SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 32,521
- Like
- 62,716
I watched the Liberty-Coastal Carolina bowl game and saw a comedy at the end of it as Liberty was about to score the go-ahead TD but wanted to take as much time as possible to do so so when a runner got to the goal line, he stopped in his tracks. The CC defenders tried to pull him into the end zone while he tried to stay out of it. Eventually a Liberty tight end who hadn't gotten the memo tried to push his teammate into the end zone and his teammate's efforts to stay out of it caused the tight end to wind up on top of him, causing him to fall and lose the ball. I saw at least a couple of similar situations in the bowls or the NFL where it was suggested that the defense should let a team score to conserve time, although it never came to that.
Everyone assumed the Jets were tanking to get Trevor Lawrence and then the "blew it" by winning a couple of games. Will the Jags get Lawrence because they did a better job of tanking. People are now claiming that the Eagles tanked against the Redskins to get the #6 pick instead of #9 at the expense of the Giants, who were watching on TV, hoping they would win so the Giants could get into the playoffs. I have no sympathy for the Giants, a 6-10 hoping a division rival will put them in the playoffs. But it is a problem for the league and the game's image.
Do fans have a right to expect that players and teams will give their best effort for 60 minutes of every game? If they do, what can be done to give them an incentive to do so if pride and professionalism isn't enough?
As to conceding a score/not wanting to score yet, the only thing I could think of is a rule that 30 more seconds are run off the clock in a team that has or could take the lead scores with less than 2 minutes left in the game. I don't know if that would be enough but I don't know what else would have the potential to fix this.
An NBA-like Lottery could help the NFL tanking situation. Another thing that could be done, (good luck getting it approved) is to base each team's share of the TV contract on how many games they win. Divide the games won by the games played in the league during the regular season and that's your percent age of the TV money. The billionaires who own the teams wouldn't go broke but they wouldn't like getting the short end of the stick. Seth Goldberg on Orange Nation had another idea: instead of giving out draft picks in reverse order of the standings, alternate the order over a 32 year period. One team gets #1 this year, #2 the next, #3 the next, etc. Steve Infante suggested that wouldn't help competitive balance but Seth countered it would end tanking.
Anybody have any other ideas to 'keep the feet moving' in sports?
Everyone assumed the Jets were tanking to get Trevor Lawrence and then the "blew it" by winning a couple of games. Will the Jags get Lawrence because they did a better job of tanking. People are now claiming that the Eagles tanked against the Redskins to get the #6 pick instead of #9 at the expense of the Giants, who were watching on TV, hoping they would win so the Giants could get into the playoffs. I have no sympathy for the Giants, a 6-10 hoping a division rival will put them in the playoffs. But it is a problem for the league and the game's image.
Do fans have a right to expect that players and teams will give their best effort for 60 minutes of every game? If they do, what can be done to give them an incentive to do so if pride and professionalism isn't enough?
As to conceding a score/not wanting to score yet, the only thing I could think of is a rule that 30 more seconds are run off the clock in a team that has or could take the lead scores with less than 2 minutes left in the game. I don't know if that would be enough but I don't know what else would have the potential to fix this.
An NBA-like Lottery could help the NFL tanking situation. Another thing that could be done, (good luck getting it approved) is to base each team's share of the TV contract on how many games they win. Divide the games won by the games played in the league during the regular season and that's your percent age of the TV money. The billionaires who own the teams wouldn't go broke but they wouldn't like getting the short end of the stick. Seth Goldberg on Orange Nation had another idea: instead of giving out draft picks in reverse order of the standings, alternate the order over a 32 year period. One team gets #1 this year, #2 the next, #3 the next, etc. Steve Infante suggested that wouldn't help competitive balance but Seth countered it would end tanking.
Anybody have any other ideas to 'keep the feet moving' in sports?
