U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: QB Kneel Unfair?
It is fair / Keep it the way it is 20 86.96%
It is unfair / Change it somehow 3 13.04%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-02-2013, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Here
2,614 posts, read 5,856,463 times
Reputation: 2661

Advertisements

Hello. I am not the biggest football fan, more of a basketball fan, but I watch pro/college football every now and then, and I've watched my share of full NFL games this season. So if I seem noob, forgive me.

One thing that has irked me for a while and has re-irked me this Thanksgiving weekend is the QB kneel. With more than enough time (~2:00 minutes) to go the length of the field if needed, it's very non-exciting to have to sit there and let the winning team run out the clock when it's a close game.
In my opinion, there shouldn't be any QB kneels in the last 2 minutes of the first half or the end of the game. Moreso at the end of the game, since that's where it really matters.

Counterpoints: I'm sure the QB can toss off to a receiver or a tailback for the kneel...Not sure how this can be played out, maybe prohibit intentional kneel downs by any player for a set amount of seconds or completely unless they reach or pass the line of scrimmage?

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2013, 01:41 PM
 
5,305 posts, read 2,702,850 times
Reputation: 3543
No offense man but the question shows you are not much of a football fan. No one is debating the validity of the qb kneel, except you I guess. It may not be exciting but the same way that watching the end of a basketball game take forever when a team is down but keeps fouling the other team in hopes that they miss and get the ball back with time left to come back, that's called strategy. And in football with turnovers so prevalent and devastating, ESPECIALLY late in the game why would you consider taking away something that has been done as long as football has existed? I think given the NFL's ratings people find football plenty exciting enough without your tinkering. Good luck with your idea though.

Last edited by biggunsmallbrains; 12-02-2013 at 02:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 01:43 PM
Status: "Beach time!" (set 29 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg/Virginia Beach, VA
10,701 posts, read 11,108,112 times
Reputation: 14095
With a win in hand a team should be able to do whatever it wants to do in order tonclose out the game without causing risk of injury or a turnover. Keep it the way it is, there is nothing unfair about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Here
2,614 posts, read 5,856,463 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggunsmallbrains View Post
It may not be exciting but the same way that watching the end of a basketball game take forever when a team is down but keeps fouling the other team in hopes that they miss and get the ball back with time left to come back, that's called strategy.
The point of fouling and stopping the clock and hoping for misses at the FT line is that the losing team has a chance to get back in the game until the end, unlike 2 minutes left in football and the game is over. That's a 58 minute game if the winning team gets possession by that time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 02:05 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
13,343 posts, read 17,431,467 times
Reputation: 19655
The losing team has had 58 minutes to close out the game. Why give them more chances in the last 2 minutes? How is that fair to the winning team?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 02:09 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
13,343 posts, read 17,431,467 times
Reputation: 19655
Quote:
Originally Posted by NARFALICIOUS View Post
The point of fouling and stopping the clock and hoping for misses at the FT line is that the losing team has a chance to get back in the game until the end, unlike 2 minutes left in football and the game is over. That's a 58 minute game if the winning team gets possession by that time.
In basketball, the "cost" of stopping the clock by fouling is the giving of freethrows to the winning team.
There's no equivalent in football. Forcing the winning team to run plays only benefits the losing team.

They're going to have to radically change the rules to entice the winning team to run plays. For example, the winning team only have to get 5 yds for a first down or something crazy like that ... even then, I still wouldn't risk running a play.

Last edited by jaypee; 12-02-2013 at 02:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
9,114 posts, read 15,682,822 times
Reputation: 3695
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
With a win in hand a team should be able to do whatever it wants to do in order tonclose out the game without causing risk of injury or a turnover. Keep it the way it is, there is nothing unfair about it.
this^^^^

if I'm in a position to run out the clock, so be it...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,690 posts, read 89,269,992 times
Reputation: 29451
Quote:
Originally Posted by NARFALICIOUS View Post
Hello. I am not the biggest football fan, more of a basketball fan, but I watch pro/college football every now and then, and I've watched my share of full NFL games this season. So if I seem noob, forgive me.

One thing that has irked me for a while and has re-irked me this Thanksgiving weekend is the QB kneel. With more than enough time (~2:00 minutes) to go the length of the field if needed, it's very non-exciting to have to sit there and let the winning team run out the clock when it's a close game.
In my opinion, there shouldn't be any QB kneels in the last 2 minutes of the first half or the end of the game. Moreso at the end of the game, since that's where it really matters.

Counterpoints: I'm sure the QB can toss off to a receiver or a tailback for the kneel...Not sure how this can be played out, maybe prohibit intentional kneel downs by any player for a set amount of seconds or completely unless they reach or pass the line of scrimmage?

Thoughts?
When the game reaches the point where the possessing team can win by running out the clock, the game is over. Kneeling it out just a formality. To make them physically keep playing is the equivalent of making a home team bat in the bottom of the 9th even if they're winning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Here
2,614 posts, read 5,856,463 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
When the game reaches the point where the possessing team can win by running out the clock, the game is over. Kneeling it out just a formality. To make them physically keep playing is the equivalent of making a home team bat in the bottom of the 9th even if they're winning.
In baseball, they don't exchange "possessions" based on each play, they exchange when 3 outs are done, that's different entirely.

In football, if the team is forced to run a play, there is a chance to get the ball back.

I guess I get your point, if the winning team has the ball in the last ~2:00 minutes, that's kinda like the bottom of the 9th.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaypee View Post
In basketball, the "cost" of stopping the clock by fouling is the giving of freethrows to the winning team.
There's no equivalent in football. Forcing the winning team to run plays only benefits the losing team.
Good point, it definitely benefits the losing team. But that doesn't mean they automatically win even IF they get possession back, because the winning team has a chance to protect their lead on defense.



I guess this poll may be about as one-sided as the poll I made asking if people were shopping on Thanksgiving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Born & Raised DC > Carolinas > Seattle > Denver
9,349 posts, read 5,575,774 times
Reputation: 9446
I say, shame on the other team for putting themselves in a position for the other team to kneel down and kill clock.

But really, if the winning team has a comfortable lead to where they can either end the game or get it down to less than 30 seconds left and punt, there's no reason to run plays and risk injury to your players or theirs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top