Idoolittle

Established Members
  • Content count

    2,105
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

435 Excellent

1 Follower

About Idoolittle

  • Rank
    Superstar

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No
  1. Pats/Chiefs

    I'd prefer this over the current system, but I'd even take it a step further and see each team should have the same number of offensive drives for the game to end. So in this game, if the Pats start with the ball in OT, the game will end with KC having the ball (either because they did better or worse than what the Pats did on the previous drive). If they match what the Pats do, the game continues. The only exception would be a defensive score, which would automatically end the game. Would possibly mean longer OTs, but at least it's even. And if there is concern about the game dragging on that absolutely must be address (for safety reasons or whatever), then do a 2-pt convert shootout or something after a certain number of tied drives. But either way the coinflip shouldn't give one team a significant advantage over another team.
  2. Pats/Chiefs

    I'm a Pats fan, so I'm obviously happy with the outcome. But the OT rules could be improved. Especially when you're looking at two high-offensive teams like these two. Each team should get a shot. Keep it even.
  3. Pats/Chiefs

    I agree. The team that doesn't start with the ball should get a chance to match/do better, whether it's a TD or FG. A coinflip essentially decided OT (or at least gave the Pats a significant advantage).
  4. Pats/Chiefs

    Or fumbles, or even when there's "something there" he ends up over/under throwing the open guy and gets picked off. Or connects with someone before the end zone and runs off the clock. Also keeping in mind you're probably talking about a kicker throwing the ball here. Not saying I'm against this kind of call, just saying there is some risk if it's not executed properly.
  5. Pats/Chiefs

    I don't think I would have called the timeout there. Ball likely would have been snapped around 40 seconds left, still tons of time with 3 seconds. Plus don't have to worry about the catch being reviewed.
  6. Pats/Chiefs

    Last year's rules that's probably no catch. But this year's rules looks good to me. The top half of the ball hits the ground, but he has a grip on the bottom half of the ball when it does.
  7. Pats/Chiefs

    Well, I guess that call didn't matter anyway...
  8. Pats/Chiefs

    That definitely didn't hit him. Question is whether they have "clear evidence" to overturn the call.
  9. Rams/Saints - NFC Championship

    Really hard to make this kind of comparison given how different each sport is. But let's say Steph goes on an 0-for-10 run and someone like Klay goes 7-for-10 from the field. You might not take Steph out of the game, but you'd look for Klay as your first option over Steph. In baseball a single player only gets up to the plate 1 out of every 9 at-bats for his team (not to mention if a player is taken out he's done for the night). So it's completely set of circumstances. If instead baseball had something that allowed one guy to go up to the plate more than another guy, and Trout goes is 0-5 and another guy is 3-5, you might give the 3-5 guy a few more at-bats than Trout. Anyway, point is they were just kept going with what was working (Anderson) over what wasn't working (Gurley) for a little while. Doesn't mean Gurley's done for the night (seeing more snaps now), but just giving him a bit of a break.
  10. I guess it depends where you rank him. I don't think you'll find many people putting him in the same conversation as Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Mahomes, etc. And I would say a lot of people would put him above Dalton, Smith, Flacco, Carr, etc. But after that it's probably a bit more up in the air. I think I'd have him around the Luck, Cousins, Stafford area, but that's just my opinion. Either way, I don't think throwing for 331 yards and scoring 3 TDs in an AFC Divisional Round game is that bad of an outing. The Chargers as a whole just needed to play better.
  11. They won the Divisional match against the Chargers in 2006 on the road, before losing to Indy on the road in the Conference Championship.
  12. They've only played 3 road playoff games since 2006. 2006 AFC Championship @ IND (L 38-34) 2013 AFC Championship @ DEN (L 26-16) 2015 AFC Championship @ DEN (L 20-18) Mainly because they've been the top seed / one of the top seeds most years and were playing at home. They also won 2 Superbowls during this time, where they technically would have been on the road as well. So I think the stat sounds worse than it actually is.
  13. I'm taking Saints by more than a TD. We'll see what kind of magic Nick Foles and the Eagles can bring again this year, but that's a really strong Saints offense and a good defense. I just can't really see them losing this one.
  14. Indy Colts @ KC Chiefs Gameday

    I noticed that from a lot of people. I actually put a fair amount of money on the Chiefs -5.0. The Colts deserve credit for where they got to and how they played coming down the stretch, but that Chiefs offense is insane and their defense has been a bit better as of late. Honestly I was surprised the spread for this game was less than the spread for the Rams/Cowboys game.