, I seriously doubt the US- Mexico qualifier would have even made it to television. It wasn't that long ago even the World Cup (yeah that event that gets the highest TV ratings worldwide) didn't even make it to US television. I said years ago that soccer would take off as the kids who played soccer instead of football in grade school and high school became adults. Now they're coaches - and the US is finally producing players that are legitimate stars on the world stage.

 

I don't think soccer is making much of a dent in ratings...compared to other sports.