Nantz ripping apart Fatcessa

[FREEJET]

Anyone watching Nantz rip apart Fatcessa on the OT arguement. He is presenting facts at evry question and Mike is just making blanket statements. Mike knows he picked the wrong guy for this arguement.

On YES right now.

[Yankeejet22]

good radio... rare back and forth dialogue wit Francesa..

[32green]

They are good friends. They love to argue and Nantz always holds his own.

[Traitor Jay & the Woodies]

Originally Posted by FREEJET

Anyone watching Nantz rip apart Fatcessa on the OT arguement. He is presenting facts at evry question and Mike is just making blanket statements. Mike knows he picked the wrong guy for this arguement.

On YES right now.

What is the argument exactly and who is on which side?

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by Traitor Jay & the Woodies

What is the argument exactly and who is on which side?

All about two posession OT. Wrong that 40% of the time the team that has a fortunate call of "heads" gets the only possession, wins the game.

Mike = Against it. "The way it is works. Play some defense and shut up."

Nantz = For it. "The system is broken. Brett Favre shouldn't sit there in OT and not have a chance to win it too."

SAR I

[Boynton Beach Jets]

I was listening to ESPN 1050

[BLEEDgreenN'white]

Why should they change it? It's called PLAY DEFENSE.

Maybe Favre shouldn't have thrown that pick then he wouldn't have to watch on the sideline during OT as the Vikings lost.

[Megalomaniac]

peter king made a good point about this. of the 470ish times a game has gone into OT, only 7 times ever has the winner of the coin toss chosen to kick off. with that data, you can't convince me there's not an advantage to having the ball first. there clearly is an advantage when practically EVERY team says "yeah, we want the ball first."

[ground and pound]

Originally Posted by SAR I

All about two posession OT. Wrong that 40% of the time the team that has a fortunate call of "heads" gets the only possession, wins the game.

Mike = Against it. "The way it is works. Play some defense and shut up."

Nantz = For it. "The system is broken. Brett Favre shouldn't sit there in OT and not have a chance to win it too."

SAR I

without having had the luxury of hearing this debate, based on this recap i must say that Francesa is 100% right, and the league should not change the overtime rules at all.


the absolute case in point of this is the Cardinals- Packers wild card game this year. in a game where 100 freaking points were scored, almost 1000 yards of offense put up, and where neither punter had been seen since the first quarter, the game ended in overtime on a DEFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN of all things. that was the clincher about this stupid overtime debate. this is not baseball, on any given play, either team score. as such, each team has a more than fair shot in overtime. im sure the whole world, including myself thought the Packers were going to win when they won the toss, and yet a defensive play ended the game. if that isn't proof that the overtime system is fair i dont know what is, and it sounds like Francesa is arguing the correct point of view, for once.

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by BLEEDgreenN'white

Why should they change it? It's called PLAY DEFENSE.

Maybe Favre shouldn't have thrown that pick then he wouldn't have to watch on the sideline during OT as the Vikings lost.

i already mentioned the stat that only 7 out of the 470+ OT games the coin toss winner elected to kick, but as well...

when OT was implemented, teams were kicking off from the 35, now they kick off from the 30. plays a big difference in field position.
also, when OT was implemented, FG kickers were making FG's 60% of the time. now, (minus this randomly bad postseason year) they are at 80%.

the game isn't the same, and it's totally not fair.

[intelligentjetsfan]

Originally Posted by Boynton Beach Jets

I was listening to ESPN 1050

+1

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by ground and pound

without having had the luxury of hearing this debate, based on this recap i must say that Francesa is 100% right, and the league should not change the overtime rules at all.


the absolute case in point of this is the Cardinals- Packers wild card game this year. in a game where 100 freaking points were scored, almost 1000 yards of offense put up, and where neither punter had been seen since the first quarter, the game ended in overtime on a DEFENSIVE TOUCHDOWN of all things. that was the clincher about this stupid overtime debate. this is not baseball, on any given play, either team score. as such, each team has a more than fair shot in overtime. im sure the whole world, including myself thought the Packers were going to win when they won the toss, and yet a defensive play ended the game. if that isn't proof that the overtime system is fair i dont know what is, and it sounds like Francesa is arguing the correct point of view, for once.

i completely disagree. it was a freak play and you know it. the lowest scoring offense was the rams with 175 points. the highest scoring defense was the saints with 56 points. that's a difference of 119 points. this is the absolutely worst scoring offense compared to the absolutely best scoring defense, and it's still not even close. there's no way you can make the point that the defense has just as much opportunity to score as the offense because it's simply not true in any way.

[sg3]

so wait...

Michael Kay on 1050 had on 14 guests that had something to say about the Superbowl


and the Fat Stinking Turd had on Jim Nantz to argue about the all important issue of changing the OT rules?

thank God I moved up the dial permanently

[C Mart]

Originally Posted by SAR I

All about two posession OT. Wrong that 40% of the time the team that has a fortunate call of "heads" gets the only possession, wins the game.

Mike = Against it. "The way it is works. Play some defense and shut up."

Nantz = For it. "The system is broken. Brett Favre shouldn't sit there in OT and not have a chance to win it too."

SAR I

Favre (and every other team that loses the coin toss) had 60 minutes to win it.

[Ven0m]

My belief is that football is a team game, and thus both offenses should get a chance to win the game as much as both defenses should get a chance to lose it.

If you're an offensive-driven team and your defense gives up a score, that shouldn't be the end of the game. Your offense should have some sort of chance to match it.

I generally think the college system sucks because you shouldn't be starting teams off in Field Goal range, but they do have the right idea when it comes to taking turns. Perhaps those turns should just start on their own 20 yard line instead of the opposing side of the field. I don't know.

[JStokes]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

i already mentioned the stat that only 7 out of the 470+ OT games the coin toss winner elected to kick, but as well...

when OT was implemented, teams were kicking off from the 35, now they kick off from the 30. plays a big difference in field position.
also, when OT was implemented, FG kickers were making FG's 60% of the time. now, (minus this randomly bad postseason year) they are at 80%.

the game isn't the same, and it's totally not fair.

Then maybe they should practice more on the coin-flip.

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by C Mart

Favre (and every other team that loses the coin toss) had 60 minutes to win it.

so did the other team

[CV 40]

Eliminate the Field Goal.

Problem Solved.

[ground and pound]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

i completely disagree. it was a freak play and you know it. the lowest scoring offense was the rams with 175 points. the highest scoring defense was the saints with 56 points. that's a difference of 119 points. this is the absolutely worst scoring offense compared to the absolutely best scoring defense, and it's still not even close. there's no way you can make the point that the defense has just as much opportunity to score as the offense because it's simply not true in any way.

what do the St. Louis Rams have to do with whether or not each team should be guaranteed a possession in overtime?

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by CV 40

Eliminate the Field Goal.

Problem Solved.

One of the OT suggestions was the first team to score 5 points wins. This way, if the coin toss loser gets beat on the first possession it wasn't due to a 20 yard KR, 20 yards of offense, and a long FG as so often happens. And, in most cases, it guarantees at least a 2 possession game.

SAR I