Jump to content

NFL taking measures to avoid tanking


Gainzo

Recommended Posts

Division games in Weeks 16 & 17 would be cool.

Commissioner Roger Goodell just wrapped his press conference which acts as the official close to the league meetings, and among the things he mentioned is a move to discourage teams from "tanking" end-of-season games.

The league's schedule-maker is working to have every Week 17 game be a division matchup, and as many Week 16 games as possible be intra-divisional as well.

If they're able to pull that off -- particularly in Week 16 -- it would keep divisional leaders honest. Not many division leaders have a two-game cushion after 14 games, so putting emphasis on those final two contests will hopefully force teams to play their starters late in the season, and thus avoid a preseason-type "who made that tackle?" atmosphere for paying fans.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2010/03/nfl_taking_meas.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Division games in Weeks 16 & 17 would be cool.

Commissioner Roger Goodell just wrapped his press conference which acts as the official close to the league meetings, and among the things he mentioned is a move to discourage teams from "tanking" end-of-season games.

The league's schedule-maker is working to have every Week 17 game be a division matchup, and as many Week 16 games as possible be intra-divisional as well.

If they're able to pull that off -- particularly in Week 16 -- it would keep divisional leaders honest. Not many division leaders have a two-game cushion after 14 games, so putting emphasis on those final two contests will hopefully force teams to play their starters late in the season, and thus avoid a preseason-type "who made that tackle?" atmosphere for paying fans.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2010/03/nfl_taking_meas.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to sound paranoid, but in 2004 the Pittsburgh Steelers played their 3rd stringers against the Buffalo Bills who needed the win to have a shot at the playoffs. That the Steelers 3rd stringers won isn't the point.

The question is why wasn't a fuss made about it then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to sound paranoid, but in 2004 the Pittsburgh Steelers played their 3rd stringers against the Buffalo Bills who needed the win to have a shot at the playoffs. That the Steelers 3rd stringers won isn't the point.

The question is why wasn't a fuss made about it then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think it has proved that is does work....even the worst team ever' date=' the Nets, are still trying to win.[/quote']

The lottery system doesn't work in the NBA. Remember when the Spurs got the #1 pick and drafted Tim Duncan? They were the 3rd worst team in the NBA that year and won 6 more games than the Grizzlies and 5 more games than the Celtics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think it has proved that is does work....even the worst team ever' date=' the Nets, are still trying to win.[/quote']

The lottery system doesn't work in the NBA. Remember when the Spurs got the #1 pick and drafted Tim Duncan? They were the 3rd worst team in the NBA that year and won 6 more games than the Grizzlies and 5 more games than the Celtics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lottery system doesn't work in the NBA. Remember when the Spurs got the #1 pick and drafted Tim Duncan? They were the 3rd worst team in the NBA that year and won 6 more games than the Grizzlies and 5 more games than the Celtics.

so you are saying you would rather the Vancouver Grizzlies win 4 titles instead of the Spurs?

canadian :Nuts:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lottery system doesn't work in the NBA. Remember when the Spurs got the #1 pick and drafted Tim Duncan? They were the 3rd worst team in the NBA that year and won 6 more games than the Grizzlies and 5 more games than the Celtics.

so you are saying you would rather the Vancouver Grizzlies win 4 titles instead of the Spurs?

canadian :Nuts:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This actually isn't a bad idea, but its a shame that they have to change the rules when the whole problem is really just one man, Bill Polian.

Yep.

But Polian does play his starters when they can set individual records. See Week 17, 2009 at Buffalo in a snow storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This actually isn't a bad idea, but its a shame that they have to change the rules when the whole problem is really just one man, Bill Polian.

Yep.

But Polian does play his starters when they can set individual records. See Week 17, 2009 at Buffalo in a snow storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's obvious that this is all about the Jets-Colts game, and Baddell being the Anti-Jet he is, was upset at that game and had to do something about it.

That fact is the NFL won't be able to prevent this from happening. Maybe they can limit it to a degree, but probably not a lot.

Lets say the Jets have locked up home field advantage by week 17 next season and the Bills are on their schedule for the last game. The Jets of course would still rest their starters. Lets say they have the Pats* for the last game instead. Maybe the Pats* seeding is already locked, so neither team plays its starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's obvious that this is all about the Jets-Colts game, and Baddell being the Anti-Jet he is, was upset at that game and had to do something about it.

That fact is the NFL won't be able to prevent this from happening. Maybe they can limit it to a degree, but probably not a lot.

Lets say the Jets have locked up home field advantage by week 17 next season and the Bills are on their schedule for the last game. The Jets of course would still rest their starters. Lets say they have the Pats* for the last game instead. Maybe the Pats* seeding is already locked, so neither team plays its starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...