I heard Peter King is saying that the NFL might change the booth review to the last 5 minutes (from the last two minutes). This minor change would help prevent teams who have used all their timeouts from getting hosed at the end of games (see Falcons v. Eagles last week).
Here's a suggestion for the NFL: don't force teams to use a timeout for a challenge. Give teams an option. If they have a timeout, they can forfeit it in the event of a bad challenge. An alternative is the teams are penalized 10 yards if they lose their challenge. Teams can challenge as much as they want, but each time they lose one, it costs them. Don't limit the challenges, just make the penalty for losing them sufficient to discourage excessive challenging. The current system forces coaches to consider the likelihood that the refs will screw up later in the game. That shouldn't be the case ... so change the rule!
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Monday, October 06, 2008
What exactly is an "opportunity"?
People are still harping on TO for complaining about wanting the ball more after the loss to the Redskins a week ago. Sure, Owens was "thrown to" a bunch of time (17, I think), had a couple drops, 7 catches and two runs. So, he wasn't exactly frozen out, but don't mistake 17 balls going his direction with Romo giving him 17 opportunities to catch the ball.
Had I known the outcome of the game before it happened (as well as TO's comments), I would have taped the game and charted the throws to TO. Then, I'd be able to answer how many actual, realistic opportunities TO had to make catches in that game. Obviously, he had more than a few because he made 7 catches. But, really, the numbers are less relevant than I think people think they are.
If Player A is thrown to 10 times, but is unable to get his hands on any ball, whereas Player B is thrown to 5 times and makes 5 catches, who's really more involved? If a QB has a guy he throws to if no one is open, that WR will have inflated "thrown to" numbers without a comparable increase in actual opportunities to make catches. Should TO be happy that he is the intended receiver on a play when the ball is knocked down by a guy at the line?
I'm not entirely sure, but I would imagine the only thing worse than not getting the ball thrown your way is to have uncatchable balls thrown your way. Wide receivers want to make plays, but their ability to make plays is contingent on the play of other players. If WR's don't get open, that's their fault. If the ball doesn't get there when they are open, that's when problems are bound to occur.
Had I known the outcome of the game before it happened (as well as TO's comments), I would have taped the game and charted the throws to TO. Then, I'd be able to answer how many actual, realistic opportunities TO had to make catches in that game. Obviously, he had more than a few because he made 7 catches. But, really, the numbers are less relevant than I think people think they are.
If Player A is thrown to 10 times, but is unable to get his hands on any ball, whereas Player B is thrown to 5 times and makes 5 catches, who's really more involved? If a QB has a guy he throws to if no one is open, that WR will have inflated "thrown to" numbers without a comparable increase in actual opportunities to make catches. Should TO be happy that he is the intended receiver on a play when the ball is knocked down by a guy at the line?
I'm not entirely sure, but I would imagine the only thing worse than not getting the ball thrown your way is to have uncatchable balls thrown your way. Wide receivers want to make plays, but their ability to make plays is contingent on the play of other players. If WR's don't get open, that's their fault. If the ball doesn't get there when they are open, that's when problems are bound to occur.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
The 32 is not the 35
I'm watching the OU v. Baylor game, and I can't believe that awful officiating. One play in particular, Baylor had a 7 yard run on first down from the 25. He was obviously stopped at the 32 before being pushed back a couple of yards on the tackle. Much to my surprise, the next play was run from the 35 yard line ... and it was 1st and 10. Fortunately, I have the game taped, so I was able to verify that I'm not going crazy and that the officials missed the mark by 3 yards! It wasn't half a yard or a yard ... it was three. Now, later on the drive, the officials are measuring to see if it's a first down ... why not just move the ball forward 3 yards and give it to them?
Now, what's the difference between 1st and 10 at the 35 or 2nd and 3 at the 32? Not a whole lot. I'm not arguing that OU was adversely affected by the call ... I'm just saying that officiating crews shouldn't be making mistakes like that. And, why doesn't someone in the replay booth say something about the obvious error?
And, this wasn't the only marginal call. Baylor intercepted Bradford near the end zone in the 1st quarter, only to have the play called back by a marginal (at best) interference call that had no bearing on the play - I'm not even sure what the actual interference was. But OU was flagged for a personal foul for a late hit out-of-bounds that was far less egregious than a play later in the game by a Baylor player that didn't draw a flag. Then, there was the play that resulted in a Bradford interception where it sure looked like the ball hit the ground before being corralled by the Baylor player, although the interception was just as good as a punt for the Sooners (3rd down interception from midfield that gave Baylor the ball at the 10 - 40 yards net).
Now, what's the difference between 1st and 10 at the 35 or 2nd and 3 at the 32? Not a whole lot. I'm not arguing that OU was adversely affected by the call ... I'm just saying that officiating crews shouldn't be making mistakes like that. And, why doesn't someone in the replay booth say something about the obvious error?
And, this wasn't the only marginal call. Baylor intercepted Bradford near the end zone in the 1st quarter, only to have the play called back by a marginal (at best) interference call that had no bearing on the play - I'm not even sure what the actual interference was. But OU was flagged for a personal foul for a late hit out-of-bounds that was far less egregious than a play later in the game by a Baylor player that didn't draw a flag. Then, there was the play that resulted in a Bradford interception where it sure looked like the ball hit the ground before being corralled by the Baylor player, although the interception was just as good as a punt for the Sooners (3rd down interception from midfield that gave Baylor the ball at the 10 - 40 yards net).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
