If they win Saturday, no. Lose Saturday and all that is needed is a QB to make that team unstoppable.
It’s pretty unlikely. I wouldn’t say never, but we don’t have a 1st round pick in 2022 or 2023. Would you be happy with not getting a 1st for Rodgers? Would you expect your front office to take a deal that doesn’t include a first? I also don’t think there’s much interest in replacing one near 30 million dollar salary with another near 30 million dollar salary, especially when they’re going to have to pay Deebo and Bosa soon, plus the secondary really is going to need some work too (though it’s gotten better as the season has gone on).
You don't necessarily get the best football team winning. You get the team with the best redzone touchdown efficiency winning. Which I'm sure Buffalo would've loved since they were first in the league in that category this year. TB too, since they were second. CFB was a decent setup, they just needed to start further back. At least it kept the spirit of the game in tact while giving both teams a shot. The two-point shootout nonsense is just as stupid as the NFL's rules.
Ah, so we will just pretend red zone defense is not a thing. No matter what, you have to get to overtime for this to even come up. And out of necessity to end the contest with as little effect on the next round, it makes sense to set it up to reduce the number of plays necessary to break a tie. There are already 60 minutes of play, this is just to decide the greater among equals.
Rodgers is a one year rental, IMO. And with Packers front office, who knows? They could offer a 7th rounder and a leather football and they might take it. Plus, I'd not be shocked if he played hardball and made them cut him. JMO
Who said it wasn't a thing? I'm saying it's not the only thing. It shouldn't be redzone O vs redzone D unless the team actually drives into that position... Like it is the rest of the game. And why do we need to reduce the number of plays? They have an entire week to recover; it's overtime, not time to be over. Don't all of a sudden come up with a new game and new rules just because it's tied at the end of regulation. It's idiotic. Play the game the way it's supposed to be played or just let the coin flip decide it all. Might as well leave it up to the coin if they aren't going to actually play football the way it's intended to be played. Just as stupid as a two-point shootout, but drastically reduces the number of extra plays needed to zero. All else being equal, just let the luckier team through. Greater among equals wins.
It means time has gone over what was initially allotted. It doesn't mean be a retard and completely change the rules to end it as quickly as possible. You obviously think otherwise.
Oh ya, you got this pegged. Overtime doesn't meant time to be over. And no need to worry about next week, they have a week to recover. Uh huh. These are smart people things you type.
Here's my idea: Make it untimed. If the first team scores a TD, skip the point after and kick off. If the second team scores a TD to tie, then teams alternate 2 point conversions until someone wins. Or same thing if they both kick FGs, I guess. Basically college, but without the 25 yard line gimmick, so still actual football, and with sudden death after both teams have a possession. Ties are funny, but teams bleeding the clock in OT playing for one is trash. Maybe cap it at 2 possessions per team before the 2 point shootout. Which is the weak part of it, but gotta make a sacrifice somewhere. It would be cool because the team that got the ball second would just go for every fourth down until FG range.
Basketball overtime should flip a coin to see who shoots a free throw first. First one to hit a free throw wins. Wouldn't want to over-exert basketball players by making them play more basketball. What a hilariously awful argument, lol.
Something. Epic game like that and one qb doesn't get a chance based off a coin flip. May as well go soccer route and have kickers kick fgs from 30 yards till one hits the post
Baseball extra innings should be first team to throw a strike. Scoring a run can take a long time sometimes, wouldn't want the millionaire baseball players getting too tired.
Boy, that'd be crazy. Imagine if one of the most popular sports in the world did something like that, such as soccer? Or if they did it while wearing ice skates, like hockey? Lord, only a bunch of ice hockey loving canucks could think something like that made sense.
Throwing a strike is worth a point now? Oh right, we are thinking up bullshit deflections to cover up the inability to simply make a case.
Hockey possession is way more fluid than football. Sudden death makes sense for them. Shootouts are stupid - notice how they don't do that when it really matters? Crazy that they allow for full, 20 minute periods of 5 on 5 hockey to determine who the better hockey team is. How stupid to let teams play hockey to decide who the better hockey team is. I hate soccer, but last i checked, they play two extra periods before going to dumb ass shootouts. None of the major tournaments play golden goal.
