NBA OFF TOPIC THREAD

[Stakesarehigh]

Just saw the video of Davanta Adams, he’s got to get suspended for that.

I'd think so

Plus dude is pressing charges

 

[bksballer89]

I'd think so

Plus dude is pressing charges

Rightfully so. Got to sell it too

 

[shopson67]

He was legitimately sacked in the same method that Tua was slung to the ground (only Brady didn't get his head slammed into the turf). Brady hasn't had that level of protection, this is a new one.

The Brady sack has nothing to do with new or existing concussion protocols. Mixing the arguments is silly.

 

[shopson67]

You may not, but the data the NFL tracks tells them most people want faster games. So that's one of several things they are trying to address to attract the more casual fans.

They know that folks like us on these message boards aren't going anywhere, so they don't cater to us. They cater to the fans who will go find something else to do.

Chasing viewers that don't love the sport is ridiculous IMO. They're ruining the product for people who don't care in the first place.

 

[shopson67]

Basketball is hard because I'd say most if not all the calls are subjective...

Only because they've officiated the sport in that manner for years. Basketball did not start as a contact sport or as a sport of strength. It has morphed into that. They've allowed more and more leeway on traveling over the years as well. Strange that the argument for loose traveling rules (more exciting plays) is the exact opposite result of allowing more physical play.

 

[trojanfan12]

Chasing viewers that don't love the sport is ridiculous IMO. They're ruining the product for people who don't care in the first place.

And yet, every sport does it. They're chasing the money those folks represent.

It's why sports have changed rules to make things easier for offenses.

Casuals don't appreciate a good defensive battle that ends 17-14. They want 45-42 shootouts.

 

[trojanfan12]

The Brady sack has nothing to do with new or existing concussion protocols. Mixing the arguments is silly.

Yes, it does. It's an overreaction/overcorrection to Tua, so was Teddy Bridgewater.

 

[Black Adam]

Yes, it does. It's an overreaction/overcorrection to Tua, so was Teddy Bridgewater.

Yup. Still mad at that call on Chris Jones Monday night. It's getting a tad ridiculous...

 

[shopson67]

As nasty as McCaffery would make them, they don’t need him.

If the Bills are trading away multiple firsts, there are probably other pieces that would help them improve more.

If the cost is multiple firsts, hell no. Seems extravagant for that injury history. That is likely why nothing more has come of this after the initial rumored call.

 

[shopson67]

Yes, it does. It's an overreaction/overcorrection to Tua, so was Teddy Bridgewater.

There have been no rule changes this week for concussion protections.

If it was an overreaction to Tua, Brady would've been benched and in the protocol. The hits on Tua were not illegal to that level. The one in the Bills game was a late push in the chest, a penalty but not rule-changing. The 2nd hit on Tua didn't break any rules and wasn't penalized either (and shouldn't have been). Bridgewater however was an overreaction to Tua (and the new concussion rules). Well, it was an overreaction if no concussion had occurred. He certainly didn't show any obvious symptoms other than maybe moving slowly? He didn't have far to go, given that they were backed up into the end zone.

Brady has been over-protected by the refs for decades.

 

[shopson67]

Yup. Still mad at that call on Chris Jones Monday night. It's getting a tad ridiculous...

They claim they couldn't change the call, but the review was necessary due to the fumble. Identifying that he was falling to the ground as the established new ball carrier should've been enough to void that penalty IMO.

 

[shopson67]

And yet, every sport does it. They're chasing the money those folks represent.

It's why sports have changed rules to make things easier for offenses.

Casuals don't appreciate a good defensive battle that ends 17-14. They want 45-42 shootouts.

Of course, but I don't think it's worth the effort to chase the casuals. It's the same line of thinking that annual profits aren't enough unless they are improvements on the profits the period prior. Greed is pushing these changes.

 

[trojanfan12]

Of course, but I don't think it's worth the effort to chase the casuals. It's the same line of thinking that annual profits aren't enough unless they are improvements on the profits the period prior. Greed is pushing these changes.

It's absolutely worth it.

If it wasn't, they wouldn't bother.

I guess you can say it's greed driving the changes. But these leagues and teams are businesses and are trying to make as much as they can. They do that by trying to make their games appealing to as many people as they can.

Folks like us may complain about the rule changes, etc. But we're not going anywhere. The leagues know this.

 

[trojanfan12]

There have been no rule changes this week for concussion protections.

If it was an overreaction to Tua, Brady would've been benched and in the protocol. The hits on Tua were not illegal to that level. The one in the Bills game was a late push in the chest, a penalty but not rule-changing. The 2nd hit on Tua didn't break any rules and wasn't penalized either (and shouldn't have been). Bridgewater however was an overreaction to Tua (and the new concussion rules). Well, it was an overreaction if no concussion had occurred. He certainly didn't show any obvious symptoms other than maybe moving slowly? He didn't have far to go, given that they were backed up into the end zone.

Brady has been over-protected by the refs for decades.

Brady was still an overreaction to Tua because the refs feel the pressure of not having another Tua situation. There wasn't anything to take him out of the game over, but they could send a message to both teams re: hits on the QB.

As for Bridgewater, it was the result of a "stumble" that a "spotter" thought they saw, but no one can seem to find on tape. Bridgewater passed all of the tests, yet couldn't return to the game because someone whose job was suddenly in the spotlight thought he saw something and there was no doctor or passed test that could get him back in the game.

All over what basically amounts to a coincidence.

 

[Heatles84]

The Brady sack has nothing to do with new or existing concussion protocols. Mixing the arguments is silly.

When has Brady got the benefit of a roughing the passer call like he did against Atlanta? He's gotten some beneficial calls in the past, never like that before. And it comes just after the Tua situation.

 

[Heatles84]

Chasing viewers that don't love the sport is ridiculous IMO. They're ruining the product for people who don't care in the first place.

It's a pure business strategy. The more viewers you bring in, the more lucrative the TV contracts. The challenge is finding the perfect balance to maintain your current base while bringing on new viewers. So no, this isn't exactly ridiculous.

 

[shopson67]

When has Brady got the benefit of a roughing the passer call like he did against Atlanta? He's gotten some beneficial calls in the past, never like that before. And it comes just after the Tua situation.

Brady and the QB elite always draw more roughing penalties than the rest of the league. Might as well put orange pinneys on them.

 

[Heatles84]

And yet, every sport does it. They're chasing the money those folks represent.

It's why sports have changed rules to make things easier for offenses.

Casuals don't appreciate a good defensive battle that ends 17-14. They want 45-42 shootouts.

Calling a multi-billion dollar business for trying to scale ridiculous. I've heard it all now.

 

[Heatles84]

Brady and the QB elite always draw more roughing penalties than the rest of the league. Might as well put orange pinneys on them.

When has that happened on a text book sack? Brady wasn't hit above the shoulders, the defender didn't lean in with his helmet, and he wasn't hit at the knees. The defender literally wrapped him at the hip and used his momentum to bring Brady to the ground. This is literally a text book tackle.

Again, when has that been called?

 

[shopson67]

It's a pure business strategy. The more viewers you bring in, the more lucrative the TV contracts. The challenge is finding the perfect balance to maintain your current base while bringing on new viewers. So no, this isn't exactly ridiculous.

Who isn't watching pro football because the games are too long? They have an established time slot. If they're turning off games, it's because the matchup is shit. The NFL can charge networks anything they want already. Look at the suckers Amazon, paying for crap Thursday games like Washington/Chicago.