Bob Sacamano;2939588 said:screw watching a slugfest with Chris Collinsworth doing the commentary
talk about bore on top of boring
then tell every defender to just hold everybody if you know it wont result in a first down. i see what you mean but i think the auto first down is ok because it keeps the defenses from using penalties on purpose.Bizwah;2939591 said:There's another rule change I would implement.
Does an illegal contact penalty really need to be an "automatic" first down?
Seriously, if you have a third and 20, should a five yard illegal contact penalty result in a first down?
Especially if the call is as bad as that one.
I really don't understand the logic in penalties.
cowboys#1;2939605 said:then tell every defender to just hold everybody if you know it wont result in a first down. i see what you mean but i think the auto first down is ok because it keeps the defenses from using penalties on purpose.
Yeah, I don't get that at all. INT the other way is 2 points for the Bears and a FG wins it.Hoofbite;2939646 said:Going for two is kind of pointless here.
It doesn't make it 7 points so whats the use?
Hope the Bears muff the PAT if they score?
Hoofbite;2939646 said:Going for two is kind of pointless here.
It doesn't make it 7 points so whats the use?
Hope the Bears muff the PAT if they score?
Hostile;2939654 said:Yeah, I don't get that at all. INT the other way is 2 points for the Bears and a FG wins it.
Hostile;2939654 said:Yeah, I don't get that at all. INT the other way is 2 points for the Bears and a FG wins it.