NFL (2024 Season)

[cwf1701]

On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.

I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?

This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions

Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.

I think a better idea would have a draft lottery. My version would have all the teams who finish last in their division to be eligible. The only drawback can be a team that finishes last with a 9-8 record would have a shot of getting the number one pick.

[ethanhopkin14]

On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.

I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?

This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions

Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.

I think a better idea would have a draft lottery. My version would have all the teams who finish last in their division to be eligible. The only drawback can be a team that finishes last with a 9-8 record would have a shot of getting the number one pick.

Well do it so that the team with the worse record gets more "lottery balls."  So a rotisserie of ping-pong balls, the lowest record teams get three, the higher record teams get two.  So still it's still left up to chance, but the teams that have a lower record have a better chance. 

[webny99]

The teams who picked first and second in 2012 might think there was some difference, at least in retrospect anyway.

Maybe 1998 also.

Well, maybe it was the team more than the player. But the fact that we need to look back 9 years...then 30+ years, shows that the difference may not truly matter all that much.

The chances of getting a great pick down low, like Tom Brady, is more likely to happen than getting a star at number 1.

It does depend on the season. The average value of a #1 pick vs. a #2 pick may not be all that different, but if there's a generational prospect/QB you believe can change your franchise, the difference in that particular year is immeasurable. 2020 may be a better example in this regard... Chase Young was by all accounts a solid #2 pick and there's still no comparison to what Joe Burrow has done for the Bengals franchise.

[Big John]

On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.

I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?

This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions

Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.

I think a better idea would have a draft lottery. My version would have all the teams who finish last in their division to be eligible. The only drawback can be a team that finishes last with a 9-8 record would have a shot of getting the number one pick.

Well do it so that the team with the worse record gets more "lottery balls."  So a rotisserie of ping-pong balls, the lowest record teams get three, the higher record teams get two.  So still it's still left up to chance, but the teams that have a lower record have a better chance. 

You mean like the NBA draft lottery?

[Alps]

On the subject of the Pro Bowl, I saw the idea floating around that the Pro Bowl should be replaced with a game between the two teams with the worst records, with the winner getting the #1 overall pick.

I actually like that idea, and to take it a step further... how about after 16 games, the bottom four teams play each other in the season finale, with the two winners advancing to the #1 pick bowl?

This past year we would have had:
(29) Jets (or Giants? depending on tiebreaker) vs. (32) Jaguars
(30) Texans vs. (31) Lions

Of course, it would be a little tricky to figure out what to do with those team's original opponents. Presumably they would play each other, so in this case that would have been Bills vs. Packers and Colts vs. Titans. Not sure the league would ever go for that, but I think it would help disincentive tanking because you'd have to be good enough to win two games to clinch the #1 pick.

NFL teams spend weeks preparing for opponents. You're not going to get them to buy into any sort of variable scheduling at the end of the season.

The two worst teams facing off for the #1 pick is intriguing, but you're not going to get those teams to hang around until Pro Bowl weekend to do it. If you're going to do it, it would have to be a Thursday night game between the Wild Card and Divisional weekends.

I don't think there's a good solution for the Pro Bowl. Teams don't want their players to risk injury in a meaningless exhibition, and fans don't want to watch a farce of a game. This is the best I can come up with:

Make the game essentially a competitive 7-on-7 drill. Since a 7-on-7 drill doesn't have linemen, have one quarter where the OL and DL have to play all the positions except QB.

I like it. I've been thinking along similar lines to other sports: Forget the game and turn it into an exhibition. Get your top few at each position and have them face off against each other in drills. Every position has 3 drills that they have to complete and you score based on speed, accuracy, timing, whatever the case may be. That's day 1. Then day 2 you have "teams" - let's say you pick the top 4 around the league, 2 NFC and 2 AFC at each position. Two NFC teams face each other in a drill, whether 7/7 or 11/11, but it's expressly something that tests skill without being contact/injury risk. Same for AFC teams, winners face off to determine the best league.

[KCRoadFan]

Next Sunday:

3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship

One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive

I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.

I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation

Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).

Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.

[formulanone]

I can't see any motivation or TV excitement for a draft lottery "bowl". What motivation do players have to vie for a better position so the team can better leverage getting new players to potentially replace them?

It makes more sense to have them play each other in Tecmo Bowl to decide the draft than having players risk injury almost certainly for someone else's gain.

[Henry]

Next Sunday:

3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship

One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive

I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.

I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation

Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).

Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.

I think the best way would be I-71 south to Louisville, I-64 west to St. Louis, I-44 west to OKC, I-40 west to Barstow, I-15 south to San Bernardino, and I-10 west to Los Angeles. (Of course, there 's the option of replacing the first two routes with I-75 north to Dayton and I-70 west to St. Louis, but that would be more out of the way than the other trip.)

Or, as an even better alternative, you can take I-71 south to Louisville, I-65 south to Nashville, and then the last three routes from the first example.

(OT: That question reminds me of the movie Rain Man, where Tom Cruise's character was forced to use surface highways because Dustin Hoffman's character hated Interstates, but they detoured to Las Vegas at one point, so none of the above routings would've applied.)

EDIT: I just realized that I completely forgot about I-74 west to Indianapolis, where you could catch I-70 west to go to St. Louis. But as we know by now, there are several ways to get from Cincinnati to Los Angeles, none of which involve a single route number.

[NWI_Irish96]

So I guess a Bears vs Chargers would be the ultimate roadgeek Super Bowl, right?

[ethanhopkin14]

Next Sunday:

3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship

One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive

I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.

I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation

Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don’t know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that’s not even close to being an optimal route).

Of course, there’s also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.

I think the best way would be I-71 south to Louisville, I-64 west to St. Louis, I-44 west to OKC, I-40 west to Barstow, I-15 south to San Bernardino, and I-10 west to Los Angeles. (Of course, there 's the option of replacing the first two routes with I-75 north to Dayton and I-70 west to St. Louis, but that would be more out of the way than the other trip.)

Or, as an even better alternative, you can take I-71 south to Louisville, I-65 south to Nashville, and then the last three routes from the first example.

(OT: That question reminds me of the movie Rain Man, where Tom Cruise's character was forced to use surface highways because Dustin Hoffman's character hated Interstates, but they detoured to Las Vegas at one point, so none of the above routings would've applied.)

That's awesome because that's what I thought immediately as well.  The Rain Man Bowl.

Although, there are lots of issues with the route in that movie since Raymond wouldn't let Charlie drive the interstates:

Why did they go from Amarillo to Tucumcari, but then drive through Las Vegas?  Maybe in 1988 there were more surface streets between Amarillo and Tucumcari (I am thinking this because those are towns specifically named in the movie with an interstate running between them), but you would have to wind north through Colorado and then west through Utah to drive through Las Vegas from Tucumcari, or just follow around I-40 and go around to the north rim of the Grand Canyon or across Hover Dam.  Maybe Raymond really wanted to see the Grand Canyon?

Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me.  They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, TX, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route. 

[triplemultiplex]

Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me.  They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route. 

That's a long-standing road trip movie trope.  Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip.  Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip.  At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ).

This might be a fun spin off thread, actually.  Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.

[formulanone]

Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me.  They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route. 

That's a long-standing road trip movie trope.  Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip.  Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip.  At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ).

This might be a fun spin off thread, actually.  Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.

Much easier to close a random two-lane road for filming rather than almost any Interstate, especially one in an urban area.

Of course, they can use file/stock footage to make you think they're on Interstate 50 with two hastily-arranged control cities which would never actually be posted on separate signs, just past the State Line sign.

[jeffandnicole]

Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me.  They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route. 

That's a long-standing road trip movie trope.  Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip.  Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip.  At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ).

This might be a fun spin off thread, actually.  Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.

Much easier to close a random two-lane road for filming rather than almost any Interstate, especially one in an urban area.

Of course, they can use file/stock footage to make you think they're on Interstate 50 with two hastily-arranged control cities which would never actually be posted on separate signs, just past the State Line sign.

Most movies aren't filmed on location anyway. Any 2 or 4 lane roadway in Canada where it's cheaper to film substitutes for most 2 or 4 lane roadways in the US.

[Scott5114]

These days you could CGI in pretty much any sort of scenery you wanted.

[NWI_Irish96]

There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.

[ethanhopkin14]

Let me get something straight, its one of my favorite movies ever made, so I am not clowning it, but the route has always bothered me.  They went from OH, KY, MO, OK, NM, NV (without going through CO or UT) and CA without using interstates and Charlie was pressured by time, yet he took a way out of the way route. 

That's a long-standing road trip movie trope.  Characters driving from A to B on bucolic two-lane roads rather the way they would actually drive if they were actually making that trip.  Which of course would be 99% interstate for just about every movie featuring a road trip.  At least assuming they're not trying avoid the authorities or whatever (Smokey and the Bandit ).

This might be a fun spin off thread, actually.  Movie Road Trips: Fantasy vs. Reality.

Much easier to close a random two-lane road for filming rather than almost any Interstate, especially one in an urban area.

Of course, they can use file/stock footage to make you think they're on Interstate 50 with two hastily-arranged control cities which would never actually be posted on separate signs, just past the State Line sign.

Most movies aren't filmed on location anyway. Any 2 or 4 lane roadway in Canada where it's cheaper to film substitutes for most 2 or 4 lane roadways in the US.

That movie was an exception.  Most of the areas they said they were in were actually filmed in those areas.  All the Cincinnati scenes were filmed in Cincinnati or northern Kentucky, the Oklahoma senses were filmed in Oklahoma and of course Las Vegas and Los Angeles. 

[thspfc]

100 pages!

[Max Rockatansky]

100 pages!

So basically half the OG COVID thread?

[Alps]

Next Sunday:

3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship

One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive

I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.

I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation

Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).

Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.

US 50 to US 66 done

[Max Rockatansky]

Next Sunday:

3:00 The US 50 Championship
6:40 The US 101 Championship

One can drive US 50 between Cincy and KC, but unless you like pain and/or winding thru Southern Indiana, I-74&I-70 or I-71,I-64&I-70 probably is a quicker and easier drive

I guess that worked out in the end since there's no Buffalo-Cincinnati highway.

I-71&I-90 make a good diagonal cooridor between Cincy and Buffalo, but no unified designation

Updating this for the Super Bowl: are there any routes connecting Cincinnati and Los Angeles? I don't know of a way to do it via a single route, but I know of a route that only involves changing highways once: I-75 down to I-10 in Florida, then west to LA (although that's not even close to being an optimal route).

Of course, there's also the option of taking US 50 to its west end in Sacramento, then south on I-5.

US 50 to US 66 done

But the US 66 fandom refuses to believe parts of I-44 and I-40 were late alignments of the highway.  Whatever are we to do?

[oscar]

There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.

If you're referring to Devin Hester:

-- "his position" was return specialist (he was also a wide receiver, but less famous for that position)

-- he's just in his first year of eligibility

This year's HOF elections included at least one player in his last year of eligibility. That player, Sam Mills, went in with Tony Boselli. Both players were significant not just because of the quality of their play on the field, but also they led their expansion teams (Panthers for Mills, Jaguars for Boselli) to exceptional starts. Both teams made it to conference championship games in their second years.

[NWI_Irish96]

There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.

If you're referring to Devin Hester:

-- "his position" was return specialist (he was also a wide receiver, but less famous for that position)

-- he's just in his first year of eligibility

This year's HOF elections included at least one player in his last year of eligibility. That player, Sam Mills, went in with Tony Boselli. Both players were significant not just because of the quality of their play on the field, but also they led their expansion teams (Panthers for Mills, Jaguars for Boselli) to exceptional starts. Both teams made it to conference championship games in their second years.

Return specialist is a position, and he was the best ever. Special teams is 1/3 of the game and when the opponent has an entire game plan built around you, you're quite the game changer.

[ilpt4u]

There was one guy on the HOF ballot who was the greatest ever at his position and he didn't get in.

If you're referring to Devin Hester:

-- "his position" was return specialist (he was also a wide receiver, but less famous for that position)

-- he's just in his first year of eligibility

This year's HOF elections included at least one player in his last year of eligibility. That player, Sam Mills, went in with Tony Boselli. Both players were significant not just because of the quality of their play on the field, but also they led their expansion teams (Panthers for Mills, Jaguars for Boselli) to exceptional starts. Both teams made it to conference championship games in their second years.

Return specialist is a position, and he was the best ever. Special teams is 1/3 of the game and when the opponent has an entire game plan built around you, you're quite the game changer.

Hester should be in, no doubt.

As a Bears fan, Hester did things at the Returner postition that we will probably never see again, especially if Kickoffs are completely removed from the game, as has been proposed multiple times and tried in this year's Pro Bowl. Just moving the Kickoff line has greatly reduced the number of Returns

All that said, is Devin Hester a First Ballot Hall of Famer? The HoF committe said no. Will Hester get enough votes to make it as a semifinalist and finalist in the years to come? I hope so, but until the voters vote, we won't know

He should go in next year. I haven't looked ahead to see who will begin their eligibility next year

[Big John]

^^ 2023 eligible nominees: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/2023-pro-football-hall-of-fame-lookahead-james-harrison-joe-thomas-among-first-time-eligible-players/ar-AATJRDt

Darrell Revis and Joe Thomas should get in.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

So I guess a Bears vs Chargers would be the ultimate roadgeek Super Bowl, right?

Or Jets-49ers