Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, September 02, 2018

OT - 2018 NFL thread

Quarantine procedure in effect.

The Raiders and Bears have finalized a deal that will send pass-rusher Khalil Mack and a second-round pick to Chicago in exchange for four draft picks—including two first-rounders—a source told ESPN’s Adam Schefter on Saturday.

The Bears gave up first-round picks in 2019 and 2020, a third-round pick in 2020 and a sixth-round pick in 2019, the source said. In addition to Mack, Chicago also gets a second-round pick in 2020 and a conditional fifth-round pick in 2020.

Lance Reddick! Lance him! Posted: September 02, 2018 at 08:07 AM | 1329 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nfl, off-topic

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 9 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 7 8 9 10 11 >  Last ›
   801. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 06:59 AM (#5807227)
I don't think the Rams offense is going to light up the Patriots. They haven't been there early season self in a long time.
   802. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: January 21, 2019 at 07:21 AM (#5807231)
I think losing Cooper Kupp really hurt them a lot. He opened up a lot of things that made them almost unstoppable.

The other thing is I think teams have decided to just not let LBs bite on the play action at all. And stay back until you are absolutely certain it is a run, and just trust that the front 4 can slow the running game down enough / McVay won't run Gurley into the line 40+ times.
   803. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 07:47 AM (#5807234)
I haven't read a hundred articles on it but so far everything I've read says play action works. That middle linebackers bite pretty much every single time.
   804. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 07:48 AM (#5807235)
As for Gurley I think it is very clear at this point that he is not healthy right now.
   805. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:09 AM (#5807242)
Ok, I looked through and this Super Bowl between New England and Los Angeles is the first time that the sb matchup is the same as the most recent World Series matchup. However, there was one time in which the World Series matchup was the same as the previous Super Bowl matchup- in January 1969 New York played Baltimore in the Super Bowl, followed by the same matchup in that October’s World Series.

On a (very) slightly related note, here's a question with two correct answers: What two cities have met in the World Series, an NFL championship game, an NBA final, and a Stanley Cup final?

(EDIT: If you want to get technical, there's actually only one correct answer.)



   806. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:27 AM (#5807248)
Chicago is out because Boston and NY is in the same conference as them in basketball.

No LA team every faced a NY team in a football championship.
   807. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:28 AM (#5807249)
This morning I had a look over Kansas City's schedule this year and was surprised at how unimpressive a season they really had, for an almost-Super Bowl team.

What was Kansas City's most impressive win this year? Well, it was their round 2 shellacking of Indianapolis, but I mean in the regular season. Their most impressive win, in retrospect, was in Week 1, 38-28 over the Chargers. (It wasn't that close; it was 31-12 after three quarters and the rest was prevent defense garbage time.)

They won only one more game all year over a playoff team: needing overtime to beat Baltimore at home in Week 14.

They gave up 43 points and lost to New England. They gave up 54 points and lost to the Rams. They gave up 29 points (15 in the last 4 minutes) and lost to the Chargers. They gave up 38 points and lost to the Seahawks.

They crushed Jacksonville 30-14, Cincinnati 45-10, and the phenomenally uninterested Raiders 35-3 in Week 17. Congratulations, fellas. Have a cookie.

Kansas City wasn't a dominant team this year. They were a dominant offense. Unfortunately for them, offense is only half the game. (Well, 45%.) Overall they were a 10-11 win team, because their offense was somewhat more great than their defense was terrible, and also because their special teams were elite. But you can't be a real contender with a defense that awful. The story of their season was that they scored a ton of points, and lost close games against almost all of their good opponents because their defense could not get a stop when they needed one. Especially in the fourth quarter, when they were worn out from being on the field so much.

New England was not a great team this year, either. Their expected W-L record as per pro-football-reference.com was identical to Kansas City's, actually: 10.7-5.3. (DVOA rates KC far ahead of New England, and everyone else for that matter, partly because it systematically overestimates the value of special teams but mostly because it systematically underestimates the value of defense.) In the macro this game turned out exactly the way it was most likely to: close, with New England closing the gap of home field disadvantage by being a better balanced team, and tipping the likely outcome to a narrow New England win by virtue of Andy Reid's chronic mismanagement of late-and-close games.

It didn't have to turn out that way. I went into yesterday thinking KC was probably around 30-40% to win (my prediction two pages back was New England by 2), and saw nothing to make me think that was wrong. There are plenty of universes where KC won. (Many of them involve that dude lining up onside on what would have been a game-sealing Brady interception, for instance.) But they shouldn't have been regarded as the favorite. They were a good but deeply flawed team. They were the least likely of the four semifinalists to win the Super Bowl.

I woke up this morning to find that Bob Sutton, Kansas City's defensive coordinator to whom Andy Reid is fanatically loyal despite a hefty pile of evidence he is incompetent, has not yet been fired. Now, if Kansas City's ownership is content for the team to keep winning 10-12 games every year and losing in the playoffs, that's fine. Given the franchise's history since Len Dawson retired, that's a legitimate choice. But if they are not content with that, I think at this point they have to tell Andy Reid that Sutton is fired; we love the work *you* are doing, but Sutton has to go, and if we must fire you to make that happen, regrettably, we will.

KC could really benefit from mailing a blank check to Lovie Smith or Marvin Lewis and telling him to fill in whatever number he likes. (To be defensive coordinator, I mean. Not to replace Reid, gods no.)
   808. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:36 AM (#5807252)
I would guess Boston and St louis but I can't think of an NBA team for STL.
   809. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:37 AM (#5807254)
The chiefs were within a frog's eyelash of being in the super bowl. They were a contender.
   810. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:42 AM (#5807256)
Yeah. Teams that by rights were not really championship caliber teams have won Super Bowls before when everything broke their way (2012 Ravens, both Eli Manning Giants teams). It could have happened. It wasn't likely. Had they won yesterday, Kansas City would likely have lost the Super Bowl; I'd have happily put money on the Rams and think KC would have been maybe 20-25% to win.

They were the weakest of the four remaining teams, though, slightly behind New England and well behind both NFC teams. That's the part where I seem to be in disagreement with most punditry, who thought KC were the strongest team, or at least on par with the others. They weren't. The defense was just too bad for that to be the case.

The Patriots being favored over the Rams seems pretty wild to me, but I admit (the proof being my own hesitance to bet money on the Rams) there is probably something real to the notion that McVay and Goff's never having been on this stage before (and I do not think Jared Goff is very good, and Belichick has two weeks to plan how to attack him) is a serious handicap for the Rams. McVay did a respectable Mike McCarthy impression in the fourth quarter yesterday.

If you favor the Patriots, though, that's why. The Rams are better. And in particular, good as New England's offensive line is, their receivers are bad and will get 0 extra milliseconds to find separation. With Aaron Donald and Ndamukong Suh (who has been tremendous down the stretch) on the prowl, Brady's options are get the ball out fast or get killed. There are going to have to be even more screens and shovels and quick hit slants than usual from New England.

(New Orleans, after all, also has a good coach, a 40-year-old formerly legendary, still pretty good quarterback, a good offensive line, and far better receiving options than New England's, and struggled to consistently move the ball against the Rams' pass rush. Brees rushed throws a few times even when he didn't have to, wary of getting killed by Donald if he didn't get the ball out quick. It will be the same for Brady. Getting hit hurts a LOT more when you're 40 than even when you're 35, much less 30 or 25. It matters. And Wade Phillips' defenses have beaten the stuffing out of Brady before.)
   811. Graham & the 15-win "ARod Vortex of suck" Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:55 AM (#5807260)
I think McCoy is right - the Celtics and St. Louis Hawks met in the NBA finals in 1957, '58, '60, and '61.

EDIT: I believe Philadelphia and Chicago are the other two. I'm not sure which answer is technically incorrect since both sets of answers include teams who later moved.
   812. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 10:06 AM (#5807261)
I did not recall the Hawks coming from STL. Thanks for that.
   813. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 21, 2019 at 10:08 AM (#5807264)
Which three quarterbacks since 1990 have started and lost multiple conference championship games, but never won one? (One of the three comes with a slight asterisk.)
   814. Graham & the 15-win "ARod Vortex of suck" Posted: January 21, 2019 at 10:13 AM (#5807266)
Which three quarterbacks since 1990 have started and lost multiple conference championship games, but never won one? (One of the three comes with a slight asterisk.)


Mark Sanchez is one of them.
   815. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 10:19 AM (#5807270)
Tom Brady's biggest thrill yesterday, I'm sure he said after the game, was matching Sanchez's career total of 4 playoff wins on the road.
   816. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 10:32 AM (#5807275)
I think McCoy is right - the Celtics and St. Louis Hawks met in the NBA finals in 1957, '58, '60, and '61.

Right. Boston and St. Louis first met in the World Series in 1946, the NBA championship in 1957, the Stanley Cup in 1970, and the Super Bowl in 2000.

EDIT: I believe Philadelphia and Chicago are the other two. I'm not sure which answer is technically incorrect since both sets of answers include teams who later moved.

The only "technically" incorrect answer is that the Philadelphia Warriors and the Chicago met in 1947 for the first BAA championship, not the NBA championship, but Basketball-Reference considers the BAA as a legitimate forerunner of the NBA.
   817. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 21, 2019 at 10:45 AM (#5807279)
Which three quarterbacks since 1990 have started and lost multiple conference championship games, but never won one? (One of the three comes with a slight asterisk.)


Brunell is one of them
   818. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:03 AM (#5807284)
[816] And here I thiught the technicality would be that the Patriots don’t actually play in Boston.
   819. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:09 AM (#5807289)
Nah, I'm not that geeky.
   820. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:25 AM (#5807297)
Yeah. Teams that by rights were not really championship caliber teams have won Super Bowls before when everything broke their way (2012 Ravens, both Eli Manning Giants teams). It could have happened. It wasn't likely.

No team winning the Super Bowl is likely. That is the result of having to win 3 playoff rounds against similarly strengthed opposition. Even if you don't like DVOA, they were second in the NFL in point differential, and SRS behind the Saints. If they are not a contender, nobody is.

KC didn't play their best game on offense. That is why they lost. And they still only lost in OT. Scoring 0 points in the first half, when you have the best offense in the league is not getting it done. It happens. It doesn't mean they were a fake team, and not a contender. The notion that they would have been a 8-10 point underdog in the SB (equates to 20-25% win probability), is completely bonkers.
   821. Nasty Nate Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:34 AM (#5807300)
581. Nasty Nate Posted: January 18, 2019 at 06:28 PM (#5806699)
Saints 27-20.

No idea on AFC game.
If that PI gets called, maybe the Rams let the Saints score a TD in exchange for time, and my prediction might have come true! And if frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their booty.

583. Nasty Nate Posted: January 18, 2019 at 08:27 PM (#5806715)
I'm really curious what trick play or 2 the Patriots might use. This is a "break glass in case of emergency" game. They haven't done a fake FG in forever, maybe it's time.
Ended up being a flea-flicker.
   822. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:40 AM (#5807303)
I put together a quick spreadsheet of the last 20 Super Bowls with lead changes, scores at the half, etc.

For my money the top five of the last 20 years would be (in no particular order) Pats-Seahawks, Pats-Giants #1, Pats-Falcons, Pats-Panthers, and Steelers-Cardinals. If forced to choose, SB XLIX (Butler Interception Game) and SB XLII (Helmet Catch Game) would be my #1 and #2. Of those 20 games, btw, 10 of them were within a single score at the 2' warning, 8 had a decisive play in the final minutes, and 8 included (at least one) 4th quarter comeback. Only a couple-three dire games in that whole stretch, (Seahawks-Broncos, Bucs-Raiders, and Ravens-Giants).
   823. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:48 AM (#5807308)
I found giants pats with the “amazing catch” to be one of the most boring bowls I’ve watched. Rarely has a game lived up to all he hoopla in my opinion. Some have most have not.
   824. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:50 AM (#5807309)
Andy Reid's chronic mismanagement of late-and-close games.


Eh. This is too harsh on Reid. He made one poor decision, and that was at least defensible in challenging the Hogan catch that was very possibly not a catch. His team ran their FG drill perfectly, his play-calling was good, and if KC gets the ball at the start of OT we're probably talking about how his clock management has improved to the point where it doesn't really hurt his team at the end of games and because he's so good at the Monday-Saturday part of the game he's on the short list for best coaches in football (especially given that Belichick made some suspect decisions of his own- punting on 4th and short in KC territory and also running right into 10 men on 4th and 1).
   825. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:53 AM (#5807313)
I found giants pats with the “amazing catch” to be one of the most boring bowls I’ve watched.


As a Pats fan that whole game was frustrating and then terrifying, because it had a dominant D-line which could get to Brady and reduced his ability to make plays in the pocket. It wasn't super high scoring, and had plenty of punting, but like Pats-Rams in 2002 the longer the underdog stuck around against a heavy favorite the more interesting it got.
   826. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:56 AM (#5807317)
Steelers-Cardinals is underrated. That game featured a goal line pick-6 as the first half expired and one of the all-time great catches by Santonio Holmes to win it.
   827. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 12:02 PM (#5807319)
With Aaron Donald and Ndamukong Suh (who has been tremendous down the stretch) on the prowl, Brady's options are get the ball out fast or get killed.


The Pats handled Joey Bosa and Melvin Ingram without difficulty against the Chargers, and by DVOA the Rams were actually only average this year (18th in full season DVOA). Donald and Suh could very well give the Patriots fits, but it's not a foregone conclusion.
   828. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 21, 2019 at 12:08 PM (#5807321)
If that PI gets called, maybe the Rams let the Saints score a TD in exchange for time, and my prediction might have come true! And if frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their booty.


If they call PI, the Saints would simply take three kneel-downs and kick the winning FG.

   829. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 12:53 PM (#5807330)
just read that in addition to the Pats-Falcons Super Bowl and yesterday, Brady has played in one other OT playoff game. and in that one, too, the Pats won the toss and scored a game-ending TD.

3 for 3 on scoring TDs is impressive.
3 for 3 on coin flips - seriously? that's a key factor in who wins?

..............

"If they call PI, the Saints would simply take three kneel-downs and kick the winning FG."

if the Rams all lay down with inside of a minute left, I think if you're the Saints you have to walk into the end zone... slowly.

actually that could have been ... awkward. the Saints would be wanting to get inside the 1-yard line, but if they did that there could be a scrum where the Rams defenders are trying to drag the runner into the end zone while the runner desperately tries to avoid it.

:)

gimme FGs have been missed in big spots. you never know.
   830. Nasty Nate Posted: January 21, 2019 at 12:56 PM (#5807332)
If they call PI, the Saints would simply take three kneel-downs and kick the winning FG.
Yeah you're right. Although I guess there's a tiny chance they might hand it off on 3rd down. It would have depended how they viewed being up by 6-7 with ~50 seconds to go versus up 3 with ~10 seconds, and how much they thought the FG was a risk.
   831. Nasty Nate Posted: January 21, 2019 at 12:58 PM (#5807333)
just read that in addition to the Pats-Falcons Super Bowl and yesterday, Brady has played in one other OT playoff game. and in that one, too, the Pats won the toss and scored a game-ending TD.
Actually a FG; it was still pure sudden death back then.

actually that could have been ... awkward. the Saints would be wanting to get inside the 1-yard line, but if they did that there could be a scrum where the Rams defenders are trying to drag the runner into the end zone while the runner desperately tries to avoid it.
Something similar happened in the second Pats-Giants super bowl; the Giants' RB tried to stop inside the 1 but accidentally fell into the end zone.
   832. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:03 PM (#5807335)
3 for 3 on coin flips - seriously? that's a key factor in who wins?


Not really -- since they changed the OT rules, the winner of the coin flip wins 53% of the time. Heck, yesterday the Saints won the coin flip and lost the game.

A factor in the last two OT playoff wins for the Patriots is the sheer number of plays the opposing defense was on the field. The Patriots' offense had 93 plays against the Falcons and 97 yesterday.
   833. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:06 PM (#5807336)
thanks. I still hope they change the rule
   834. SoSH U at work Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:12 PM (#5807338)

thanks. I still hope they change the rule


Just curious: to what?

   835. Nasty Nate Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:14 PM (#5807340)
They could just played an extra timed period (probably shorter than a full quarter), similar to basketball.
   836. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:18 PM (#5807345)
no, I would just make it that in the postseason at least, both offenses get the ball at least once.
   837. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:20 PM (#5807346)
Or they could just play sudden death and get done. You lose the OT toss and lose without ever getting the ball and don't like it, tough. Win in regulation next time.

Alternatively: no punting allowed in overtime. You want the ball, great, but if you go four-and-out you lose. Good luck; have fun.
   838. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:23 PM (#5807347)
no, I would just make it that in the postseason at least, both offenses get the ball at least once.


Why?
   839. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:40 PM (#5807351)
By the way, please correct me if you think I'm missing something, but I think the solution which ensures a travesty like yesterday's DPI no-call (and even smaller travesties like the just-barely-grazing-the-facemask roughing the passer) is really simple: you add a ref who sits in the booth watching the game on TV, whose only job is to, when necessary, call down and tell the head official "uhhh yeah, you need to throw the flag on that one" or "uhhh yeah, you need to pick up the flag on that one".

Actually, the league Head of Officiating is already empowered to do that. But yesterday he didn't, which only fuels speculation that the league office wanted the Rams to win (or at least wanted to get the game to overtime) that can really harm the sport's credibility. Just put a ref in the booth at every game, watching the TV feed, whose sole job is to be the double-checker who catches the obvious stuff, and you pretty much solve that problem.
   840. Nasty Nate Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:45 PM (#5807355)
Actually, the league Head of Officiating is already empowered to do that.
I don't think this is correct.
   841. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:45 PM (#5807356)
Refs don't want to second-guess fellow refs. They know it's hard down there, and you aren't there at the moment, so I think it wouldn't amount to anything.
   842. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:51 PM (#5807359)
gimme FGs have been missed in big spots. you never know.

The only missed point in Justin Tucker's entire 7 year career (he's now 241 out of 242) quite possibly gave the Saints HFA for yesterday's game, and would've kept the Ravens out of the postseason altogether if the Steelers hadn't folded down the stretch.
   843. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 01:59 PM (#5807365)
Why?

um, because it's more fair and it mostly takes a coin flip out of the equation?
"no punting" is an interesting variation, too.

and afaik, no off-field official is empowered to do anything about an incorrect PI or non-PI call.

if that wasn't obvious before yesterday, it should be now.
   844. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 02:24 PM (#5807377)

um, because it's more fair and it mostly takes a coin flip out of the equation?


As posted, the coin flip is already mostly out of the equation. How is it more fair?

Keep in mind that injuries are much more likely when players are tired, so it'll need to be worth the risk of a QB ACL injury.
   845. SoSH U at work Posted: January 21, 2019 at 02:32 PM (#5807382)
um, because it's more fair and it mostly takes a coin flip out of the equation?


But if they both score TDs, then the coin flip result is right back into the equation.

You can do it like they do now. You can do it like they used to do it. You can do it like college. Or you can do the full period method. But every method you devise is imperfect in one way or another.

But, in much the same way that the only answer to every bad call is MORE REPLAY, then they'll probably try to rejigger OT in some fruitless quest for fairness.

   846. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 02:53 PM (#5807391)
I'll say it again, Go with the college approach. Let them each start at the 25 and try to get into the endzone. Allow no kicks at all. Touchdowns and 2 point conversions and that is it.
   847. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 03:14 PM (#5807398)
The last Super Bowl to get under a 40 rating: Colts - Dallas, 1971, 39.9

Last BCS championship game to make it over a 20 rating: Texas - USC, 2006, 21.7

Stick with the OT rule they've got, and teach the Chiefs how to play defense. The Rams managed to do it.
   848. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 03:17 PM (#5807401)
Apples meet oranges.
   849. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 03:20 PM (#5807403)
And college football overtimes meet The Three Stooges.
   850. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 21, 2019 at 05:47 PM (#5807436)
If both teams are assured a possession, then the team that wins the toss will actually choose to go second. This is a significant advantage because e.g. if he other team scores a TD, then they know the always have to go for it on 4th down. The decision becomes a lot more like college football, which has a fairly strong bias toward the team who goes second winning. I think the current OT rule makes the coin toss as balanced as possible.
   851. McCoy Posted: January 21, 2019 at 05:55 PM (#5807440)
Thus you set it up so that there are no punts or drives. You get the ball on the 25 yard line. You try to score a TD. If you fail and the other team scores one you lose.
   852. Tin Angel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 05:56 PM (#5807441)
I used to watch a lot of football but now just catch a few playoff games, and I just can't understand how you guys can watch it. Between the terrible officiating, a replay review every two minutes, the league's nefariousness, the fact that every single close call went the Pats way in the second half...just awful. And why do you need all of these rule changes for overtime? They put them on the screen and I just laughed. What a horrible product they have created.

Edit: Not trying to be a jerk about it, I was just kind of fascinated by all of the botched calls, clear favoritism, new random rules, the league's star not being able to be touched without a penalty being called...ugh. Mayble I'll try again when Goodell is gone.
   853. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 06:23 PM (#5807446)
pick a top 10 of Most Tormented NFL Fan Bases

Last 20 Years candidates (19) - Buffalo, Miami, NY Jets, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Tennessee, Houston, Jacksonville, Oakland, San Diego, Kansas City, Washington, Dallas, Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Arizona

Last 40 Years candidates (12) - Buffalo, NY Jets, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Tennessee/Houston, San Diego, Kansas City, Detroit, Minnesota, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Arizona
   854. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 06:25 PM (#5807448)

Fancy Crazy, meet Tin Angel:

761. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: January 20, 2019 at 10:20 PM (#5807175)

It also certainly seemed to me that all the crucial penalty calls went for KC too.

.....................

852. Tin Angel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 05:56 PM (#5807441)
I used to watch a lot of football but now just catch a few playoff games, and I just can't understand how you guys can watch it. Between the terrible officiating, a replay review every two minutes, the league's nefariousness, the fact that every single close call went the Pats way in the second half...
   855. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 21, 2019 at 06:44 PM (#5807456)
Thus you set it up so that there are no punts or drives. You get the ball on the 25 yard line. You try to score a TD. If you fail and the other team scores one you lose.


Don't like the idea of determining the result of a football game by something not resembling football.


I used to watch a lot of football but now just catch a few playoff games, and I just can't understand how you guys can watch it. Between the terrible officiating, a replay review every two minutes, the league's nefariousness, the fact that every single close call went the Pats way in the second half...


Officiating was uneven but seemed to balance out. KC was beneficiary of some home-cooking (KC called for 4 penalties, NE for 6, 4 of which gave KC a first down), but that's what you get for earning home-field advantage.
   856. villageidiom Posted: January 21, 2019 at 08:06 PM (#5807486)
The overtime rule should be that if the game is tied at the end of regulation the 4th quarter is extended until the game is no longer tied. It's sudden death, except there's no coin toss; the game proceeds as though the quarter hadn't ended.
   857. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 08:25 PM (#5807493)
pick a top 10 of Most Tormented NFL Fan Bases

Last 20 Years candidates (19) - Buffalo, Miami, NY Jets, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Tennessee, Houston, Jacksonville, Oakland, San Diego, Kansas City, Washington, Dallas, Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Arizona


Washington, hands down. Because (1) Snyder (2) Snyder; and (3 through 10) Snyder. To paraphrase Joe McCarthy, it's been 20 Years of Treason Torture. It's been the football equivalent of 20 years of Donald Trump, only in Snyder's case he's probably got at least 20 more years to go.

Last 40 Years candidates (12) - Buffalo, NY Jets, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Tennessee/Houston, San Diego, Kansas City, Detroit, Minnesota, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Arizona

Cleveland. First The Interception, then The Drive, then The Fumble, then The Heist, then Johnny Football, then 0-16, and last though probably least, another interception.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I used to watch a lot of football but now just catch a few playoff games, and I just can't understand how you guys can watch it. Between the terrible officiating, a replay review every two minutes, the league's nefariousness, the fact that every single close call went the Pats way in the second half...

You should come back in October. You can just substitute "baseball" for "football" and "Red Sox" or "Yankees" for "Pats", and you'll fit right into the whinefest without skipping a beat.

I get bummed out by the officiating in football, too, but it's much worse in baseball with its ###### up personalized strike zones, and yet MLB and the NFL are still by far the two best leagues in the world of sports. YMMV but IMO the NFL has just come off one of its best years in recent memory.

And as an added bonus for the NFL, none of its games end after midnight. If only I could say that about baseball.
   858. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 08:28 PM (#5807497)
The overtime rule should be that if the game is tied at the end of regulation the 4th quarter is extended until the game is no longer tied. It's sudden death, except there's no coin toss; the game proceeds as though the quarter hadn't ended.

That's actually not that bad a suggestion, since it'd allow time management strategy to enter into the final minutes of the 4th quarter. It'd also make a team trailing by 7 points in the final minutes a lot more likely to go for 2 points if they scored a touchdown near the end of the game, since if they kicked the extra point it'd be like a guaranteed loss of an OT coin flip under the current setup.
   859. Howie Menckel Posted: January 21, 2019 at 08:37 PM (#5807500)
yeah, there may be a flaw in villageidiom's idea, but is intriguing and I would like to subscribe to his newsletter.
   860. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 08:43 PM (#5807503)
If nothing else, it would severely reduce the likelihood of OT games, and increase the number of games that came down to a 2 point conversion. That couldn't be a bad thing.
   861. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 21, 2019 at 08:59 PM (#5807507)
Romo is still a little raw - he shouts a lot - but that is a minor issue. he LOVES football, which is refreshing. plus if he gets any better at predicting plays, they may have to add a "no spoiler alert" alternate feed.

Some seem to agree:
Bryce Harper
@Bharper3407

Confirmed: Just called Tony Romo to see where I'm going to play next year. #YoureAWizardTony
   862. dave h Posted: January 21, 2019 at 09:01 PM (#5807510)
I too am intriged by VI's idea.

Edit: Not trying to be a jerk about it, I was just kind of fascinated by all of the botched calls, clear favoritism, new random rules, the league's star not being able to be touched without a penalty being called...ugh. Mayble I'll try again when Goodell is gone.


You must have really checked out on the NFL for a while if you think the Pats/Brady are Goodell's favorites, and he's rigging the games in their favor. Unless that was all a "Jar Jar is a Sith Lord" 12-dimensional chess situation.
   863. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:15 PM (#5807552)
I really do not like the idea of just extending the game into over time. Then when a team is tied late they will not make any effort to hurry up. Indeed, it’s better to score after overtime has begun as you won’t have to kick off afterwards. It would also eliminate the whole kicking a 60 yard field goal at the end of regulation because you have nithing to lose thing. At least in a tie game anyway. We’d still see the super long field goals from teams down 1-3 points.
   864. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 21, 2019 at 11:24 PM (#5807553)
I really do not like the idea of just extending the game into over time. Then when a team is tied late they will not make any effort to hurry up. Indeed, it’s better to score after overtime has begun as you won’t have to kick off afterwards. It would also eliminate the whole kicking a 60 yard field goal at the end of regulation because you have nithing to lose thing. At least in a tie game anyway. We’d still see the super long field goals from teams down 1-3 points.

No question it would alter 4th quarter strategies in ways that aren't necessarily predictable, but whatever its virtues compared to the NFL's current system, it'd sure be an improvement over seven overtimes.
   865. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 22, 2019 at 09:19 AM (#5807592)
This discussion started as one about minimizing the effects of a coin flip; those advocating a 'each gets a possession' system or the college overtime rules should be aware that a system like that significantly favors those who win the flip and defer, as they can see what the other side did and plan accordingly.
   866. Nasty Nate Posted: January 22, 2019 at 09:57 AM (#5807607)
This discussion started as one about minimizing the effects of a coin flip; those advocating a 'each gets a possession' system or the college overtime rules should be aware that a system like that significantly favors those who win the flip and defer, as they can see what the other side did and plan accordingly.
I haven't thought about it much, but are you sure? Under a 'each gets a possession' system, you probably still want the ball first unless it is actually a 'each team gets as many possessions as the other team' system. It still favors the team that wins the coin flip, but not in the way you describe.
   867. SoSH U at work Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:06 AM (#5807611)
I haven't thought about it much, but are you sure? Under a 'each gets a possession' system, you probably still want the ball first unless it is actually a 'each team gets as many possessions as the other team' system. It still favors the team that wins the coin flip, but not in the way you describe.


That is correct. If it's equal possessions until one team has more points than the other, then getting the ball second is an edge (which is why the college game rotates flips after each possession).

If it's sudden death after each team gets it once, then winning the flip is preferred.

   868. Howie Menckel Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:15 AM (#5807616)
I really do not like the idea of just extending the game into over time. Then when a team is tied late they will not make any effort to hurry up. Indeed, it’s better to score after overtime has begun as you won’t have to kick off afterwards.

hmm
   869. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:34 AM (#5807622)
If it's sudden death after each team gets it once, then winning the flip is preferred.


Disagree. You want to defer. If the other team doesn't score, you know you can with with a FG. If they get a FG, you know you need a FG to tie, TD to win. If they get a TD, you know you need a TD to tie, TD + 2 pt conversion to win. That's valuable info.
   870. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:43 AM (#5807625)
Disagree. You want to defer. If the other team doesn't score, you know you can with with a FG. If they get a FG, you know you need a FG to tie, TD to win. If they get a TD, you know you need a TD to tie, TD + 2 pt conversion to win. That's valuable info.


Which might actually even out the scales a bit. If you defer, you gain a slight advantage in OT 1, but then a slight disadvantage in the 2nd one
   871. SoSH U at work Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:45 AM (#5807628)
Disagree. You want to defer. If the other team doesn't score, you know you can with with a FG. If they get a FG, you know you need a FG to tie, TD to win. If they get a TD, you know you need a TD to tie, TD + 2 pt conversion to win. That's valuable info.


The knowledge is indeed valuable, but it's primarily valuable in allowing you to take actions that allow you to tie the score. If you only need a field goal, you'll kick the field goal. If you need a touchdown, you'll do what it takes to score the TD.

In both cases, the other team then gets the next possession in a sudden-death situation.

   872. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:53 AM (#5807631)
There are few things I would hate--HATE--more than watching coaches, trailing by 3 in overtime, going ultra-conservative and playing for the field goal as soon as they cross the 30. Which is exactly what every coach would do.

#### that. I think my suggestion on the last page was taken for a joke, but it wasn't--have both coaches submit which yard line they're willing to take the ball on, low bid gets the ball on that spot, and first score wins. Get the game done with, and don't give coaches the opportunity to extend the game interminably with their conservatism.
   873. Nasty Nate Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:58 AM (#5807636)
I think my suggestion on the last page was taken for a joke, but it wasn't--have both coaches submit which yard line they're willing to take the ball on, low bid gets the ball on that spot, and first score wins. Get the game done with, and don't give coaches the opportunity to extend the game interminably with their conservatism.
Not a bad idea, and it eliminates a lot of the issues with other ideas. I wonder where bids would generally be? For the Pats-Chiefs game, maybe as low as the 2 or 3 yard line. For other games, I'd estimate the 5-8 yard line. I guess the team with the losing bid would get to pick the end of the stadium they want to defend?
   874. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 22, 2019 at 11:07 AM (#5807638)
[873] Safties aren’t all that common even starting from the 1, but you may be right that they’re common enough to make it not worth starting from the 1. Probably not more than the 3, though.
   875. villageidiom Posted: January 22, 2019 at 11:11 AM (#5807640)
This discussion started as one about minimizing the effects of a coin flip; those advocating a 'each gets a possession' system or the college overtime rules should be aware that a system like that significantly favors those who win the flip and defer, as they can see what the other side did and plan accordingly.
Don't you mean those who win the flip and kick? Deferring just lets the other team choose, and if there's an advantage to kicking first you're letting them choose it.
   876. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 22, 2019 at 11:20 AM (#5807646)
The trouble with starting at the 1 (or even the 2 or 3) is that there's zero margin for error. A botched snap is a safety, if not a defensive touchdown. Botched handoff? Safety. Blown blocking assignment? Probably a safety. An offensive holding penalty in the end zone is an automatic safety. (Granting, in overtime the refs would not throw that flag unless a blocker threw his guy down and put him in a submission hold.) A safety is always an extremely bad outcome, but in overtime it's the absolute worst outcome: you lose.

The other thing is, if you're starting from inside the 10 (worse yet, inside the 5), you have a LONG way to go. A field goal wins, but it's 60-70 yards just to get into comfortable field goal range. And starting that close to your own end zone, a three-and-out (or even a six-and-out) is a disaster; your opponent's getting the ball needing only about 30 yards for the field goal.

I think it would be rare for coaches to bid below about the 10 in most cases. And if your team's defense is much better than its offense, it wouldn't be unusual for the coach to be willing to start on defense if it's inside about the 15. Force a 3-and-out and you'll get the ball around midfield.

(Now if you're Kansas City playing New England last week, yeah, you probably bid the 1 and hope for the best. That's almost the hypothetical extreme-most example: your team has the best offense in the league, very nearly the worst defense in the league, your defense is tired, and your opponent is also better on offense than defense. In that specific scenario, you probably bid the 1, unless you feel absolutely certain Belichick will bid higher than the 2.)
   877. villageidiom Posted: January 22, 2019 at 11:34 AM (#5807654)
I really do not like the idea of just extending the game into over time. Then when a team is tied late they will not make any effort to hurry up. Indeed, it’s better to score after overtime has begun as you won’t have to kick off afterwards. It would also eliminate the whole kicking a 60 yard field goal at the end of regulation because you have nithing to lose thing. At least in a tie game anyway. We’d still see the super long field goals from teams down 1-3 points.


Endgame offense scenarios, other than insurmountable lead/deficit, listed in descending order of preference to the offense:

1. Ahead by one score, with possession.
2. Tied, with possession.
3. Behind by one score, with possession.

TODAY:

1. Offense tries to kill the clock, or score. To do either they need to advance the ball. In the former they need to do it enough to endure timeouts and other clock stoppages. In the latter they don't need to kill the clock unless scoring doesn't make it a two-possession deficit.

2. Offense tries quickly to get into FG position, then play ultraconservative to burn the clock, then call a timeout at 0:03, then kick. If they make it they win, and if they miss their fate depends on a coin flip in OT.

3. Offense tries to score and use as much clock in doing so. Scoring enough to tie or go ahead is preferable to using the clock; it does them no good to burn the clock and fail to score. Thus the bias is to advance the ball quickly until they are in position to score, then ensure as little time as possible is on the clock when they do.

DIFFERENCES IN MY PROPOSAL:

1. Doesn't change.

2. Whether they kick at 0:03 of regulation or into OT, if they make it they win, and if they don't the other team gets the ball. Because the downside risk is greater than it is today, the offense might be willing to play less conservatively during regulation (and into OT) to get into better position, which also increases risk of turnover. But they absolutely want to get into FG range ASAP either way because it does them no good to be stopped out of range. So that aspect won't change.

3. Mostly doesn't change. They need to score before regulation or else they lose. It might raise the incentive to go for the win instead of a tie, because in the latter their opponent gets the ball.

In scenario 2 I prefer the aesthetics in my proposal to those of current state. YMMV.
   878. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 22, 2019 at 11:54 AM (#5807660)
Hot Take: the current overtime rules are good, actually.
   879. McCoy Posted: January 22, 2019 at 12:38 PM (#5807679)
This discussion started as one about minimizing the effects of a coin flip; those advocating a 'each gets a possession' system or the college overtime rules should be aware that a system like that significantly favors those who win the flip and defer, as they can see what the other side did and plan accordingly.

If you go my way which is no kicks it largely doesn't matter who goes. First team doesn't make get a TD? Doesn't matter you still have to go for a TD. First team misses the 2 point conversion? Doesn't matter you still have to go for the two point conversion.
   880. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 22, 2019 at 12:47 PM (#5807684)
If we solved overtime the way that they do in what most of the world calls football, you’d have each team kick 5 field goals from a set distance (40 yards?) and if they tied, then kick one at a time until one team hits and the other misses.
   881. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 22, 2019 at 12:56 PM (#5807688)
Hot Take: the current overtime rules are good, actually.

They're certainly better than anything the NFL is likely to replace them with. Modifying the original "first team to score in any way wins" rule was probably necessary, given the increasing range of FG kickers and the rules changes that favor offense. But if a team can't prevent a TD after kicking off into the end zone, it doesn't deserve to win.
   882. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 22, 2019 at 02:15 PM (#5807725)
If a team can't, y'know, win, then it doesn't deserve to win.

That's why I really don't care how they settle overtime, and prefer whatever gets it done with ASAP. I care not even the slightest bit about the plight of a team that loses in overtime because they lost the coin toss and their defense couldn't get a stop. Tough ####, fellas. You had your chance to win, 60 minutes' worth of it.
   883. Hot Wheeling American Posted: January 22, 2019 at 02:31 PM (#5807731)
I'm at that point, too. They fixed the ability of the winner of the coin toss to drive ~30 yards for a long game winning field goal. They're not going to go to a yard auction, so everything else is just quibbling and presents its own issues.
   884. villageidiom Posted: January 22, 2019 at 02:37 PM (#5807734)
I care not even the slightest bit about the plight of a team that loses in overtime because they lost the coin toss and their defense couldn't get a stop. Tough ####, fellas. You had your chance to win, 60 minutes' worth of it.
In terms of coaching a team, that would be the stance I would take: If we didn't want to leave it to a coin flip then we should have sealed the deal before that. But "too bad you weren't good enough to overcome random variation" isn't a spectacular way to administer a league, especially one that goes to great lengths to remove impact of random variation (Rams/Saints aside) in many other aspects.

I get that the essential problem to be solved for a tie at the end of regulation isn't "who is the better team?" as much as it's "you both played about equal, but we can't let both of you advance". An arbitrary choice is a viable and appealing method to resolve that problem. Hell, I'd be all for just saying ties go to the road team, given the home team couldn't win outright despite home field advantage. But my baseball mind leans toward the notion that "more {sport} is better than less {sport}". For that reason I prefer to have overtime. And if we're going to have overtime I'd prefer to have it be a continuation of the existing game instead of the equivalent of a new game with dumber rules.
   885. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Fred Posted: January 22, 2019 at 03:59 PM (#5807765)
Hmmm could take vi's idea and tweak it so that the team with possession at the end of the game keeps it -- but starts OT at their 25, like a touchback.
   886. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 22, 2019 at 05:28 PM (#5807804)
Which might actually even out the scales a bit. If you defer, you gain a slight advantage in OT 1, but then a slight disadvantage in the 2nd one


That assumes there is a second overtime. Under the "both sides get one possession" proposed rule, there is no 'second overtime'. Even in college, less than 30% of OT games go to a second overtime.


If we solved overtime the way that they do in what most of the world calls football, you’d have each team kick 5 field goals from a set distance (40 yards?) and if they tied, then kick one at a time until one team hits and the other misses.


Might be fun to watch QBs and TEs attempt field goals. Once.
   887. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 22, 2019 at 06:20 PM (#5807840)
I get that the essential problem to be solved for a tie at the end of regulation isn't "who is the better team?" as much as it's "you both played about equal, but we can't let both of you advance"


In the playoffs, yes. Would you be for having regular season games simply be ties at the end of regulation? The NFL is already trending in that direction by capping OT at 10 minutes when it was previously 15.
   888. McCoy Posted: January 22, 2019 at 08:05 PM (#5807935)
College overtime rules except no kicks. What's wrong with that?
   889. Nasty Nate Posted: January 22, 2019 at 08:16 PM (#5807946)
College overtime rules except no kicks. What's wrong with that?
It's grotesque.
   890. McCoy Posted: January 22, 2019 at 08:31 PM (#5807960)
It's fun and exciting
   891. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 22, 2019 at 10:59 PM (#5808019)
The issue is seen with the LSU-Alabama (I think) overtime game from a while back. The game was tied something like 3-3 in regulation. Then they go to overtime and suddenly both offensives are given the ball deeper in enemy territory than they ever got on their own. So much for defense. It's essentially the same as having the extra runner on second base in extra innings proposed last year.
   892. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 22, 2019 at 11:26 PM (#5808027)
And it's every bit as stupid. It's more like a pinball game than football.
   893. McCoy Posted: January 23, 2019 at 05:10 AM (#5808041)
It's overtime. It's not minute 35 of a regular season game. It is also football not baseball the sport that dare not do anything that might make their product enjoyable.
   894. villageidiom Posted: January 23, 2019 at 08:57 AM (#5808052)
In the playoffs, yes. Would you be for having regular season games simply be ties at the end of regulation?
I don't care enough about regular season football to provide a useful answer to this. They could leave them tied at regulation, or do an OT period with or without sudden death, or they could do a punt/pass/kick competition, or they could play a rugby sevens match, or they could do rock/paper/scissors, or they could joust, or they could send them through an American Ninja Warrior course, or they could disband the teams involved in the tie for having failed to entertain, or they could do the Price Is Right showcase showdown, and I'm not sure I'd strongly be for or against any of those.
   895. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: January 23, 2019 at 10:03 AM (#5808077)
Now that's an idea: each team elects one player to represent them running the American Gladiators Gauntlet to determine the victor.
   896. Nasty Nate Posted: January 23, 2019 at 10:06 AM (#5808080)
Under the current OT rules, if there is an INT on the first drive but the defense fumbles the ball back to the offense on the INT return, does that count as a possession?
   897. SoSH U at work Posted: January 23, 2019 at 11:05 AM (#5808126)

Under the current OT rules, if there is an INT on the first drive but the defense fumbles the ball back to the offense on the INT return, does that count as a possession?



I would assume so. It counts as two changes of possession.

   898. manchestermets Posted: January 27, 2019 at 03:05 PM (#5809359)
Given that NFl teams have complicated and secret playbooks, what do they do for the Pro Bowl? Is there a set of standard plays that they limit themselves to?
   899. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 27, 2019 at 08:55 PM (#5809413)
The Pro Bowl doesn’t even allow blitzes. As a football competition, it’s a farce.
   900. villageidiom Posted: January 31, 2019 at 01:21 PM (#5810681)
Fuh...
Page 9 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 7 8 9 10 11 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
HowardMegdal
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogYankees Manager Aaron Boone Says MLB Should Consider Adding Mercy Rule
(20 - 4:05am, Aug 18)
Last: QLE

NewsblogBryce Harper, the clutch god
(12 - 3:48am, Aug 18)
Last: Lest we forget

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for the weekend of August 17-18, 2019
(51 - 1:03am, Aug 18)
Last: JJ1986

NewsblogA pair of altercations between players and coaches highlights the Pirates’ fraying clubhouse ($)
(3 - 11:35pm, Aug 17)
Last: depletion

NewsblogOT - NBA thread (Playoffs through off-season)
(6516 - 10:31pm, Aug 17)
Last: puck

NewsblogMan dies during taco eating contest at Fresno Grizzlies game
(63 - 9:56pm, Aug 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogJosh Hamilton Says Holy Spirit Spoke to Him Before 2011 World Series Home Run
(9 - 9:35pm, Aug 17)
Last: Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head

NewsblogIs a lingering oblique injury contributing to Aaron Judge's slump?
(3 - 9:34pm, Aug 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogZach Zagger on Twitter: Minor League Baseball players alleging they should be paid minimum wage and
(12 - 9:25pm, Aug 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - A New Season is Upon Baldrick
(487 - 8:32pm, Aug 17)
Last: spivey

NewsblogBuster Posey explains why robot umps could call more balls than strike
(50 - 7:40pm, Aug 17)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogPadres star rookie Fernando Tatis Jr. will 'most likely' miss rest of year with back injury
(4 - 7:25pm, Aug 17)
Last: Jeff Frances the Mute

NewsblogJeter noncommittal on Mattingly’s future as manager
(23 - 12:37pm, Aug 17)
Last: bookbook

NewsblogJameson Taillon undergoes second Tommy John surgery
(14 - 11:13am, Aug 17)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogOMNICHATTER stocks up on water and wetnaps, for August 15, 2019
(97 - 10:28am, Aug 17)
Last: GregD

Page rendered in 0.7086 seconds
46 querie(s) executed