User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.7167 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Sunday, January 08, 2023
OT - 2022 NFL thread Part II
Under the first proposal that was voted through, the AFC Championship will now be played at a neutral-site game if any of the three following scenarios are met:
Scenario 1: If Buffalo and Kansas City both win or both tie in Week 18, then a Buffalo vs. Kansas City championship game would be at a neutral site.
Scenario 2: If the Bills and Chiefs both lose in Week 18 and Baltimore wins or ties with the Bengals, then a Buffalo vs. Kansas City championship game would be at a neutral site.
Scenario 3: If Buffalo and Kansas City both lose and Cincinnati beats Baltimore, then a Bills or Bengals vs. Chiefs championship game would be at a neutral site.
Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Posted: January 08, 2023 at 10:01 AM | 514 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags: nfl, off-topic
Tags: nfl, off-topic
Login to submit news.
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: OMNICHATTER for June 2023
(54 - 9:05pm, Jun 02)
Last: cardsfanboy
Newsblog: The Athletic: After 50 years, is this the San Diego Chicken’s last stand? [$]
(14 - 8:23pm, Jun 02)
Last: Dag Nabbit: Sockless Psychopath
Newsblog: 2023 NBA Playoffs Thread
(2539 - 7:27pm, Jun 02)
Last: Tom Cervo, backup catcher
Newsblog: Aaron Boone’s Rate of Ejections Is Embarrassing ... And Historically Significant
(1 - 6:28pm, Jun 02)
Last: i don't vibrate on the frequency of the 57i66135
Newsblog: Economic boost or big business hand-out? Nevada lawmakers consider A’s stadium financing
(10 - 6:14pm, Jun 02)
Last: McCoy
Newsblog: MLB managers should be challenging a lot more in 2023
(3 - 6:09pm, Jun 02)
Last: cardsfanboy
Newsblog: Jays pitcher Anthony Bass sorry for posting video endorsing anti-LGBTQ boycotts
(96 - 5:07pm, Jun 02)
Last: Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful
Hall of Merit: Reranking First Basemen: Discussion Thread
(35 - 4:10pm, Jun 02)
Last: bjhanke
Newsblog: 8 big All-Star voting storylines to follow
(25 - 3:48pm, Jun 02)
Last: cardsfanboy
Sox Therapy: Lining Up The Minors
(30 - 3:43pm, Jun 02)
Last: Darren
Newsblog: OT Soccer Thread - The Run In
(416 - 3:15pm, Jun 02)
Last: Infinite Yost (Voxter)
Sox Therapy: The First Third
(23 - 2:58pm, Jun 02)
Last: pikepredator
Newsblog: Diamond Sports Group fails to pay Padres, loses broadcast rights
(23 - 2:21pm, Jun 02)
Last: Karl from NY
Newsblog: ESPN the Magazine: Bat and Ball Games you've never heard of
(31 - 1:05pm, Jun 02)
Last: gehrig97
Newsblog: Former Los Angeles Dodger Steve Garvey weighs U.S. Senate bid
(17 - 12:59pm, Jun 02)
Last: People like Zonk and Chris Truby
(54 - 9:05pm, Jun 02)
Last: cardsfanboy
Newsblog: The Athletic: After 50 years, is this the San Diego Chicken’s last stand? [$]
(14 - 8:23pm, Jun 02)
Last: Dag Nabbit: Sockless Psychopath
Newsblog: 2023 NBA Playoffs Thread
(2539 - 7:27pm, Jun 02)
Last: Tom Cervo, backup catcher
Newsblog: Aaron Boone’s Rate of Ejections Is Embarrassing ... And Historically Significant
(1 - 6:28pm, Jun 02)
Last: i don't vibrate on the frequency of the 57i66135
Newsblog: Economic boost or big business hand-out? Nevada lawmakers consider A’s stadium financing
(10 - 6:14pm, Jun 02)
Last: McCoy
Newsblog: MLB managers should be challenging a lot more in 2023
(3 - 6:09pm, Jun 02)
Last: cardsfanboy
Newsblog: Jays pitcher Anthony Bass sorry for posting video endorsing anti-LGBTQ boycotts
(96 - 5:07pm, Jun 02)
Last: Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful
Hall of Merit: Reranking First Basemen: Discussion Thread
(35 - 4:10pm, Jun 02)
Last: bjhanke
Newsblog: 8 big All-Star voting storylines to follow
(25 - 3:48pm, Jun 02)
Last: cardsfanboy
Sox Therapy: Lining Up The Minors
(30 - 3:43pm, Jun 02)
Last: Darren
Newsblog: OT Soccer Thread - The Run In
(416 - 3:15pm, Jun 02)
Last: Infinite Yost (Voxter)
Sox Therapy: The First Third
(23 - 2:58pm, Jun 02)
Last: pikepredator
Newsblog: Diamond Sports Group fails to pay Padres, loses broadcast rights
(23 - 2:21pm, Jun 02)
Last: Karl from NY
Newsblog: ESPN the Magazine: Bat and Ball Games you've never heard of
(31 - 1:05pm, Jun 02)
Last: gehrig97
Newsblog: Former Los Angeles Dodger Steve Garvey weighs U.S. Senate bid
(17 - 12:59pm, Jun 02)
Last: People like Zonk and Chris Truby
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2021 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
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.
It wasn't the Buffalo crowd. Those were visiting Bengals fans chanting Who Dey
The chant dates back to the 1980s, but the Bengals' general lack of relevance over the last 40 years would excuse your unfamiliarity.
I think the Giants were both overachievers and posers. They just happened to get a first-round game against a team whose record was even less reflective of its talent.
as a general rule, no team that wins a road playoff game is a poser. that's just not how this works.
As a general rule, teams as mediocre as the Vikings don't host playoff games.
I'm not particularly surprised the Bengals are winning. But I didn't expect them to dominate the way they have.
If the Bengals' offensive line plays that way, they're probably the best team in football.
I don't expect them to play that way again.
The New York Yankees beat the Pottsville Maroons in 1927. Two missed PATs and a safety. Each team only played in the NFL for something like 3 seasons.
yes Eagles -1.5 so far implies that the 49ers are a little better. not sure I see that, but that's why they play the games.
Eagles with a bigger rest advantage (game date plus lack of travel) than is typical seen at this level in the postseason.
Bengals an absurd 21-5 against the point spread in last 26 games. who the hell keeps shorting Joe Burrow?
It was kind of a perfect storm. The Cowboys enjoyed a long period of sustained success (roughly 1965-85) that coincided with the NFL establishing itself as the No. 1 TV sport in America, which gained them a large following. Then they had another burst of dominance in the early 90s that landed them another generation.
That, and the cheerleaders.
They've been undistinguished since, but massive fan bases, once established, can last forever. The Packers were awful between the Starr and Favre eras -- but their fan base actually grew during that time.
Does anyone still call them that, other than Dallas fans and a few aging TV announcers?
I thought the same thing.
Also, can anyone explain to me why punt returners call fair catches on the six-yard line? Yes, there's a chance the opponent will down it inside the two, but the Cowboys almost certainly would have started that possession on the 20.
Close enough. He bought the team in 1989, and here's the origin of the term:
I thought I'd heard it by the early 70's, but that may just reflect my longstanding loathing of the Cowboys.
** The person who wrote this is a Dallas native and an over-the-top Cowboys fan. I repeat my question from #139 above.
I thought he should have run it back, even if he didn't have much room to maneuver. In that situation, you need to take high-risk/high-reward chances.
They already had one of the two Thanksgiving Day games locked up, so that clearly helped as well.
the rule of thumb - often repeated by announcers over the years - was that you never call for a fair catch inside your own 10-yard line. on the rare occasions that the 'rule' was broken, the TV crews would call out the blunder.
but players keep doing it - and crews seem to have given up on pointing out how dumb it is.
...........
selective endpoints alarm bells, but I still find it amusing:
1971-1991
REDSKINS 206-107-1, 3-2 in Super Bowls
COWBOYS 192-122-0, 2-2 in Super Bowls
and these are teams playing in the same division! and still the "America's Team" moniker was unshakable.
now, Dallas was 52-16-2 from 1966-70, when the Redskins were basically irrelevant - but as noted, that was before the nickname came along.
The Cowboys were a pathetic 4-28 in 1988-89 while the Skins settled for 17-15 (including one of two losing records in that two-decade span), but none of it mattered.
in 1982-87 - very early in the "America's Team" era - Dallas was 51-37, but Washington was 66-22.
again, it did not matter.
I have at least half-dozen friends/former colleagues who as youngsters went all-in on Dallas. it has been .... a rough quarter-century.
in fact, they are each starting to gain a little bit of traction in the "long-suffering" category, though being old enough to remember winning 3 SBs in 4 years - no matter how long ago - is salve on that wound.
Too bad that didn't work for the Lions, who played their first Thanksgiving Day game 32 years before the Cowboys thought of it, and had it nationally televised every year beginning in 1953.
The broadcasters praised Shanahan for alertly calling a passing play with 2:05 on the clock, because "the two minute warning will stop the clock anyway so an incompletion wouldn't hurt." But my reaction was the opposite--I thought it was a stupid risk, because the ball hit the receiver's hands at 2:02. If that pass falls incomplete with 2:02 or 2:01 on the clock, they've given Dallas a free timeout.
I don't mind calling a pass, but it would have to be a well practiced play with the quarterback perfectly understanding his decision tree: throw only if the receiver is wide open, otherwise tuck and run to keep the clock moving.
Then there was the runner getting the game-icing first down and then, with fantastic stupidity, running out of bounds. The player apparently being unaware that he needs to get past the sticks and then get on the ground in that situation is exactly the kind of classic Kyle Shanahan stuff that always bites him in the ass sooner or later.
It was nice of the Cowboys to spinelessly roll over and play dead like Mike McCarthy's teams have reliably done in the playoffs for over a decade, but the last few minutes of that game would leave me with a lot of extra optimism if I were an Eagles fan.
My howling at Mitchell's boneheadedness scared the cat under the bed for a half hour.
All resolved with off-schedule treats.
Cowboy fans treat playoff losses like they're nuclear holocausts. Makes lurking in their boards a fun day-after pastime.
The real danger is getting the ball back well inside the 5. Fair catching it inside the 10 so long as you are not that far back prevents that from occurring, if nothing else.
edit: apparently a lot of the revolution in punting accuracy stems from the Australian style, which also allows the ball to bounce straight up or back way more frequently than it used to with the old style. Overall that means punts are a lot less likely to end up in the endzone than they used to.
as noted, the chance for starting at the 20-yard line is extremely appealing.
so I'm gonna need some (any) evidence that buttresses your assertion.
There are some interesting observations here. First, these include all punts. You may be surprised to learn that only 22% of all balls allowed to bounce between the 5 & 9 yard lines reached the end zone. If we take out punts that traveled more than 50 yards, then we take out over half of those touchbacks. The chances of a pitching wedge type punt bouncing into the end zone if it is dropped between the 5 and 9 yard line is only 10%.
Hackett, an Australian, won the Ray Guy Award as the best punter in college football for Utah in back-to-back seasons in 2014 and 2015. He did it by almost exclusively hitting the drop punt, a kick that should come instinctively to anyone who has grown up playing Aussie Rules football,
...
When the ball comes off the foot, it flies away, rotating end over end so that the rotation of the ball can act as a lovely backstop should a punter place it just in front of the end zone. More importantly, though, a drop punt’s sweet spot is much, much bigger than a spiral punt’s, which means that a punter’s technique doesn’t have to be flawless to hit it right.
...
Australians have associated themselves with the NFL for decades, but where once seeing an Australian punter seemed like a novelty, now their presence is a matter of course. Darren Bennett is credited as the first Australian punter to properly introduce the drop punt to the NFL when he entered the league in 1994. He had an 11-year career despite being a 29-year-old rookie when he was signed by the San Diego Chargers. The Australian punter lineage truly took off in the mid-2000s, however, with the likes of the Cowboys’ Matt McBriar, the Jets’ and Cardinals’ Ben Graham, and the Eagles’ Sav Rocca paving the way for today’s starting Aussies.
A bit anecdotal certainly, but it matches everything I have heard.
There will naturally be more punts inside the 20, because players are fair catching balls inside the 20 more frequently.
But it looks like there were about half as many touchbacks as punts that were downed (anywhere on the field).
Maybe that ball bounces perfectly, but when you're at the six already, in that situation, I'd much rather take the chance of getting it at the 20 than worrying you might lose three yards off your starting spot.
Maybe it's a case of teams taking on the personality of their superstar. Josh Allen is the funnest player in the league, as long as you're not a Bills fan (or at least as long as you're not a Bills fan in January). He is the very epitome of a million dollar body and a ten cent head.
It baffles me that teams are lining up to interview Ken Dorsey. Assuming I'm part of the leaguewide Anti-Bieniemy Committee, I'd be a lot more interested in the guy who squeezed an above-average offense out of Daniel Jones and no noteworthy receivers, who was... (checks pro-football-reference)... Mike Kafka??
The league's been falling all over itself for 20 years to hire Belichick assistants, several of them more than once, who have almost invariably proven aggressively incompetent, but no one wants to touch Andy Reid's assistants, several of whom have coached teams to Super Bowls. C'mon, fellas, Matt Nagy was a clown show but he shouldn't scare you off all other Reid Tree coaches for years.
but as noted, I don't think it quite supports your assertion.
also, not that many punts have to wind up in the end zone to make letting the ball land inside the 10-yard line the optimal play. the 20 is a tremendous result for the offense, while the 1- or 2-yard line is potentially dangerous. other results aren't as critical, so conceding a relatively poor result doesn't strike me as the advantage play.
as for Australians and other punters who know nothing about how American football is played, they have been known to make mind-boggling mistakes when a play goes "south" because they never played the game. one-time blunders like that can undo many, many solid kicks.
as for the Giants, they were the only one of the bottom 15 teams in passing TDs to make the playoffs (they tied for 24th), with Saquon Barkley and a bad offensive line (offsetting rhetorical penalties, per a discussion). they broke an NFL record for most consecutive games failing to score 30 points.
they were 27th in passing yards, 4th in rushing yards, and 15th in offense TDs.
their coaches did an excellent job with a so-so roster, for sure. but I wouldn't go overboard there.
None of these things is a significant consideration when the game is almost over: You are not going to punt under any circumstances; you have to move the ball very quickly because the clock is as much your enemy as the opposing team, and any end to your drive ends the game so a safety isn't as big a risk relative to other ways your drive could end.
Letting the ball bounce at the 8 instead of fair catching is a -EV move, inasmuch as the median drive start when you let it bounce is probably about the 7 and you run the risk of having to start at or inside your 2, which is hugely -EV. But in the very-late-and-behind scenario it's better to risk losing 6-7 yards to gain 12.
I am a bit surprised by the level of condescension in your comment - you haven't struck me before as one likely to fall into that trap.
Now, if you know a bouncing ball is likely to take a big bounce towards the endzone that pushes things quite a bit in favor of letting it bounce. With the accurate punters now and drop punt style this is much less certain than it used to be.
to get back to baseball, no one ever claimed that walking Barry Bonds with the bases loaded was "all gravy."
the downside is obvious, and the only debate is in what circumstances it still becomes a net positive choice (which is possible). so I would say that you need to concede the obvious potential downside to the fair catch around the 5-yard line, and show me/us that a lesser but more common different result is a net positive as well overall. and I have never heard evidence from you nor elsewhere that the vast majority of NFL punters are now going the route you describe.
am also a little annoyed that you appear not only to know nothing about a couple of comically-disastrous results from foreign punters not understanding the rules and severely impacting game results, and yet dismissing it completely out of hand. WTF indeed.
the biggest problem with australian punters isn't that they occasionally make mistakes because they have low football IQ; it's that they can't kick for #### in cold weather.
physician, heal thyself
i know. trust me: i know.
and that's why you won't ever see me act surprised when someone is put off by my abrasiveness.
and fwiw, i have tried not to respond everytime you post cringe on here, at least since the last time we had this kind of blowup.
I mean I have seen plenty of instances where teams let the ball bounce in order to get it as close to the end zone as possible, so I just don't agree with this.
The whole punting/receiving thing is completely risk/reward and to do a thorough analysis it would have to be team by team - because the risks and rewards differ depending on the specific receiving teams offense; match-up by match-up, because the opposing team's defense matters; and situational - as pointed out above, the score and time of game matters as well.
And, of course, the specific punt and returner matter as well, because if the receiver doesn't feel comfortable catching a specific punt for basically any reason then I don't want them to try it. "Coach, I kind of lost the ball for a second in the lights, so I ... A: tried for it anyway or B: bailed out ... I mean, come on, if there is doubt in the returner's mind they absolutely should bail out, almost no matter what else above.
You do know that McDermott and the DC Frazier are Reid disciples, right?
ETA: Also, Kafka is from the Reid tree, and he's already been linked to the Houston job.
2nd edit: I can't really tell if this is a serious post? I mean, there are a ton of Reid assistants in the NFL. It's not an under-looked tree.
I don't know about comically-disastrous results from Australian punters, but I do know the Eagles Aussie punter almost got a 1st down on a blocked punt because of his rugby skills. Care to share a link or two?
I certainly overdid it, but I'm thinking specifically of Bieniemy, who I believe has by now interviewed with half the teams in the NFL. I'm sure they were all 100% legitimate interviews and he's just uniquely terrible at interviewing.
there are always going to be rational reasons why you shouldn't hire someone. there is always going to be an element of risk inherent to handing your franchise over to someone, regardless of whether it's their first time, or their 2nd time, or their 3rd time, or any time thereafter. no candidate is 100% clean.
whenever the topic of black coaches seemingly being held back comes up, i tend to remember this scene with the panther's new owner when he hired matt rhule:
raheem morris is never going to get that privilege.
duce staley is never going to get that privilege.
eric bieniemy is never going to get that privilege.
david culley is never going to get that privilege.
steve wilks is never going to get that privilege.
brian flores is never going to get that privilege.
hue jackson is never going to get that privilege.
jim caldwell is never going to get that privilege.
kliff kingsberry, otoh....
Could be true. But if there are legitimate reg flags, which are apparently known in NFL circles, I wonder why 15 different teams have called him in to interview for a job they knew in advance they were not going to offer him? Why, a more cynical man than I might start to believe interviewing someone they already knew they have a legitimate reason not to hire might help them satisfy some troublesome rules...
Yeah, didn't come close to working. They didn't get the space they expected after the initial reception and Elliott got blown up and was never going to figure.
But one play, 80 yards is truly hopeless if you try anything approaching normal.
And yeah, there are other things you can point a finger at, but this one play I see as perhaps the best chance. Though it's kind of akin to the strategy that is called, "playing for heart failure" in chess.
I have heard that coordinator success has no correlation with head coaching success, but if I was looking to hire a coordinator based on resume, I don't think I would look at either Jones or Kafka after one year coordinating. Ryans or Steichen or Bienemy or even Dan Quinn would be ahead of them to get looks.
How about "last and 65"? 2 TDs in the last 14 seconds.
And yeah, last second kickoff (or punt for that matter) returns are a whole different matter. These days that kick is either 3 rows deep or spends 20 seconds bouncing. Kick coverage is so much better these days and kick distance is so much further.
But I promise you that if they thought CeeDee Lamb was going to be 1v1 on a sideline route with no deep safety then they'd have called a conventional play.
I don't really have a feeling one way or the other, but that's not the rule, which the Niners' DB clearly knew. It's possible Schultz couldn't have gone forward, but he sure didn't make any effort.
But if this disqualifies him from being a HC — and I've got nothing against saying it does — why are they even interviewing him? If you feel his behavior from 20 years ago means he shouldn't be a head coach, don't interview him
I agree completely. I was just noting what the red flags were.
It may not disqualify him, but it could be a tiebreaker. "Fred" and he may end up after the interviews pretty close, but he has some red flags and Fred has none, probably safer to hire Fred.
I am not saying there is no racism involved or even saying what the real deal actually is. Just when he was talked about here in MN, even his supporters in the media acknowledged there were some flags (I believe the above post, but don't have direct knowledge of what those flags are or were).
I'm sure it's not because there's a rule that you have to interview a minority candidate and interviewing one you already know has serious red flags provides a convenient prepackaged excuse not to hire him while technically satisfying the rule. Nothing like that no sir.
Chiefs, also at home, are slightly under 2 point favorites over the Bengals. So presumably the Bengals would be favored on a neutral field.
Philadelphia: 51° with showers ending within the hour
Kansas City: 20° and cloudy, no chance of rain or snow
I am pretty unfamiliar with the rest of the 49ers pash-rush. Arik Armstead did nothing this year.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main