ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
BANKS: OK, but you want to know something that really drives me crazy? It's when I hear you and others complain that the reigning league MVP didn't even get to touch the ball Saturday night in overtime, as if Peyton Manning somehow deserved a chance to win the game in dramatic fashion. The truth is, he had his chance to win the game and be the hero, and it came late in regulation.
Had the Colts been able to execute on that 3rd and 2 from their own 9 with 2:30 remaining, they would have been able to run out the clock on the trailing Chargers, who had already burned all three of their timeouts. Instead, Manning double-clutched while searching for a receiver, didn't see blitzing Chargers linebacker Tim Dobbins and wound up taking an eight-yard sack to the Indy 1. That forced a Colts punt and set up the Chargers' game-tying field goal drive.
But to act like Manning was deprived of a chance to affect the outcome of the game when it was on the line is pure fantasy. He had his chance. And had he and the Colts made the most of it, overtime would have never even occurred. Sorry, but no special rules should apply just because your last name is Manning.
Quote:
BANKS: It shouldn't. But if you think the overtime debate would have been just as vocal this week if it were Rivers rather than Manning who never touched the ball in OT, I think you're in the distinct minority. I think because it was Peyton Manning, the league's three-time MVP, who didn't get to step on the field in overtime, that pumped up the volume. Considerably.
KING: Maybe, but I was saying the same thing when Brett Favre and the Jets got the ball in overtime in Week 11 at New England, and the Patriots' Matt Cassel and his 401 yards of passing never saw the field. Same situation. And it needs fixing.
funny i never heard king complain after that overtime win by the jets.
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
funny i never heard king complain after that overtime win by the jets.
This is what he said the week after the Jets/Pats OT game...
Quote:
I've never been in favor of the college overtime rule for pro football, but I have been a constant advocate of the rule that each team should have one possession, minimum, in overtime. It's ridiculous that a coin flip should have so much bearing on the outcome of a pro football game
my bad. i guess he did .but as banks points out it didnt receive that much noise since favre wasnt at the receiving end of that loss like manning is now.
I've gone back and forth on this one over the years, I can't really decide which side I'm on. Just saying "minimum of one possession per team" seems to be over-simplifying it though.
Wasn't there data a while back that shows the team that won the coin toss isn't that much more likely to win? I mean, it's up to the defense and special teams of the kicking team to stop them, and if they do their job, the offense will get a chance.
__________________
“I'm tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money. I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok…”
-Shaquille O'Neal
I've gone back and forth on this one over the years, I can't really decide which side I'm on. Just saying "minimum of one possession per team" seems to be over-simplifying it though.
Wasn't there data a while back that shows the team that won the coin toss isn't that much more likely to win? I mean, it's up to the defense and special teams of the kicking team to stop them, and if they do their job, the offense will get a chance.
BB's idea on WEEI after the jets loss was interesting too. Just play the 15 mins. If some team holds the ball for11 mins so be it. giving 1 possession etc and other alternatives really take the strategy part out of the game regarding timeouts and challenges and when to go for it etc. it thought it was interesting view.He said the NFL doesnt like because the game becomes too long in that case.
BB's idea on WEEI after the jets loss was interesting too. Just play the 15 mins. If some team holds the ball for11 mins so be it. giving 1 possession etc and other alternatives really take the strategy part out of the game regarding timeouts and challenges and when to go for it etc. it thought it was interesting view.He said the NFL doesnt like because the game becomes too long in that case.
You'd also end up with a boatload of ties, which is not something I think the NFL would want either.
__________________
“I'm tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money. I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok…”
-Shaquille O'Neal
Last edited by Watson's IQ; 01-06-2009 at 02:14 PM..
my bad. i guess he did .but as banks points out it didnt receive that much noise since favre wasnt at the receiving end of that loss like manning is now.
Yeah, I'm guessing there would have been a bit more attention to the OT rule in the national media had the Pats won the coin flip and scored on the first possession.
Personally I like a minimum-one-possession each or first-to-score-six rather than the current setup.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yeah, I'm guessing there would have been a bit more attention to the OT rule in the national media had the Pats won the coin flip and scored on the first possession.
Personally I like a minimum-one-possession each or first-to-score-six rather than the current setup.
Why? The rule is the rule. Plenty of OT games are decided on the first possession, and not all of them require a full-blown media investigation. The Jets beating the Patriots to take over the division lead without Cassel touching the ball was just as significant as the Pats beating Favre without him touching it would have been.
__________________
“I'm tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money. I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok…”
-Shaquille O'Neal
Banks and King debate overtime
Linear Mode
