WrigleyField 22

I agree except I think game clock management should still be a component, IMO. No one argues that if the 2nd half receiving team wins the game on an ending possession that the loser should get to respond, even though the other team got an extra possession. The clock just falls that way sometimes where teams dont posses equal number of times. As long as OT is a timed play that goes to the end, then we get more football and don't alter the gameplay. Just a matter on the right length of extension and how many TO or stoppages to include. But the coin flip is total nonsense and that should be the primary goal, eliminating a coin flip to alter who might get an extra possession. KC actually ended up with two extra possessions on the night (although one was a 13 second possession so kudos to them). I want a 10 minute period, whoever leads at the end wins. But, what if there was no coin flip for overtime - whichever team received the first quarter kick off gets the ball first. This would go against the current league tendency to kick off the game and receive the second half kick off in hope to score twice in a row (finishing first half and starting second half). Minor wrinkle, but could add another layer of strategy to the first decision of the game. Yea, saw someone suggest that. Don't hate it. I guess part of teams choice to defer is heavily influenced by the desire to have a shot at the extra possession in the second half and this makes them "pay" for that advantage. But still makes a coin flip very influential. Today, the coin flip is more formality since halftime will flip possession odds. The other benefit of two 5 minute timed halves would also be limiting any potential directional weather advantages, but I'm not as worried about that cuz weather can change and it only impacts non-domed teams (or Dallas lol)

No, KC still would have to score in 13 seconds to force the tie. But then yea, game continues from last spot. In that case the spot is the kickoff. The theory behind it is that the halftime KO already gave each team equal chances to gain the possession edge at one of the halves. After that point, any possession edge is only time based which is game flow dependent and reliant on strategy and execution. But we don't have to guarantee equal possession because that's not football. As it played out theres no valid reason for KC to get back to back possession, its 100% luck. "That's not football" is the argument I have seen a bunch since yesterday. But you can't have sudden death and then give only 1 team the opportunity for the kill. It's like 1 team getting penalty kicks, penalty shots, a chance to score a basket, a chance to bat. That's the difference between regulation, it's not sudden death. You have a clear ending to regulation. You don't have a clear ending to OT. It's not even true sudden death. It's sudden death, if you do this (score a TD). And it gets magnified when you have one of the best offensive teams in the history of the sport. I get it, and you can't have 1 offs, but seems disingenous to say, "welp, should have stopped them" when nobody is very good at stopping them. Same if the shoe was on the other foot and Buffalo got the ball. Well to be clear, the argument is to play a full timed period, not sudden death. But with no caveat for equal possession/response. If it's a 5 minute continuation and KC can milk a 5 minute drive, that IS just football. Not sure what the ideal continuation time would be. In last night's game 6 possessions went over 5 minutes and 7 went under 2 (excluding two that ended at the half). So there's still a wide range of possible outcomes with a full timed OT period, none of which have to guarantee exact equal score and response action.

Or let's just go fully on making NFL a possession based game. 9 innings with two halves. Each half inning is capped at 4 minutes and the game ends at 9 innings unless its tied and we trade innings until there is a winner. Think of how many ugly Bears games this could save us from, we could never see more than 9 3 and outs! End the terrible slogs of a game way before 3 hours and the shootouts can go on for like 5 as Allen and Mahomes led offenses trade possessions forever.

I agree except I think game clock management should still be a component, IMO. No one argues that if the 2nd half receiving team wins the game on an ending possession that the loser should get to respond, even though the other team got an extra possession. The clock just falls that way sometimes where teams dont posses equal number of times. As long as OT is a timed play that goes to the end, then we get more football and don't alter the gameplay. Just a matter on the right length of extension and how many TO or stoppages to include. But the coin flip is total nonsense and that should be the primary goal, eliminating a coin flip to alter who might get an extra possession. KC actually ended up with two extra possessions on the night (although one was a 13 second possession so kudos to them).

So with a continuation in the game last night, the Chiefs have to kick the FG to tie the game, but then kick off to the Bills in normal continuation. Or are you saying they have a choice to not tie at the end of regulation, but instead could run out the time in the continuation period and potentially win on a walk off TD? Is that basically having a 65 minute game instead of 60? No, KC still would have to score in 13 seconds to force the tie. But then yea, game continues from last spot. In that case the spot is the kickoff. The theory behind it is that the halftime KO already gave each team equal chances to gain the possession edge at one of the halves. After that point, any possession edge is only time based which is game flow dependent and reliant on strategy and execution. But we don't have to guarantee equal possession because that's not football. As it played out theres no valid reason for KC to get back to back possession, its 100% luck.

Eh? It's not the worst thing in the world, yet. If they don't have one until the super bowl, that's a problem. But there's nothing wrong with waiting until this week. There is if Daboll gets hired while Geo is pondering what salad to have at his next GM interview. He's had time, in fact this year he's had more time then in past Well one team has hired their GM and two teams have not (not counting LV since they got a late start). If given the choice I'm happy if their search looks more like Minny than NYG.

Fwiw

Yea I imagine at this point they've gotten through almost all their GM interviews and they haven't gotten enough positive feedback of Frazier as an option. Breer wrote an article about the Beads having multiple HC they are narrowing in on, and Frazier is one of them https://www.si.com/nfl/2022/01/24/mmqb-divisional-round-mcvay-stafford-mahomes-burrow So there's a lot of talk at this point. Trying to remain patient. I feel like GM search goes out to Thursday or Friday still.

Saw someone tweet in favor of just a "continuation rule" and I gotta say I don't hate it after mulling it over. Basically you'd add a full OT period, say 5 minutes and you'd continue to play until one team was leading at the end of a 5 minute period. This does away with a coin flip and kickoff to start OT. You just pick up where you left off. While this gives a team with a tie late the opportunity to extend out their drive, it doesn't do away with the strategic element completely. Yea you could stall out your drive and then score in the first minute of OT, but then you've given the other team ample time. That said, if you can milk out a 5 minute drive, good for you. I think too many people approach it with a "fairness" doctrine about trading possessions. But at the end of the day, sometimes teams get an extra possession. It's not strictly a equal possession game in the vain of say baseball. But we could eliminate a random coin flip from determining that possible extra possession. The kickoff at halftime is already designed to even out those odds. So we just continue on. The only real tough part I think is how to treat TO. One timeouts? No timeouts? A standard 2 minute stopage? And coming up with an appropriate minute time on the OT period that isn't arbitrary. Maybe like median drive times in 4th Q for a team with a tie or down by 7 or less?

I like the two five minute half idea instead of a single 10 minute period. Eliminates any coin flip luck. But also realistically ends up making many OTs somewhat college like in nature. But without eliminating whole aspects of the game, including the clock. But as long as we're brainstorming ideas I'll add one new rule to tack onto the 5 minute half OT. A 11 point mercy rule. Basically game ends if either goes up by 11 in OT. I'd maybe even consider 10, but any way to make teams go for 2 more is good by me. But still can't be a one possession game then.

I'd be shocked if they traded Smith. But that hasn't stopped even Bears fans of suggesting it. FA in 2023. They should be talking extension this offseason though. I'd assume 5/90 as a starting point which is 4/80 in new money.

At the same time I can't put it past Rodgers to facilitate a restructure that leads to him being traded to his preferred destination and then horsefeathering over Adams where the Pack tag him for 2022. And I'd actually kind of feel bad for Adams in that scenario.

Minus the Bears knocking them out of the playoffs, yesterday won't get any better. Get him out of here, ASAP. He's the MVP two years in a row. I'll take my chances with Love and their financial situation. I could see Rodgers restructuring his contract, but $50 mil is a lot to find It would be pretty shocking if Rodgers would restructure. It only happens as a package deal of Rodgers and Adams both agreeing to new deals simultaneously IMO.

I'm getting kind of greedy, but I almost want Rodgers to run it back another year because the last last dance would not go as well as the first try and it would bury their cap hole even further. If they let Adams walk and trade Rodgers a lot of their cap decisions are easy and it's a one year cap clearing job where they are well positioned to tank. They would have a bounty of picks including a probable top 3 pick in 2023, comp picks, and whatever else they get in a Rodgers trade. And they'd have tons of cap room. Plus if they run it back for 2022 maybe the Bears can be the ones to put the final nail in the Rodgers-Packers dynasty coffin.

Please refer to him by his proper name, Throw Rogan.

This Last Dance reboot was kinda anti climatic huh Gotta go for Last Last Dance

Bears got an agent inside the Packers org IMO

I'm not sure I see Khan as a guy to directly grow into the Phillips role. It would basically be the Roseman/Loomis role and Philly and New Orleans still have business Presidents separate from Football Ops. But yea that keeps the setup like (supposedly) now where the football ops won't report through the Business Pres but to ownership directly.

Interesting. Theres been growing speculation of the Bears trying to double dip with a Khan type above a personnel focused AGM. But Minnesotas offer would beat that. I'd take a Khan-Brown pairing if possible over just Poles. But really good they are keeping in the game and perhaps full control of Bears > full control of Minny which is a promising sign as I wasn't totally sure was the case. Probably highly dependent on one's opinion of Fields.

#analytics

DBB had an incredibly vague tweet. Then saw this, but yea failed to see anyone actually sau that Khan and Leftwich please. Who knows at this point what's going to happen. Hhm Khan and Leftwich do have a Pittsburgh connection. I'm nervous about Leftwichs short coaching career but to some extent his playing career must make up for that. I liked this guy's coach previews. Heres Leftwich's https://ontapsportsnet.com/2021/12/03/byron-leftwich-future-head-coach-nfl-buccaneers-offense/ He has a "coach tree" chart. And yea, Leftwich would really need to extend outside if his immediate network. Nagy really had the same problem and kinda was saved by being able to keep Fangio and his staff.

DBB had an incredibly vague tweet. Then saw this, but yea failed to see anyone actually sau that

Ima need you to be more specific than that.

A silly and fun thought exercise as we inch closer to a possible new GM: