Quote:
|
Originally Posted by King Glorious
Equal opportunity is letting both teams have the ball and making both teams have to stop the other. Making one team have to stop the other is not equal. I don't understand how anyone can rightfully argue that it is equal. You are saying that all they have to do is make a stop...well not make both teams have to do that same thing? Why is that onus only on one team? And I couldn't disagree more that nobody has come up with a better idea than what's currently in place. I've read several ideas that I think are much better than the current system. I've thought about it some more and I'd let each team have the ball once. Either your defense stops them and you make them punt and you get it or if they score, you get in on a kickoff. After each team has had it once, now, first to score wins. And on any touchdowns, no kicking the extra point. Have to go for two.
And why is the baseball talk laughable? If you give up a run in the top of the 10th, the game should be over right? I mean, all the home team should have to do is get a stop and then take advantage of their own chance right? If they can't get a stop in the top of the 10th, why do they deserve a chance in the bottom? It's the same thing as the football overtime currently is.
|
If your argument is really for equality then no game should end unless each team gets an equal number of possessions during the game. I mean, how can it be fair if one team gets 10 possessions and the other only gets 9? Shouldn't the other team get one more chance in regulation? Unless you are willing to endorse that idiotic idea then how can you campaign for equal possessions in overtime?
The closest to a concession that I'd be willing to give on the issue would be the idea that in overtime the kicking team kicks off from the 40 instead of the 30. Make that rule and I bet the receiving and kicking team win 50% of the time in the long run.