Elliott Harrison: I see the Panthers winning NFCs at 9-6-1

[TheRed]

Well, that's why the rule was changed, to lessen the outcome being decided by a simple coin toss, so I understand and have no problem with the change.

It's still decided on a simple coin toss, lol. I don't think we are on the same page here. Ohwell.

[top dawg]

It's still decided on a simple coin toss, lol. I don't think we are on the same page here. Ohwell.

The only way in reality that it's decided on a coin toss is if the team that wins the coin toss scores a TD on their first possession in OT, otherwise the team that lost the coin toss is going to get at least one shot to win the game.

Before the rule change, a team could theoretically move the ball 40-45 yards (assuming they begin at the 20), kick a field goal and end the game which was way too easy. 

[ChampD1012]

It's still decided on a simple coin toss, lol. I don't think we are on the same page here. Ohwell.

Not really...the other team has an opportunity to get the ball if a TD doesn't happen....

In the past...a field goal ends the game without the other team getting a chance...

If you give up a TD the first drive in OT...the game should be over...

[TheRed]

The only way in reality that it's decided on a coin toss is if the team that wins the coin toss scores a TD on their first possession in OT, otherwise the team that lost the coin toss is going to get at least one shot to win the game.

Before the rule change, a team could theoretically move the ball 40-45 yards (assuming they begin at the 20), kick a field goal and end the game which was way too easy. 

 

Not really...the other team has an opportunity to get the ball if a TD doesn't happen....

In the past...a field goal ends the game without the other team getting a chance...

If you give up a TD the first drive in OT...the game should be over...

I'm speaking more to the game we played last year against the Bengals.

Cincinatti won the coin toss. They finally ended up marching down the field, and missed the field goal. The game was over, and we never got another opportunity to win the game after the Bengals blew theirs. In an instance like that, the other team should get an opportunity to win the game, if they don't, then I can see the game ending in a tie. Even as ridiculous as it is.

Games ending in a tie should not be happening every year.

[top dawg]

Even if there is a higher likelihood of a tie, I'll take the rule change with a tie per year, as it's a fairer way to do things.

[ChampD1012]

 

I'm speaking more to the game we played last year against the Bengals.

Cincinatti won the coin toss. They finally ended up marching down the field, and missed the field goal. The game was over, and we never got another opportunity to win the game after the Bengals blew theirs. In an instance like that, the other team should get an opportunity to win the game, if they don't, then I can see the game ending in a tie. Even as ridiculous as it is.

Games ending in a tie should not be happening every year.

We had an entire quarter to win that game though...The bengals didn't have the ball the entire 15 minutes of OT...we blew our chances too...

i'm happy they changed the rule...because a coin toss pretty much decided the game....the new rules gives the other team a shot if they don't give up a TD...I actually believe both teams deserve a possession regardless but the new rules is better than the way it was before...

[top dawg]

 

I'm speaking more to the game we played last year against the Bengals.

Cincinatti won the coin toss. They finally ended up marching down the field, and missed the game winning field goal. The game was over, and we never got another opportunity to win the game after the Bengals blew theirs. In an instance like that, the other team should get an opportunity to win the game, if they don't, then I can see the game ending in a tie. Even as ridiculous as it is.

Games ending in a tie should not be happening every year.

The game cannot end on a field goal, unless the opposing team fails to move the ball and at least get a field goal. If they can't then they really don't deserve to win, because the opposing team just did what they couldn't...plus the rule only applies to the first possession. 

[TheRed]

We had an entire quarter to win that game though...The bengals didn't have the ball the entire 15 minutes of OT...we blew our chances too...

i'm happy they changed the rule...because a coin toss pretty much decided the game....the new rules gives the other team a shot if they don't give up a TD...I actually believe both teams deserve a possession regardless but the new rules is better than the way it was before...

The game cannot end on a field goal, unless the opposing team fails to move the ball and at least get a field goal. If they can't then they really don't deserve to win, because the opposing team just did what they couldn't. 

Hey, if you guys are satisfied with it, more power to you. I'm not.

Agree to disagree.

[top dawg]

 

Hey, if you guys are satisfied with it, more power to you. I'm not.

Agree to disagree.

Well, I can agree to disagree about the rule, but just not your reasoning. Your rationale supports the rule change as opposed to arguing against it. If you don't like the rule because you believe it leads to more ties (exactly one per year on average out of all the games), then that's all you had to say.

[Mr. Scot]

I gotta believe he's just being goofy with the tie.

Odds against that would be insane.

[top dawg]

I gotta believe he's just being goofy with the tie.

Odds against that would be insane.

He probably thinks "The Panthers are so 'goofy', why the hell not?"

[TheRed]

Well, I can agree to disagree about the rule, but just not your reasoning. Your rationale supports the rule change as opposed to arguing against it. If you don't like the rule because you believe it leads to more ties (exactly one per year on average out of all the games), then that's all you had to say.

I thought I made that pretty clear with the first post about it. But okay. Thanks for the input.

[KB_fan]

Interesting article, and seems actually pretty reasonable analysis.  If his predictions about ceilings hold remotely true, this would again make the NFCS the worst division in the NFC.  (AFC predictions not yet posted).  No team in our division has a ceiling higher than 10.  Us, Atlanta, New Orleans all predicted with a ceiling of 10-6.  Bucs ceiling 9-7. 

But, it also depicts us as the most competitive division in the NFC, something which has been true for a number of years...

Definitely we can't take our 3peat for granted - especially now with Kelvin out.  It's gonna be hard fought.

[KB_fan]

Here's a quick table with his summary of projected ceilings and floors for each team.  I've added the calculations on averages and variances.  NFC South has the lowest average ceiling (i.e. "worst division in the NFC"), but also the lowest predicted difference in ceiling from the best team in the division to the worst (only 1 game difference), so that would suggest "most competitive" division in the NFC.

NFC East	Ceiling	Floor	Variance (Wins)	Average
Dallas	13	7	6	10
Giants	11	6	5	8.5
Philly	12	7	5	9.5
Washington	10	4	6	7
average ceiling	11.5
variance best to worst	3
NFC North	Ceiling	Floor	Variance (Wins)	Average
Chicago	10	5	5	7.5
Detroit	11	7	4	9
Green Bay	13	9	4	11
Minnesota	11	5	6	8
average ceiling	11.25
variance best to worst	3
NFC  South	Ceiling	Floor	Variance (Wins)	Average
Atlanta	10	4	6	7
Carolina	10	6	4	8
New Orleans	10	6	4	8
Tampa	9	3	6	6
average ceiling	9.75
variance best to worst	1
NFC West	Ceiling	Floor	Variance (Wins)	Average
Arizona	12	6	6	9
St Louis	10	6	4	8
San Francisco	10	5	5	7.5
Seattle	15	10	5	12.5
average ceiling	11.75
variance best to worst	5