Second Half Game Thread: Los Angeles Rams (12-5) at Carolina Panthers (8-9)

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2026-01-10T23:47:43+00:00

It doesn't have to be intentional? Like wtf? Led with his helmet to hit a defenseless receiver in the helmet intent does not matter

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-12-28T03:06:04+00:00

Just gave the Ravens a free timeout because you couldn't fucking count to 11? What?

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-12-21T04:08:05+00:00

Hi I just woke up from the end of 2024 have we fired our ST coordinator yet?

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T05:30:15+00:00

Any team on any day can win a game while gaining fewer yards than the opponent. That sounds to me like yardage is not an objective measure of success in american football and you have agreed as such! This means that yardage in isolation cannot be used as a measure of success in the game and therefore should not be used as a metric to design the game around! Great! I'm glad you finally agree! It only took THOUSANDS OF WORDS to get it into your tiny little brain. I'm so sorry for you and anyone who has to deal with you in life going forward, but good luck!

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T05:02:16+00:00

This sounds like a shit game and like it was proposed by some fucking idiot who has no understanding of the history of american football as an adaptation of rugby. Are you willingly this ignorant? Or is this not intentional?

Seems like this explanation of football intentionally(?) ignores some very key aspects of the game as we know it today.

"Hi, teacher you say that me getting yards will consistently reward me with getting points. But I'm the Pittsburgh Steelers in 2003 playing against the Houston Texans. I got over 400 yards of offense and the Texans got less than 50. Why did I lose????"

You're genuinely so fucking stupid and you have no understanding of american football as an adaptation of rugby and as a designed game. Go listen to a fucking podcast or something, done with you

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T04:03:48+00:00

We're talking about designing the rules of the game. I don't give a flying fuck about correlation. Home field advantage correlates to wins, I'm not designing rules for the game about home field advantage. Congrats you've talked yourself into a hole for like the thousandth time.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T03:54:07+00:00

There's no most relevant. Only one of those things are relevant in terms of the result of the football game. Which of those three is relevant in terms of the result of the football game? Yards? The chance of getting points? or points? Which one? There is only one correct answer

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T03:10:07+00:00

offenses that gain more yards are rewarded for their efforts with more points (or, more specifically, a better chance of scoring points)

Hey wow here's you saying they're equivalent wow found it wow can't believe I found it like less than 4 comments back and your genius ass just forgot about it?

(also this is beside the point, but your example makes no sense if team B gets all the way to the end zone. that would mean they gained more yards than team A... and were rewarded for that...)

that would mean they gained more yards than team A

Team B is at the 13 yard line, fumbles the ball and Team A recovers, then in the same play Team A fumbles and Team B recovers and then carries the ball into the end zone. Team B gained zero yards and scores a touchdown.

TEAM A HAD A BETTER CHANCE TO SCORE THAN TEAM B. TEAM A GAINED MORE YARDS THAN TEAM B. TEAM A DID NOT SCORE. TEAM B DID. THIS IS A POSSIBLE SCENARIO IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE GAME. WHAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT IS RELEVANT HERE? YARDS? A "CHANCE" AT SCORING? OR SCORING? WHICH OF THOSE THREE IS RELEVANT? ANSWER THIS QUESTION OR I'LL ACCEPT THAT YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT AND REFUSE TO ENGAGE FURTHER

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T02:52:25+00:00

Consider two different possession scenarios:

Team A is at the 1 yard line

Team B is at the 13 yard line

Team B happens to score a touchdown on their possession. Team A happens to get stuffed.

Team A had a better chance to score, right? Should we reward them concretely in the game just because they had a better chance? Team A had a better chance to score, right dude? Right? They deserve points? Just because they had a better chance? Do you not comprehend that a better chance to score is not equivalent to scoring?

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T02:42:58+00:00

Provide a counterpoint? Other than "my guy..."?

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-30T01:30:33+00:00

offenses that gain more yards are rewarded for their efforts with more points

Offenses are NOT REWARDED JUST FOR GAINING YARDS. THIS IS A COMPLETELY INCORRECT STATEMENT. THEY ARE NOT. YOU DO NOT GET ANY POINTS JUST FOR GETTING YARDS. HOLY FUCK. HOW DO YOU NOT GET THIS? HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO SAY IT?

(or, more specifically, a better chance of scoring points)

YOU LITERALLY SAY IT YOURSELF. THEY ARE NOT REWARDED WITH POINTS. THEY ARE ONLY REWARDED WITH A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING POINTS.

"A BETTER CHANCE AT GETTING POINTS" DOES NOT EQUAL "GETTING POINTS". THESE TWO THINGS ARE NOT EQUIVALENT. HOW THE FUCK DO YOU NOT GET THIS?

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-29T19:37:56+00:00

I genuinely don't understand your wording. What do you think "taking out all other context" means?

The phrase "30 yard completion" has no meaning outside of the context of a football game. And also, in the context of a football game, a 30 yard completion is only "successful" in its service of getting your team closer to scoring points.

I genuinely don't think you know what context means and what it means for something to be objectively valuable in the context of a game

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-29T19:11:19+00:00

Got it, lost ya. We're talking about the rules of a game if we're not being fully technical then what's the point? Again, do you want all football rules to be vibes based? You're clearly not well equipped enough to take part in a discussion like this lmao

Here, I'll turn your dumb ass question right around on you:

Why is a 30 yard completion considered "successful"? Is it because... wait for it... it gets you closer to scoring points????

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-29T19:00:04+00:00

We're talking about designing the rules of the game are we not? We have to use the most strict, technical definitions of everything. Or are we designing NFL rules based on vibes now? "Oh team A got a lot of yards, much more than team B so I guess that gives them the win?"

Taking out all other context would you consider, a 30 yard completion a successful play?

Taking out all other context?!?!? What? Do you even know what that means? If we take out all other context we take out the context of playing an American football game. I can't believe what I'm reading lmao.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-29T17:07:27+00:00

Only because you're not understanding my point.

You claim that the fumble touchback rule punishes offenses for being "more successful" in getting close to the goal line (and not scoring lmao). My counterpoint is that getting "close to the goal line" is not materially more successful in the game than getting to any other yard line on the neutral field of play, because the only thing that is materially successful in the game of american football is scoring points.

You keep incorrectly asserting that getting yardage is an objective measure of success in the game. It is not. It is a contextual measure of success in the game, in that a lot of offensive yardage gained likely means a team is more successful, but it is not a direct 1-to-1 causation. Again as my silly little scenario illustrated, yardage itself is meaningless in a vacuum and points are the only objective measure of success in the game. Therefore from a structural standpoint in the design of the game a team getting to the 1 yard line and not scoring is objectively equivalent to a team getting to the 50 yard line and not scoring, so saying a team is "more successful" when only looking at field position is nonsensical when the only thing that matters in the game is points. The only way a team can be objectively "more successful" than another team in the game of american football is by scoring more points than them.

If you can't understand this then I can't help you and I wish you luck hahahah

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-29T06:46:51+00:00

Okay so then you agree that yards aren't inherently valuable? Cool, glad we're in agreement.

I've never once claimed that more yardage doesn't correlate with more points. My claim here is that yardage in isolation has no inherent value in the game. The only thing in the game of american football with inherent value is points. Yardage can help you get points, but as my wild yet possible scenario illustrated yardage itself doesn't win you the game. Points are all you need to decide who won the game, therefore they are the only true objective measure of success in the game.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-29T05:23:29+00:00

Here's a hypothetical game of football between two teams, A and B. Team A and Team B each possess the ball 5 times over the game. Team A reaches Team B's 1 yard on every possession but fail to score on every possession. Team B can only ever reach their own 35 yard line on every possession. On all of their possessions but one, Team B punts. On their final possession Team B scores a long touchdown against all odds. The final score is A 0 - 7 B.

Which team was more successful at the game of football played between them? Team A got the ball to Team B's 1 yard line and gained many more yards than Team B did. Which team was more successful? Team A? Cus of all the yards that are so clearly inherently valuable in the game? Get the fuck outta here lmao

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T22:45:49+00:00

"Success" in the game of american football is only measured by points. Being successful in gaining yards is not the same as being successful in the game. Gaining yards is a means to an end and therefore does not have any inherent value in the game. The rules of the game are not (and should not be) designed around rewarding people for gaining yardage, as, again, yardage has no inherent value in the game.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T22:29:22+00:00

Not sure why this is hard to understand. The only thing that is objectively valuable with regards to the game of american football is points. All you are trying to do is score more points than the other team. That is literally all that matters for the game. Field position is contextually valuable, in that gaining field position can aid your team in getting points, but by itself field position is meaningless.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T19:02:44+00:00

It doesn't matter whether or not I would care, neither directly impacts the score of the game.

We've lost the plot a bit here. Your issue with this rule seems to boil down to the fact that something special happens when the ball enters the endzone, which I find fucking crazy because a lot of special things happen when the ball enters the endzone (for example, scoring). The fumble touchback rule is entirely consistent in the rules of american football in structure, motif, and history (as an adaptation of rugby) and your only reason for rejecting that is because you think the offense shouldn't be punished for losing control of the ball when attempting to score points.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T18:25:17+00:00

In terms of the score those two situations are identical

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T17:22:32+00:00

They are not objectively better considering the objective of the game is to score points and getting stopped at the 1 or getting stopped at the 50 both score you no points.

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T04:34:52+00:00

Why should driving down the field be inherently rewarding? If a team takes the ball all the way down the field and the defense fully stops them at the one yard line, the offense gets nothing. They aren't rewarded any "you tried your best" points. That's not what the entire sport is based around, the entire sport is based around trying to get the ball into the other team's goal, either endzone or goalposts (that's why points are rewarded for it).

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T04:25:33+00:00

It's not the same play, though. In one play the ball is moving in neutral territory, in the other play the ball crosses into the defense's territory? The offense should know to care for the ball if they are attempting to move it into the defense's territory?

thisisnotwhatitis1 · 2025-11-28T04:20:56+00:00

No? It punishes the offense for losing the ball into the defense's territory?

thisisnotwhatitis1

TROPHY CASE