bilbobag said:

---

No offense but the Patriots were 6 best offense in the league. Saints best. Pitt better than pats

---

No offense but I'm using final 2017 DVOA ranks.

I agree whole heartedly with this

corleoneAg99 said:

---

bilbobag said:

---

No offense but the Patriots were 6 best offense in the league. Saints best. Pitt better than pats

---

No offense but I'm using final 2017 DVOA ranks.

---

You realize you are arguing stats with a guy who works for an NFL team and who does this for a living right?

mathguy86 said:

---

corleoneAg99 said:

---

bilbobag said:

---

No offense but the Patriots were 6 best offense in the league. Saints best. Pitt better than pats

---

No offense but I'm using final 2017 DVOA ranks.

---

You realize you are arguing stats with a guy who works for an NFL team and who does this for a living right?

---

Yup...and that has no bearing on my point or his I don't think.

The D said:

---

Tom Brady is the best qb of all time, I'm not sure if that's even debatable at this point.

---

As much as it sucks, it's hard to disagree with that statement.

WWC2001 said:

---

YAWN.....another a Pats Super Bowl. Their division sucks, so they will go back next year.

---

this never gets talked about enough (even though I've posted about it for more than a decade)...

NE has a tremendous advantage playing in a mediocre division every year. And the division will be mediocre again next year

Part of the reason the division rarely makes the playoffs is that the Pats typically hand each team 2 losses every season

aggie kid said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

UMichAg said:

---

Granted, the Pats didn't have Gronk for most of the game

---

This is a big deal as far as the NFL is concerned but probably won't be because they ended up winning. A team can essentially take a 15 yarder and eliminate any player they want.

Think they need to either start ejecting for helmet to helmet hits or make it that offending players are out as long as those they hit.

---

That one guy on the Bills agrees.

---

So Gronk would have missed a quarter instead of four. Got it.

I am sure the nfl would still have the right to suspend.
Basically, add punishment to the existing rule

Forum Troll said:

---

Wait, people actually wanted to see Blake Bortles and the Jags in the Super bowl?

---

Given the other side will likely line up Nick Foles, i'd begrudgingly answer "yes".

Foles, Brady . . . a matchup for the ages.

Forum Troll said:

---

Wait, people actually wanted to see Blake Bortles and the Jags in the Super bowl?

---

I actually did, but because I'm a fan of "The Good Place". They make references about how terrible Jacksonville is, but they would have altered part of the show should they win it all.

Besides I'm sick of seeing the same team there

bilbobag said:

---

I am sure the nfl would still have the right to suspend.
Basically, add punishment to the existing rule

---

No doubt. Just poking at him going back to the Tre'Davious well again, especially since Gronk missed more time than TD under current rules.

CFTXAG10 said:

---

Just remembered, of course James Harrison made some big plays on defense to contribute towards the win

---

He's why I wished it would have been the Steelers playing the Pats....would have been interesting to watch

Ag_07 said:

---

UMichAg said:

---

Granted, the Pats didn't have Gronk for most of the game

---

This is a big deal as far as the NFL is concerned but probably won't be because they ended up winning. A team can essentially take a 15 yarder and eliminate any player they want.

Think they need to either start ejecting for helmet to helmet hits or make it that offending players are out as long as those they hit.

---

If such a rule were in place, a team could just use some guy who sits on the bench to take the penalty.. same result.

Hasn't Gronk said multiple times he'd rather a safety hit him high rather than low?

So apparently Brady's injury is finally being disclosed. He had a bone in his thumb popp out of the joint & tore a hole through the palm of his throwing hand.

Pretty crazy

bilbobag said:

---

So apparently Brady's injury is finally being disclosed. He had a bone in his thumb popp out of the joint & tore a hole through the palm of his throwing hand.

Pretty crazy

---

62strat said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

UMichAg said:

---

Granted, the Pats didn't have Gronk for most of the game

---

This is a big deal as far as the NFL is concerned but probably won't be because they ended up winning. A team can essentially take a 15 yarder and eliminate any player they want.

Think they need to either start ejecting for helmet to helmet hits or make it that offending players are out as long as those they hit.

---

If such a rule were in place, a team could just use some guy who sits on the bench to take the penalty.. same result.

---

Do you really think the opportunities present themselves often enough that you could sub a bench player for one play and get the job done? Doubt it.

Ag_07 said:

---

UMichAg said:

---

Granted, the Pats didn't have Gronk for most of the game

---

This is a big deal as far as the NFL is concerned but probably won't be because they ended up winning. A team can essentially take a 15 yarder and eliminate any player they want.

Think they need to either start ejecting for helmet to helmet hits or make it that offending players are out as long as those they hit.

---

I think ejecting players for helmet to helmet is the worst rule in college football, and now you want to bring it to the NFL?

I would be for it if it could be wisely judged by referees on blatant head hunting penalties, but instead I've seen defenders coming off a block make helmet to helmet contact because the running back lowers his helmet, and the defender gets ejected. I've seen receivers and defenders diving for the same thrown ball and have helmet to helmet contact, and the defensive player get ejected, even though making a play on the ball.

The ejection for helmet to helmet hit is the worst rule in football at any level.

It's a good rule but it needs to be tweaked. If a player drops the level of their head at the last second and helmet-to-helmet was unavoidable as a result, then it should be no penalty.

Football has to take measures to reduce head injuries very rapidly the sport will go away.

Iowaggie said:

---

I think ejecting players for helmet to helmet is the worst rule in college football, and now you want to bring it to the NFL?

...

The ejection for helmet to helmet hit is the worst rule in football at any level.

---

The implementation may be flawed or poorly adjudicated, but the reasoning is sound. Guys are launching themselves at high speed and becoming guided missiles, with the helmets as the warheads. Just look at the number of concussions players and teams are dealing with. From not just the H2H hit but the driving into the grounds actions with skulls bouncing off hard surfaces. If you dont think that is a problem and that it wont change the way football is played I dont know what to tell you

Forum Troll said:

---

Wait, people actually wanted to see Blake Bortles and the Jags in the Super bowl?

---

No, people wanted to see the not-Patriots in the Super Bowl, whoever that might be.

The immediate ejection is a terrible rule. This game is not played in slow motion. At a minimum, it should be a bit like flagrant fouls in the NBA. Keep track both during games and across games, and once a player hits a # (say 2 or 3), then you suspend for one game.

Iowaggie said:

---

I think ejecting players for helmet to helmet is the worst rule in college football, and now you want to bring it to the NFL?

---

Sure do. And maybe you're right that it needs tweaking, but it needs to happen on some level.

A) Evens the playing field as far as concussed players missing time. It's just not fair that even the potential of a concussion costs a player to miss plays while the offending player keeps playing.

B) Will get guys to stop leading with helmet and look at what they're tackling.

And maybe you do auto ejection but it under the umbrella as a challengeable play. If they review it and don't see malicious intent then he stays and you win the challenge.

But for instance that hit on Gronk...That was to me blatant targeting and it needs more than a 15 yarder.

And also did the offending player not go to concussion protocol? If it was helmet to helmet then doesn't he stand just a much of a chance of a concussion as Gronk did? I never heard if the defensive player even missed a play. Maybe that's the key. If it's helmet to helmet both players must go into protocol.

Go back to 1930 soft helmets the problem goes away.

Part of the solution is penalizing players who launch themselves. But part of it needs to be a much more modern helmet design. Bike helmets went through this. They are frangible and turn impact energy into destroying the helmet not the thing inside. Race cars do the same thing. They destroy themselves on impact leaving the racing pod inside intact. Imagine a H2H hit where the helmet literally cracks into pieces from the impact energy rather than the head inside absorbing the impact energy.

mathguy86 said:

---

Part of the solution is penalizing players who launch themselves. But part of it needs to be a much more modern helmet design. Bike helmets went through this. They are frangible and turn impact energy into destroying the helmet not the thing inside. Race cars do the same thing. They destroy themselves on impact leaving the racing pod inside intact. Imagine a H2H hit where the helmet literally cracks into pieces from the impact energy rather than the head inside absorbing the impact energy.

---

Then you wouldn't need penalties. If you're helmet cracks or breaks then you're done.