If they cared about stoppages, and retaining their viewership, they'd save the commercial breaks for the replays.
Upvote
0
-
New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.
- Thread starter crazybuckfan40
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nfl
I thought of this yesterday.....except I only came up with 15. That was probably 5 times as long as needed for the Saints call. Anything longer, and we get into nuances of touching vs pushing that would make defense even more of a joke.
Upvote
0
Agreed. And honestly, NFL and especially college football could take a page out of soccer’s book. Extremely condensed halftime coverage, if any at all, and 15-20 minutes of commercials. I RARELY keep the game on once it hits halftime, never on Saturdays when there are 6 other options to watch during the break. Would easily cut down on the length of commercial breaks during the actual game.
Upvote
0
The college replays that take a long time are usually overturns. I think they make the decision pretty fast... but now they have to unfuck the clock, figure out where to put the ball, and redo the down markers.
There's some stuff that could make that a lot more efficient (have a saved state for clock, dont be hasty to move down markers, use 2nd ball for spotting both outcomes) ... but the standard of officiating seems like it's beyond the people doing it already and they'd only manage to make it even more of a cluster.
There's some stuff that could make that a lot more efficient (have a saved state for clock, dont be hasty to move down markers, use 2nd ball for spotting both outcomes) ... but the standard of officiating seems like it's beyond the people doing it already and they'd only manage to make it even more of a cluster.
Upvote
0
Might be the worst officiated season I've ever watched.
I mean at least they knew what a catch is? Athough some of the chiefs pats calls had me baffled.
So many first downs granted off clean sacks this year. Never seen so many missed false starts either. Thats the easiest one to see!
I mean at least they knew what a catch is? Athough some of the chiefs pats calls had me baffled.
So many first downs granted off clean sacks this year. Never seen so many missed false starts either. Thats the easiest one to see!
Upvote
0
alexhortdog95
Eye to the future, honoring the past
I love how many people are butthurt about officiating right now.
The Saints had 67 plays. The PI call was one single play.
How many passes did Brees complete in the 4th quarter? He was 4-12 in the 4th and overtime.
I believe Goff went something like 8-11 in the 4th and OT.
There ya go. Deal with it.
The Saints had 67 plays. The PI call was one single play.
How many passes did Brees complete in the 4th quarter? He was 4-12 in the 4th and overtime.
I believe Goff went something like 8-11 in the 4th and OT.
There ya go. Deal with it.
Upvote
0
Counterpoint: They did everything needed to win in those 67 plays. Why should they have to do all that AND more?
Upvote
0
alexhortdog95
Eye to the future, honoring the past
C'mon, man....if they did everything they needed to in those 67 plays, we wouldn't be having this conversation. On that possession, Kamara returned the kick for 30 giving them great field position. After a long bomb to Ginn for 43, Saints had first and 10 on the 13.
Their next three plays -
Incomplete pass.
Run for Zero.
Bad no Call.
Did the no call have a definite impact on the game? You bet your azz it did. Was it the main cause of them losing? Nope. Everybody is talking about the officials. Nobody is talking about how the Saints shart the bed there and gave it away. Here's a thought - RUN THE BALL ON FIRST DOWN. Why throw it with less than 2 minutes left and you're on the 13?!? Why throw the ball in that situation anyway? Why didn't Kamara touch the ball there instead of Thomas? The Rams had no answer for Kamara in the 2nd half.
You're just putting words in my mouth - never said they shouldn't have gotten a call - I'm saying that the call isn't why they lost. They lost because they didn't make more plays than the Rams.
Look at what happened in the AFC championship game. The Chiefs had a PI AND a roughing the passer call on one play. They put it into the end zone on that drive. I think the roughing the passer on Brady was a BS call myself, and they benefitted from that call. But the reason why the Chiefs lost was because they lost the coin flip at that point. There were bad calls on both sides at that point, maybe not as egregious as the NFC game, but the refs are the refs. Your job - make them a non-factor. Execute. That's what I'm saying...
Upvote
0
Buckeneye
I lead, you follow.
No, I'm not putting words into your mouth. I'm pointing out the idiocy of what you're implying. Can't remember where I saw it, should you choose to die on this hill you can find it yourself - but take a peek at the probability % of the Saints winning should that call be made and awarded the first down.
So there is a direct correlation between that non call and the Saints odds of winning being halfed (at minimum)
Anyone can argue any point they like to whatever end, but in that moment the Saints dialed up a play that would have cured their offensive ills erasing anything previously done or not done. And in said moment, the refs felt it necessarily to irrevocably shift the game, away from a near 100% lock for the Saints if the 1st down is given, to handing the Rams a potential tie/win.
Argue all you like, if the correct call is made New Orleans (statistically) is assured a win.
Upvote
0
That's not even remotely true. They did everything they needed to do. If the refs made an obvious call, they win. That means they did all that was needed. Just because they made mistakes throughout the game, that doesn't mean they didn't do enough to win if the refs just make that one obvious call.
Upvote
0
alexhortdog95
Eye to the future, honoring the past
It's your opinion is that it's idiocy. There's no guarantee, odds or not, that the Saints win that game even after that call is made. You have to play the game in its entirety. I'm saying that the Saints NEVER should have been in that situation with a two score lead to begin with.
Stats mean jack when the game is played on the field. Here's what I'm saying - the refs have bad calls because they're incompetent at times. We know this. I'm not arguing that fact that they got jobbed on a call. I agree with you on that one.
But to put ALL of the blame on that ONE call, no matter how big, while:
- Saints averaged less than 4 yards a carry
- Had a three score lead at one point in time
- Turned the ball over twice
NOT TO MENTION....
They had the ball first in OT. One guy doesn't miss a block - maybe they win? Who knows.
Upvote
0
alexhortdog95
Eye to the future, honoring the past
By my recollection - there were still close to 90 seconds left on the clock at that time, yes? They didn't do everything they needed to win - there was still game to be played. There were still 10 plays after that horrible no call, right? Last I checked, the Saints didn't stop playing football right after that call - they had another 10 snaps to still win it in regulation and they didn't get that done.
Should they have been in this situation? Nope - the ref should have thrown the flag....and the Saints shouldn't have blown a 13 - 0 lead, either.
Again, there's always a human factor. If there wasn't, then Brees would have been playing in this very game last year too.
Upvote
0
LA called a TO on the previous play to preserve any chance of winning that game in regulation.
That's not how wins are counted.
There is zero time for a Rams FG if that obvious call is made. It was early, targeting and interference. You can pick any of the three, but when all 3 happen at once it's blatantly obvious.
Does NO still have to kick the FG? Yes, and they did.
Upvote
0