|BlackJesus| Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 Fuck Kansas City! 🐸 I don't want to hear Roger talk about "integrity of the game". An NFL team just blatantly threw a competition on purpose in true WWE fashion. 1 1 Quote
|BlackJesus| Posted January 6 Author Report Posted January 6 The NBA has a draft lottery, to prevent tanking on purpose. The NFL needs to consider options to both prevent tanking for the #1 pick and playoff teams not actually competing once their seed # is wrapped up. It's not fair that the Bengals had to play the Queefs in a game against their starters, and the Broncos got to play their 2nd and 3rd string. If your best team is losing its last game 38-0, the system is broken. 3 Quote
sparky151 Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 Disagree. Reid has every right to choose his lineup and prioritize winning/rest in a game that doesn't matter to the Chiefs. It mattered to the Bengals and Dolphins but they also could have helped themselves more over the course of the season. Reid doesn't owe them anything. 3 Quote
dex Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 Bengals made their own bed. KC can play whoever they want in the reg season finale. They earned that right by winning often during the reg season. 2 Quote
|BlackJesus| Posted January 6 Author Report Posted January 6 One solution might be having 6 playoff teams determined by record and then the 7th team be determined by sports writers or a coaches poll voting in the best remaining team. Sort of how college football uses an "eye test". This would keep teams with bad records halfway through the season from tanking as they could still get hot and earn that 7th spot later in the year. It would also allow a good team that should be in the playoffs but had some bad luck and close losses from missing the playoffs when they deserve it more than the teams that did make it. 2 Quote
Le Tigre Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 Love the ideas, BJ…but the NFL is dialed into their tourney rules. Andy Reid is a shit head…but doesn’t care 1 Quote
T-Dub Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 Sour grapes. If the roles were reversed, would anyone want to start Burrow? The narrative is pretty fun though. Yeah they're terrified. 1 Quote
New Jersey Bengal Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 I hope the chiefs get their heads handed to them 1 1 Quote
Jamie_B Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 No. Ried has sat his players when securing a top seed before. It had nothing to do with us. 3 Quote
|High School Harry| Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 I hope Taylor Swift gets pregnant with Cordell Volson's child. 3 Quote
KA14_HOF Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 If we went into our final game with the #1 overall seed wrapped up, knowing that a loss meant that Pittsburgh would be eliminated from playoff contention, I would put together a game plan designed 100% to win that final game. And I would make sure that Logan Woodside and Cole Burgess and Jalen Davis fully understood how to implement it. 3 Quote
LostInDaJungle Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 12 hours ago, sparky151 said: Disagree. Reid has every right to choose his lineup and prioritize winning/rest in a game that doesn't matter to the Chiefs. It mattered to the Bengals and Dolphins but they also could have helped themselves more over the course of the season. Reid doesn't owe them anything. I'm sure if the roles were reversed people would be in here complaining about Zac not playing starters and we'd feel like the Chiefs fans were justified in being mad that we didn't play our hardest to help the Chiefs get over losing to New England. 1 Quote
|BlackJesus| Posted January 6 Author Report Posted January 6 Another idea would be taking away a draft pick every game a team sits more than 5 healthy starters. First offense is a 3rd rd pick. Second time a 2nd rder. Third time a 1st rder. This would also prevent the "load management" bullshit that has killed off the NBA regular season and may one day come to the NFL. 2 Quote
LostInDaJungle Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 2 minutes ago, BlackJesus said: Another idea would be taking away a draft pick every game a team sits more than 5 healthy starters. First offense is a 3rd rd pick. Second time a 2nd rder. Third time a 1st rder. This would also prevent the "load management" bullshit that has killed off the NBA regular season as well and may one day come to the NFL. Yes, we should figure out more ways to punish 15-1 teams. Plus it's a great way for the NFL to show off their commitment to player safety. If you don't want them sitting starters, go win games. Quote
saphead Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 Now that we were forced this dumb safety minded uneven 17 game regular season, anyone over .500 should make the playoffs. I mean, more NFL is always better right? 1 Quote
Griever Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 11 minutes ago, saphead said: Now that we were forced this dumb safety minded uneven 17 game regular season, anyone over .500 should make the playoffs. I mean, more NFL is always better right? 18 games with 2 byes may be coming soon... Quote
saphead Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 12 minutes ago, Griever said: 18 games with 2 byes may be coming soon... I feel like that long of a season would just grind on. As they say in the entertainment biz, always leave them wanting more ... Quote
|BlackJesus| Posted January 6 Author Report Posted January 6 4 hours ago, saphead said: anyone over .500 should make the playoffs. I like that idea. Sort of like how college football gives bowl games to every team with 6 wins. In the NFL you could just have 9 wins guarantee you the playoffs. The Bengals are the only team above .500 to miss out ... Quote
TigerJ@w Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 18 hours ago, BlackJesus said: The NBA has a draft lottery, to prevent tanking on purpose. The NFL needs to consider options to both prevent tanking for the #1 pick and playoff teams not actually competing once their seed # is wrapped up. It's not fair that the Bengals had to play the Queefs in a game against their starters, and the Broncos got to play their 2nd and 3rd string. If your best team is losing its last game 38-0, the system is broken. I totally agree 1 Quote
TigerJ@w Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 And what if KC were undefeated in the last game, does the ones that think they did the right thing, think they would have played their starters to go undefeated? Of course, they would play their starters, and the NFL would make sure they did. but remember, the ones who said they have the right not to start them, well, then what if they did start them in this scenario? We all can play Devil's Advocates here. I will never agree that teams should be allowed to not start their starters during the regular season, ever. 1 Quote
Shebengal Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 18 hours ago, New Jersey Bengal said: I hope the chiefs get their heads handed to them I hope that sitting their starters for 24-25 days comes back to bite them in the ass. Would serve them right! 1 2 Quote
Le Tigre Posted January 6 Report Posted January 6 6 minutes ago, Shebengal said: I hope that sitting their starters for 24-25 days comes back to bite them in the ass. Would serve them right! They will get the winner of the Stealers/Rats. Either one will make them feel it. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.