gohusk
Well-Known Member
KC's D isn't good, period. They beat teams because they rack up the points. Give the Pats 3-4 chances to get 10 yards when they absolutely have to, and they usually will, especially vs KC. And why does New England's D get off the hook? They were getting absolutely torched. They were damn lucky they didn't have to play defense first.
The rules are not "fine" if Pat Mahomes is sitting on the sidelines in a playoff game because his offense isn't allowed to take the field. That's the opposite of fine, a blemish for the NFL, and an indicator that the system is need of a tuneup. (and why everyone is talking about it) I'm struggling to think of any major sport with an OT like this, and there's probably a reason for that: It's not good. Nobody has made a good argument for not letting each team play O and D, at least once. How bout letting both sides of the ball determine the winner in OT?
I didn't realize that this was some death match between QB's. Defense used to win championships, right? If you can't keep the opposing team out of the end zone when you need to after a kick off then you have no reason to bitch.