NFL 2024 NFL - Week 17

[balmainforever]

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 26 @ 5:00 AM
Kansas City at Pittsburgh LIVE

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 26 @ 8:30 AM
Baltimore at Houston LIVE

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 27 @ 12:15 PM
Seattle at Chicago LIVE

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 29 @ 5:00 AM
Los Angeles Chargers at New England

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 29 @ 8:30 AM
Denver at Cincinnati LIVE

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 29 @ 12:00 PM
Arizona at Los Angeles Rams LIVE

MONDAY, DECEMBER 30 @ 5:00 AM
Carolina at Tampa Bay LIVE
Dallas at Philadelphia LIVE
Indianapolis at New York Giants
Las Vegas at New Orleans
New York Jets at Buffalo LIVE
Tennessee at Jacksonville

MONDAY, DECEMBER 23 @ 8:05 AM
Miami at Cleveland LIVE

MONDAY, DECEMBER 23 @ 8:25 AM
Green Bay at Minnesota LIVE

MONDAY, DECEMBER 23 @ 12:20 PM
Atlanta at Washington LIVE

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 24 @ 12:15 PM
Detroit at San Francisco LIVE

AUSTRALIAN T.V. GAMES
LIVE ON NETFLIX AT 5.00 AM ON 26/12: Kansas City at Pittsburgh
LIVE ON NETFLIX AT 8.30 AM ON 26/12: Baltimore at Houston
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 12:15 PM ON 27/12: Seattle at Chicago
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 8.30 AM ON 29/12: Denver at Cincinnati
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 12.00 PM ON 29/12: Arizona at Los Angeles Rams
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 5.00 AM ON 30/12: Dallas at Philadelphia
LIVE ON ESPN2/KAYO AT 5.00 AM ON 30/12: New York Jets at Buffalo
LIVE ON 7MATE AT 5.00 AM ON 30/12: Carolina at Tampa Bay
LIVE ON 7MATE AT 8.05 AM ON 30/12: Miami at Cleveland
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 8.25 AM ON 30/12: Green Bay at Minnesota
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 12.20 PM ON 30/12: Atlanta at Washington
LIVE ON ESPN/KAYO AT 12.15 PM ON 31/12: Detroit at San Francisco

LIVE ON watchESPN AT 5:00 AM on 30/12: NFL RedZone

All Games live on TAB app

NB: VIC, NSW, TAS times
less 30 mins SA
less 1 hour QLD
less 1.5 hours NT
less 3 hours WA

 

[hutchy31]

The rules are geared towards offense these days, it is simply ridiculous to have a game come down to a coin flip - if it were fair/even chance for the D to win by making a stop then teams would elect to defer the ball in OT after winning the coin toss at least some of the time. That never happens, for obvious reasons.

Good point - nobody ever defers if they win the toss, showing how egregious the imbalance is.

If both teams get to possess it, then you defer (in what 49ers fans will forever call the Shanahan cluster **** rule after this year’s SB).

 

[BeinPurplenGreen]

Tough on Brown getting ejected after being assaulted two-on-one.

And the cowardly offsetting personal fouls don't really discourage anyone from fighting.

Line judge nearly copped a broken leg from the rolling around players...

 

[GreyCrow]

I only care about OT when my side loses

 

[AmericanCrow]

One spanking of the hapless Browns is definitely needed.

I hope you enjoy trading the first pick for some other equally as useless magic beans.

Business as usual for analytical boys

 

[AmericanCrow]

But that should apply to both sides. Winning a game off a coin toss is BS.

Stop the other team

 

[AmericanCrow]

There is absolutely no truth to rumor spread by A11dAtP0w3R and Exe Gesis that this is me that called in yesterday…

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

There is absolutely no truth to rumor spread by A11dAtP0w3R and Exe Gesis that this is me that called in yesterday…

Fans like this complain yet they still pay to go to games. Time for the morons in the Browns fanbase to wake up and stop attending.

Gruden singing from my hymn book, DTR is the worst, **** Stefanski for benching Winston right before fantasy playoffs.

Sanders ending up in Cleveland just feels right. Hopefully my boys Berry and DePo do the right thing.

 

[bangbang]

I get what you’re saying about about ‘fair’ but professional sport isn’t always fair. It will be fair when every single play can be reviewed and penalties/outcomes can be taken away and added to each play and we’ll take away all human element like officiating (I know that’s a totally different rabbit hole)

But the team isn’t winning on the coin toss. There winning when they get the ball and score a touchdown. There is another team out there to do there job and stop them. Of course each team gets the ball at each half cause there are two halves, it’s a pretty reasonable solution.

So question, if each team gets 2 possessions guaranteed. Would you say the first team is at a disadvantage not knowing they will have 4 downs the whole length of the field compared to the first side that is playing the game ‘normally’. Would it be outrage if the first team scored a TD, then the 2nd team went on a 14 play drive with 4th downs every single set of downs and scored and ending up winning ? Yeah the side who gets ball first has that chance to go on all 4th downs but we know that isn’t going to happen.

Like I said, it’s been a whole game and both sides have probably made mistakes, left points on the field somewhere and after 60minutes going to complain they didn’t win cause they didn’t get the ball is how ‘losers’ talk. I obviously agree who gets the ball is at an advantage but it’s sport, and sometimes luck is a huge part of it and good teams make their own luck. And i personally think the drama of sudden death who scores first is great, nail biting but great.

The meet in the middle with the other team getting the ball after a field goal is a good balance out

 

[rumply]

The meet in the middle with the other team getting the ball after a field goal is a good balance out

No, it really isn't.

What is a good balance out is both teams having the same opportunity to score in what is essentially a new game.

Remember, both teams couldn't beat each other for 4 quarters but now we are saying, you got lucky and won the toss so score a TD and we can all go home.

That team secures a huge advantage based off a coin toss. It's unfair at its core.

 

[Exe Gesis]

There is absolutely no truth to rumor spread by A11dAtP0w3R and Exe Gesis that this is me that called in yesterday…

1) ditto what ADP said...fans do have a degree of power to force change. Irate customers, boycotts, or en masse protestations across social media, the media, etc, are needed, otherwise the fans are living a form of Stockholm Syndrome here. I think some Browns fan(s) with a strong voice in the media need to step up first most as that can put pressure on Haslam. Like what McAfee is doing with the Colts. I mean, you seldom hear Haslam being heavily criticized in the football media like other NFL owners are. That needs to change.

2) It's not one guy in a random Aust Football message board who sees the truth and the level of decrepitness. It's a perception seen by all of Cleveland and across the nation. Not saying there's comfort in that, but hearing the exact same diatribe from various random Browns fans shows it's all true. It's not a difference of opinion of the few versus a majority of shills.

 

[rumply]

 

[Exe Gesis]

Regarding OT....my initial feeling is a penalty shootout like soccer but with 2 point tries could be a solution.....but I also think in-season ties should not be broken with an OT....let there be ties, like they used to frequently happen, nothing wrong with that....you only gotta break them in the playoffs.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I get what you’re saying about about ‘fair’ but professional sport isn’t always fair. It will be fair when every single play can be reviewed and penalties/outcomes can be taken away and added to each play and we’ll take away all human element like officiating (I know that’s a totally different rabbit hole)

But the team isn’t winning on the coin toss. There winning when they get the ball and score a touchdown. There is another team out there to do there job and stop them. Of course each team gets the ball at each half cause there are two halves, it’s a pretty reasonable solution.

So question, if each team gets 2 possessions guaranteed. Would you say the first team is at a disadvantage not knowing they will have 4 downs the whole length of the field compared to the first side that is playing the game ‘normally’. Would it be outrage if the first team scored a TD, then the 2nd team went on a 14 play drive with 4th downs every single set of downs and scored and ending up winning ? Yeah the side who gets ball first has that chance to go on all 4th downs but we know that isn’t going to happen.

Like I said, it’s been a whole game and both sides have probably made mistakes, left points on the field somewhere and after 60minutes going to complain they didn’t win cause they didn’t get the ball is how ‘losers’ talk. I obviously agree who gets the ball is at an advantage but it’s sport, and sometimes luck is a huge part of it and good teams make their own luck. And i personally think the drama of sudden death who scores first is great, nail biting but great.

The meet in the middle with the other team getting the ball after a field goal is a good balance out

It's about fairness of opportunity, as long as both sides have the same opportunity to win it is fair regardless of how that plays out. Currently they don't.

 

[drd23]

 

[rumply]

Regarding OT....my initial feeling is a penalty shootout like soccer but with 2 point tries could be a solution.....but I also think in-season ties should not be broken with an OT....let there be ties, like they used to frequently happen, nothing wrong with that....you only gotta break them in the playoffs.

Yeah I'd be ok with ties too.

 

[bangbang]

No, it really isn't.

What is a good balance out is both teams having the same opportunity to score in what is essentially a new game.

Remember, both teams couldn't beat each other for 4 quarters but now we are saying, you got lucky and won the toss so score a TD and we can all go home.

That team secures a huge advantage based off a coin toss. It's unfair at its core.

What’s the point of a defense if by what it sounds like it’s a given the offense scores a touchdown?

Or maybe we can turn a traditional classic game into a gimmick and go 2 point conversions until someone fails. At some point, stop changing a game because people get offended when they lose.

Maybe off topic, well not really but let’s say in regulation, should we now start counting possessions so we make sure each team has the same amount of possessions in the 60minutes, so the team who possess’s the ball last hasn’t had one more and win by 1 score? Same theory by not having the same amount of chances with the ball just a bigger timeframe

 

[rumply]

What’s the point of a defense if by what it sounds like it’s a given the offense scores a touchdown?

Or maybe we can turn a traditional classic game into a gimmick and go 2 point conversions until someone fails. At some point, stop changing a game because people get offended when they lose.

Maybe off topic, well not really but let’s say in regulation, should we now start counting possessions so we make sure each team has the same amount of possessions in the 60minutes, so the team who possess’s the ball last hasn’t had one more and win by 1 score? Same theory by not having the same amount of chances with the ball just a bigger

Regulation is finished, scores are tied. Both teams possessed the ball to start a half. All fair and square (can't believe I used those words in an NFL setting).

Overtime begins, let's make up some inane rules to get us out of here as quick as possible...

 

[bangbang]

Regulation is finished, scores are tied. Both teams possessed the ball to start a half. All fair and square (can't believe I used those words in an NFL setting).

Overtime begins, let's make up some inane rules to get us out of here as quick as possible...

But how is it fair if one team has 8 possessions and one 9 over the 4 quarters. It’s just a bigger sample size compared to overtime ?

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

What’s the point of a defense if by what it sounds like it’s a given the offense scores a touchdown?

Or maybe we can turn a traditional classic game into a gimmick and go 2 point conversions until someone fails. At some point, stop changing a game because people get offended when they lose.

Maybe off topic, well not really but let’s say in regulation, should we now start counting possessions so we make sure each team has the same amount of possessions in the 60minutes, so the team who possess’s the ball last hasn’t had one more and win by 1 score? Same theory by not having the same amount of chances with the ball just a bigger timeframe

Bottom line is in the playoffs rule changes and both times get at least one possession regardless if first team scores a TD. So to put this in place for playoffs the league knows it’s fundamentally unfair in regular season. It really is stupid they have different rule for regular season.

IMO if a team isn’t good enough to win in regulation time should revive had a win each bit of course that’ll never happen in America. It’s why I can’t understand AFL supporters whingeing about draws in home and away. You’re not good enough to win you get teo points

 

[rumply]

But how is it fair if one team has 8 possessions and one 9 over the 4 quarters. It’s just a bigger sample size compared to overtime ?

Yeah you are off on a tangent now so this is my last post on the subject.

Overtime has nothing to do with the previous 60 minutes of play other than scores were tied. As I posted above, I'd be happy with ties but if the NFL wants OT then make it fair and fair (to me) means both teams having the same opportunity to possess the ball to start a drive. That's it, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[bangbang]

Bottom line is in the playoffs rule changes and both times get at least one possession regardless if first team scores a TD. So to put this in place for playoffs the league knows it’s fundamentally unfair in regular season. It really is stupid they have different rule for regular season.

IMO if a team isn’t good enough to win in regulation time should revive had a win each bit of course that’ll never happen in America. It’s why I can’t understand AFL supporters whingeing about draws in home and away. You’re not good enough to win you get teo points

Totally agree post season and regular season rules should be the same

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Imagine if you were playing for the title in fantasy this week and that Higgins TD cost you the title, you'd be filthy.

Wake up NFL! OT ruins fantasy and everyone knows thats all that matters!

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Dont let the Panthers get away with it either, moving on from him and Baker. Both looking pretty good now.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

View attachment 2195686

"InSaNe" Brasher

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Discussion in media whether Eagles play Barkley this week to try for 101 yds to break Dickerson's record. Like Barkley's comment...

Wouldn't risk it at all.

Barkley made clear after Sunday’s win that while going for the record would be cool, his eyes, and the eyes of the team, were on a much bigger prize.

“I’m not overtly trying to get it,” Barkley told reporters. “I’m not scared of it. I would love to, but we’ve got bigger things we’re focused on. Whether we play next week or rest, I’m fine with that. I didn’t sign here just to rush for 2,000 or break a record. I want to do something special with the team.”