Firstly, the Manning lead comeback to tie was magnificent to witness and funbelievable!... Although not perfect with the interception just beforehand, he's still pretty amazing when the chips are down, and you can always rely on him to show why he's considered one of the best QB's in the game.

 

Secondly, I didn't have a dog in this fight and had internal debates about who I wanted to win as I support Manning's heroics, but also wanted the Bengals to end week 3 as the only undefeated team in the AFC, which of course they now are.

 

Lastly, The OT period seemed quite anticlimactic, and sorely missing was The Broncos having an opportunity to answer. Sure we can say the Broncos "D" didn't do their job, but we didn't even get the chance to see if the Seahawk's "D" would've done any better. The announcers made a comment that I agree with is that late in the game when all are exhausted, it tends to benefit the Offense. With that in mind we saw the Seahawks Offense roll fairly unchallenged.

 

Sure, it's splitting hairs a bit to say what way an OT should be handled by the NFL, but with all the possible choices, this one seems to be the least sensible. Of all the ways that I've seen I can't say with certainty which one I like best, but I can certainly say that the one they're presently going with is my least favorite.

And the Seahawks had just given one up rather easily at the end of regulation. Instead of rewarding the Broncos for that, they were punished by the fates.

 

Any argument in favor of deciding games by a coin flip is foolishness.

Regular season OT in general is foolishness, but I'll let that just sit out there for now.

Agree 100%

Call me foolish, I don't believe the coin flip decided the out come. Both teams had 60 minutes to decide it and the Broncos had an opportunity to stop them. I really have no preference for any way they do OT because you had 60 minutes to decided it, but if i had to decide one it would be play a full extra quarter and let the chips fall where they may.

Call me foolish, I don't believe the coin flip decided the out come. Both teams had 60 minutes to decide it and the Broncos had an opportunity to stop them. I really have no preference for any way they do OT because you had 60 minutes to decided it, but if i had to decide one it would be play a full extra quarter and let the chips fall where they may.

 

My favorite OT solution.

Call me foolish, I don't believe the coin flip decided the out come. Both teams had 60 minutes to decide it and the Broncos had an opportunity to stop them. I really have no preference for any way they do OT because you had 60 minutes to decided it, but if i had to decide one it would be play a full extra quarter and let the chips fall where they may.

OK, you're foolish.:walk:

 

 

The contest ended tied. Can't argue that the coin flip was crucial. I agree wholly that they should change it to a full quarter.

I tuned in off-and-on for the game in the first half. I sat down to watch in earnest in the 3rd quarter. First Bronco drive they were moving and getting a rythm, then on 3rd down, on a crossing pattern, the Seahawk defensive back tackled Welker before he had a chance to catch the pass. Next offensive series on 3rd down and short the Seahawk defensive lineman was practically in the Bronco backfield when the ball was snapped. There was a flag thrown, but the ref. was overruled and no penalty call. Then when Seattle had the ball on maybe their next possession I saw two blatant holding calls on successive plays. I decided to not waste any more time on "professional" sports and now the inside of my truck is nice and clean.

And the Seahawks had just given one up rather easily at the end of regulation. Instead of rewarding the Broncos for that, they were punished by the fates.

 

Any argument in favor of deciding games by a coin flip is foolishness.

 

Regular season OT in general is foolishness, but I'll let that just sit out there for now.

And claiming an NFL that goes to OT is decided by a coin flip is foolishness.

 

Denver had 14 offense possessions and could only muster 20 points. They punted 8 times and turned it over twice. But because they manage to get a TD in their final possession they somehow deserve better than the NFL OT rules allow? How about score at min a FG in one the 10 possessions they squandered and it doesn't go to OT.

 

Like they say in boxing/MMA, don't leave in the judges hands.

And claiming an NFL that goes to OT is decided by a coin flip is foolishness.

 

Denver had 14 offense possessions and could only muster 20 points. They punted 8 times and turned it over twice. But because they manage to get a TD in their final possession they somehow deserve better than the NFL OT rules allow? How about score at min a FG in one the 10 possessions they squandered and it doesn't go to OT.

 

Like they say in boxing/MMA, don't leave in the judges hands.

 

Well to a certain extent, you're barking up the wrong tree because I think all regular-season overtime is pointless.

 

BUT... if we're going to do it, then shouldn't it observe (to the greatest degree possible) some measure of fairness? Denver snatched that game back in impressive fashion. Then Denver was not given the opportunity to do it again... by rule. That seems completely insane to me.

 

And as I say in boxing/MMA... is anything else on? This is unwatchable.

OK, you're foolish.:walk:

 

 

The contest ended tied. Can't argue that the coin flip was crucial. I agree wholly that they should change it to a full quarter.

 

You now join my wife and kids that think that. The grandkids love I'm foolish. They are the only one's that get it anyway.

And claiming an NFL that goes to OT is decided by a coin flip is foolishness.

 

Denver had 14 offense possessions and could only muster 20 points. They punted 8 times and turned it over twice. But because they manage to get a TD in their final possession they somehow deserve better than the NFL OT rules allow? How about score at min a FG in one the 10 possessions they squandered and it doesn't go to OT.

 

Like they say in boxing/MMA, don't leave in the judges hands.

How is it in the judges hands when the contest ended in a tie?

How is it in the judges hands when the contest ended in a tie?

 

Because you know going in that if it is tied at the end of regulation you will go to the goofy OT rules the NFL has.

Well to a certain extent, you're barking up the wrong tree because I think all regular-season overtime is pointless.

 

BUT... if we're going to do it, then shouldn't it observe (to the greatest degree possible) some measure of fairness? Denver snatched that game back in impressive fashion. Then Denver was not given the opportunity to do it again... by rule. That seems completely insane to me.

 

And as I say in boxing/MMA... is anything else on? This is unwatchable.

 

I agree that the game should just end in a tie during the regular season.

 

That said, what did Denver do to deserve another opportunity to do it again? They were given 14 opportunities to do it in regulation.

Because you know going in that if it is tied at the end of regulation you will go to the goofy OT rules the NFL has.

That's understood, but I think getslow's point is that the OT rules (still) allow for a coin flip to aid in the outcome.

 

IMO, the NFL obviously acknowledged a problem with the fairness of the OT in the first place when it changed the format recently. I think it needs more. Still not totally equal opportunity, which a game that was that awesome deserved.

I agree that the game should just end in a tie during the regular season.

 

That said, what did Denver do to deserve another opportunity to do it again? They were given 14 opportunities to do it in regulation.

So, it was fair to give Seattle an extra opportunity? I don't follow the logic. I'd have said the same thing had Seattle lost the toss.

The thought of games ending in ties is WAYYYY worse than overtime. And it isn't close.