🏈 2021 NFL Week 18 Thread - More like WEAK 18!

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

I just hope we can all appreciate that moment. We likely will never see such a weird scenario again. As someone who loves studying strategy, that was incredibly fascinating to watch.

[EZ: Brainy Bae]

I don't know how I am alive, but I am

Raaaaaaaaiiiiideeeeeers

[EZ: Brainy Bae]

Jan 10, 2022 0:42:50 GMT -5 BRV said:

Jan 10, 2022 0:34:14 GMT -5 Mecca said:

Chiefs open at -14, that's one of the biggest playoff spreads I've seen.

Unless I’m mistaken, that’s the biggest playoff point spread since the Patriots opened as 16-point favorites over the Texans in the 2016 AFC Divisional Round.

And for what it’s worth, the largest point spread in NFL playoff history was Super Bowl XXIX, when the 49ers opened as 19-point favorites over the Chargers.

As much as I hate the Steelers, I can't lie and say that I wouldn't be amused if they beat the Chiefs as massive underdogs with a herculean defense and a QB who can't throw the ball .... yes, their own Tebow moment

[Allie Kitsune]

Jan 10, 2022 0:50:48 GMT -5 "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik said:

I just hope we can all appreciate that moment. We likely will never see such a weird scenario again. As someone who loves studying strategy, that was incredibly fascinating to watch.

Apparently there was an even weirder scenario involving the Washington [REDACTED] a long time ago, where a loss would put them in, but a win would lock them out...

[Alice Syndrome]

Jan 10, 2022 1:02:40 GMT -5 EZ: Brainy Bae said:

Jan 10, 2022 0:42:50 GMT -5 BRV said:

Unless I’m mistaken, that’s the biggest playoff point spread since the Patriots opened as 16-point favorites over the Texans in the 2016 AFC Divisional Round.

And for what it’s worth, the largest point spread in NFL playoff history was Super Bowl XXIX, when the 49ers opened as 19-point favorites over the Chargers.

As much as I hate the Steelers, I can't lie and say that I wouldn't be amused if they beat the Chiefs as massive underdogs with a herculean defense and a QB who can't throw the ball .... yes, their own Tebow moment

I mean, we almost had that last year with the Browns after 5hey already pulled the funniest upset ever the week before

[stoptheclocks]

Jan 10, 2022 0:21:13 GMT -5 häšhtå.gdālėÿ said:

Jan 10, 2022 0:19:40 GMT -5 Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] said:

The Raiders choosing a sexual assaulter over a sportsmanship tie is any good reason as any to see them get pounded and lose by 50 to the Bengals.

Maybe the Chargers shouldn’t have taken that time-out in some last-ditch attempt to sneak a win in the last 30 seconds.

They didn't though, did they? Otherwise they'd have taken the timeout with 40s on the play clock rather than four.

Simple answer is the right one here. The Raiders were about to run the ball in the hope of getting in better field goal range. The Chargers called timeout to get the defense they wanted, knowing that with 38s left, it wouldn't make any difference.

And it didn't. The Raiders still ran the ball, happened to break a 15 yard run and kicked for the win.

That the Chargers couldn't stop an obvious run is what got them beat. The overreaction to the timeout doesn't make any sense - if the Raiders were settling for a tie they would've been kneeling on first down.

[Ben Wyatt]

Jan 10, 2022 0:28:11 GMT -5 Lupin the Third said:

Jan 10, 2022 0:17:59 GMT -5 sfvega said:

Idk, I feel like the league would have a lot of questions to answer if two teams basically worked together to end a game in a tie.

"Why do you care about taunting, saying it's bad for kids, when you allow alcoholic sponsors and women beaters in the league?"

Why do you penalize individuals for taunting but allow TD/Int celebrations with team photos and 3 min dance routines? Like, how is that *not* worse?

[häšhtå.gdālėÿ]

Jan 10, 2022 4:54:56 GMT -5 stoptheclocks said:

Jan 10, 2022 0:21:13 GMT -5 häšhtå.gdālėÿ said:

Maybe the Chargers shouldn’t have taken that time-out in some last-ditch attempt to sneak a win in the last 30 seconds.

They didn't though, did they? Otherwise they'd have taken the timeout with 40s on the play clock rather than four.

Simple answer is the right one here. The Raiders were about to run the ball in the hope of getting in better field goal range. The Chargers called timeout to get the defense they wanted, knowing that with 38s left, it wouldn't make any difference.

And it didn't. The Raiders still ran the ball, happened to break a 15 yard run and kicked for the win.

That the Chargers couldn't stop an obvious run is what got them beat. The overreaction to the timeout doesn't make any sense - if the Raiders were settling for a tie they would've been kneeling on first down.

It’s how the Raiders took it. They were content to simply fall forward for the tie. They weren’t showing anything on their previous runs, the Chargers stopped the clock which showed them they wanted the ball back, BOOM. Raiders decide to play for reals and it cost them. Should cost coach Galaxy Brain his job wkth all his other 4th down weirdness.

[häšhtå.gdālėÿ]

Lol Rams

[stoptheclocks]

Jan 10, 2022 9:26:27 GMT -5 häšhtå.gdālėÿ said:

Jan 10, 2022 4:54:56 GMT -5 stoptheclocks said:

They didn't though, did they? Otherwise they'd have taken the timeout with 40s on the play clock rather than four.

Simple answer is the right one here. The Raiders were about to run the ball in the hope of getting in better field goal range. The Chargers called timeout to get the defense they wanted, knowing that with 38s left, it wouldn't make any difference.

And it didn't. The Raiders still ran the ball, happened to break a 15 yard run and kicked for the win.

That the Chargers couldn't stop an obvious run is what got them beat. The overreaction to the timeout doesn't make any sense - if the Raiders were settling for a tie they would've been kneeling on first down.

It’s how the Raiders took it. They were content to simply fall forward for the tie. They weren’t showing anything on their previous runs, the Chargers stopped the clock which showed them they wanted the ball back, BOOM. Raiders decide to play for reals and it cost them. Should cost coach Galaxy Brain his job wkth all his other 4th down weirdness.

Nothing the Chargers did suggested they were trying to save time to get the ball back (calling it with next to no time on the play clock and under 40s).

The Raiders passed the ball three times on that final drive, and the run immediately prior to the timeout went for 7 yards. That's not falling forward or playing out a tie my dude.

[Sicho100]

Jan 10, 2022 10:23:56 GMT -5 stoptheclocks said:

Jan 10, 2022 9:26:27 GMT -5 häšhtå.gdālėÿ said:

It’s how the Raiders took it. They were content to simply fall forward for the tie. They weren’t showing anything on their previous runs, the Chargers stopped the clock which showed them they wanted the ball back, BOOM. Raiders decide to play for reals and it cost them. Should cost coach Galaxy Brain his job wkth all his other 4th down weirdness.

Nothing the Chargers did suggested they were trying to save time to get the ball back (calling it with next to no time on the play clock and under 40s).

The Raiders passed the ball three times on that final drive, and the run immediately prior to the timeout went for 7 yards. That's not falling forward or playing out a tie my dude.

And the Raiders were in the shotgun when Staley called the time out. The Raiders at least were showing a potential down field shot when Staley called time.

[Heart of fools gold]

Let's take a moment to discuss the differences between a tie, a win and a lose for the Raiders. They tie both teams in but Vegas has to go to KC while Chargers would get the Bengals. Raiders lose they play no one and if they win Steelers get the defending AFC Champs while Vegas goes to Cincinnati. So I'll say this it's not the Raiders job to ensure their division rival gets a higher seed and a "lesser" opponent. That Chargers loss is on LA the Raiders didn't screw LA out of anything the Raiders went out got the W and ensured they would have the best seeding they could obtain. If the Raiders were seriously content with a tie neither team would have tried to score in OT plain and simple

[Spider2024]

Jan 10, 2022 11:12:28 GMT -5 Heart of fools gold said:

Let's take a moment to discuss the differences between a tie, a win and a lose for the Raiders. They tie both teams in but Vegas has to go to KC while Chargers would get the Bengals. Raiders lose they play no one and if they win Steelers get the defending AFC Champs while Vegas goes to Cincinnati. So I'll say this it's not the Raiders job to ensure their division rival gets a higher seed and a "lesser" opponent. That Chargers loss is on LA the Raiders didn't screw LA out of anything the Raiders went out got the W and ensured they would have the best seeding they could obtain. If the Raiders were seriously content with a tie neither team would have tried to score in OT plain and simple

That whole division has a rich history of all 4 of the teams hating their divisional rivals. It's up there with NFC East and NFC North, for real. I'm sure Al Davis was smiling up there seeing his Raiders stick it to another team in the division.