2018 NFL Thread - The Dynasty

[TAC]

I love how people act like shitty officiating is excusable if you play a less than great game.

I don't feel that way. I mean, if it happened earlier in the game, then it would be on the Saints to get over it, but that play at that time literally changed the game.

[King Postwhore]

I love how people act like shitty officiating is excusable if you play a less than great game.

I don't feel that way. I mean, if it happened earlier in the game, then it would be on the Saints to get over it, but that play at that time literally changed the game.

Agreed.

[lordxizor]

I love how people act like shitty officiating is excusable if you play a less than great game.

I don't feel that way. I mean, if it happened earlier in the game, then it would be on the Saints to get over it, but that play at that time literally changed the game.

Agreed.

As much as I don't want more reviews, allowing penalties (or lack of penalties) to be reviewed within the last 2 minutes of a game may make sense. I definitely don't want this to be allowed throughout the whole game though.

Obviously in this case New Orleans still needs to punch the ball into the endzone, which there is no guarantee they would have done, but at least they would have killed a bunch more clock before kicking the field goal. If the obviously correct call was made there, the Saints probably had a 95%+ of winning. Bad calls at the end of the game have too much power over the outcome, which is why reviews there may be a good idea.

[King Postwhore]

Bill Belichick has said it before.  I should be able to challenge everything.  Still only have the 2 challenges.

Let have t like the NHL were the main office reviews the calls.  It would move the game so much faster.

[Podaar]

Thee Pass Interference pissed me off, at the time, for all the reasons mentioned in this thread, but what is the most shameful to me is that it was so very unnecessary. If Robey-Coleman hadn't been so intent on taking someone's head off and just glanced back at Brees he would have seen the ball closer to him than the receiver. The ineptitude of the referees kept his poor play from being an issue in this game, but if I were the Rams DC I'd be seriously tempted to keep that dude off the field...or at least give him a serious dressing down.

[King Postwhore]

2 refs were right there looking at that non catch.  It's amazing how they did not call it.

[mikeyd23]

Bill Belichick has said it before.  I should be able to challenge everything.  Still only have the 2 challenges.

Let have t like the NHL were the main office reviews the calls.  It would move the game so much faster.

I'm not sure that would make sense. If they make it so judgement calls like PI are review able, they would just be rejudging judgement calls. The way it is now, the only things that can be reviewed are black and white plays - goal line, out of bounds, fumbles, etc.... where clear black and white evidence can be observed. PI is a judgement call. Sure the one in the Saints/Rams game was over the top obvious, but most aren't going to be that obvious.

I think it's clearly frustrating for Saints fans, I know I'd be ticked, but overall, I think it's just part of the game.

[Stadler]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

[KevShmev]

I cannot get on board with "everything" being challenge-able, as you'd have a coach challenging a TD by the other team by saying an offensive linemen held (which can be called on like every play).  Too much of a slippery slope.

The NFL should definitely move to all challenges being reviewed by someone elsewhere.  It would save time instead of the ref having to go over and get under the hood and watch the play.  You can't tell me the NFL cannot afford to have a team ready to review a play in every game every week.  They make billions.

[T-ski]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

I know it isn't relevant because the team with the ball first has an advantage.

And your hockey analogy is poor because a face-off involves both teams with an opportunity to win with a players skill, which isn't the case with a coin flip.

[rab7]

He's doing the Super Bowl, right? I'm looking forward to that.

Yes, CBS has the Super Bowl this year, and the Nantz/Romo team will do the commentary.

Thee Pass Interference pissed me off, at the time, for all the reasons mentioned in this thread, but what is the most shameful to me is that it was so very unnecessary. If Robey-Coleman hadn't been so intent on taking someone's head off and just glanced back at Brees he would have seen the ball closer to him than the receiver. The ineptitude of the referees kept his poor play from being an issue in this game, but if I were the Rams DC I'd be seriously tempted to keep that dude off the field...or at least give him a serious dressing down.

He didn't know where the ball was and said he was worried that if he turned his head around, he wouldn't be able to get to the receiver on time. The helmet-to-helmet was unfortunate, but he was set on causing the interference no matter what. He decided that causing the penalty was better than allowing the touchdown (although with the time situation, he should've just let them get the TD and give the Rams the ball again).

[Stadler]

The problem for me with the Saints PI no-call was not the no-call of pass interference, but that we've been hearing all season long about "protecting" the receivers, and there have been countless penalties all year where DBs put helmet - legit - on a receiver, and were flagged, and here, "on the biggest stage", national game with millions watching, and Robey-Coleman basically assassinates the receiver and.... <chirp chirp, chirp chirp>.

As much as I wanted the Saints to win (almost as bad as the Pats) that whole sequence was shit; I get it, Sean Payton knows more than I do but why not get the Rams to burn a time out at the end there?   And by the way, Wade Phillips may be the greatest defensive coordinator in the game today.   He didn't have a Von Miller, but he mixed it up at the end and he kept Brees off balance when he needed him to be that way the most.   I thought that was the difference in the game, not the PI no-call.

At least the Brady roughing the passer nonsense was quasi-consistent.   

Oh, and Chiefs fans, welcome to football ala Andy Reid.  Why didn't he call the timeout to save his D?  Because he's the worst game manager in the league.  Sure, he's got a sheet of "big plays" but if you notice, Belichick took away Hill almost entirely (one catch) and Kelce for a large part (3 for 23, though he did have a TD) and Reid never overcame that.   Kyle Van Noy played like, if not LT then at least Carl Banks. The guy was on fire.   

[King Postwhore]

Bill Belichick has said it before.  I should be able to challenge everything.  Still only have the 2 challenges.

Let have t like the NHL were the main office reviews the calls.  It would move the game so much faster.

I'm not sure that would make sense. If they make it so judgement calls like PI are review able, they would just be rejudging judgement calls. The way it is now, the only things that can be reviewed are black and white plays - goal line, out of bounds, fumbles, etc.... where clear black and white evidence can be observed. PI is a judgement call. Sure the one in the Saints/Rams game was over the top obvious, but most aren't going to be that obvious.

I think it's clearly frustrating for Saints fans, I know I'd be ticked, but overall, I think it's just part of the game.

Take a read.  Kev, you too.


https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/03/bill-belichick-why-not-let-coaches-challenge-everything/

[Stadler]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

I know it isn't relevant because the team with the ball first has an advantage.

And your hockey analogy is poor because a face-off involves both teams with an opportunity to win with a players skill, which isn't the case with a coin flip.

Bart just proved - with stats - that there IS no advantage, or at least not a statistically significant one.  And there IS ability involved; please don't try to make your case that what Brady did was not skillful or significant in the outcome. 

[KevShmev]

As much as I wanted the Saints to win (almost as bad as the Pats) that whole sequence was shit; I get it, Sean Payton knows more than I do but why not get the Rams to burn a time out at the end there?   And by the way, Wade Phillips may be the greatest defensive coordinator in the game today.  He didn't have a Von Miller, but he mixed it up at the end and he kept Brees off balance when he needed him to be that way the most.   I thought that was the difference in the game, not the PI no-call.

No, but he does have Aaron Donald, the best defensive player in football.

As for Brees, lost in the PI controversy is the fact that Brees' play really dropped off at the end of the season and carried over into the playoffs.  Makes you wonder if Father Time has caught him...

Oh, and Chiefs fans, welcome to football ala Andy Reid.  Why didn't he call the timeout to save his D?  Because he's the worst game manager in the league.  Sure, he's got a sheet of "big plays" but if you notice, Belichick took away Hill almost entirely (one catch) and Kelce for a large part (3 for 23, though he did have a TD) and Reid never overcame that.   Kyle Van Noy played like, if not LT then at least Carl Banks. The guy was on fire.

I have no idea why he didn't call timeout once NE got to 1st and goal in OT. What was he saving those timeouts for??

The amazing thing is NE did everything they wanted to do - shut down Hill and Kelce, protected Brady, ran the ball, got pressure on Mahomes all day, etc. - and still needed OT to win. 

[mikeyd23]

Bill Belichick has said it before.  I should be able to challenge everything.  Still only have the 2 challenges.

Let have t like the NHL were the main office reviews the calls.  It would move the game so much faster.

I'm not sure that would make sense. If they make it so judgement calls like PI are review able, they would just be rejudging judgement calls. The way it is now, the only things that can be reviewed are black and white plays - goal line, out of bounds, fumbles, etc.... where clear black and white evidence can be observed. PI is a judgement call. Sure the one in the Saints/Rams game was over the top obvious, but most aren't going to be that obvious.

I think it's clearly frustrating for Saints fans, I know I'd be ticked, but overall, I think it's just part of the game.

Take a read.  Kev, you too.


https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/03/bill-belichick-why-not-let-coaches-challenge-everything/

Yeah I get his stance, he wants control, not surprising 

I still think it's a bad idea, a slippery slope, and that it doesn't make a ton of sense. What makes more sense, like I said, is to have clear, provable, black and white rules be reviewed. PI, for example, is not that.

[KevShmev]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/03/bill-belichick-why-not-let-coaches-challenge-everything/

I get the logic. I just think it is a slippery slope. 

Imagine a game-winning TD at the end of a game being overturned because a challenge flag was thrown and the ref decided an offensive lineman held (which, as I said before, can be hold on nearly every play).

[T-ski]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

I know it isn't relevant because the team with the ball first has an advantage.

And your hockey analogy is poor because a face-off involves both teams with an opportunity to win with a players skill, which isn't the case with a coin flip.

Bart just proved - with stats - that there IS no advantage, or at least not a statistically significant one.  And there IS ability involved; please don't try to make your case that what Brady did was not skillful or significant in the outcome.

re-read what I wrote, both teams have a chance to win a hockey face-off due to skill, there is no skill involved in a coin flip at midfield.

[Dublagent66]

I love how people act like shitty officiating is excusable if you play a less than great game.

I don't feel that way. I mean, if it happened earlier in the game, then it would be on the Saints to get over it, but that play at that time literally changed the game.

That no-call was the worst I've ever seen.  Even if it wasn't PI (which it clear was), it was also H to H contact.  They missed 2 severe penalties that would've set up the Saints for the go ahead score.  However, the Saints put themselves in that situation by not recognizing their situation.  1st down on the Rams 15 YL just inside 2:00 mins remaining.  What do they do?  Run a pass play for an incompletion and essentially give the Rams a free timeout.  2nd down is a running play but it doesn't matter.  No 1st down yet and the Rams still don't need a timeout at this point.  3rd down is pass again and then the no-call.  Clock stops.  4th down.  Extremely poor 2:00 min drill by the Saints.  They essentially gave that game away by not keeping the ball on the ground.

[Stadler]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

I know it isn't relevant because the team with the ball first has an advantage.

And your hockey analogy is poor because a face-off involves both teams with an opportunity to win with a players skill, which isn't the case with a coin flip.

Bart just proved - with stats - that there IS no advantage, or at least not a statistically significant one.  And there IS ability involved; please don't try to make your case that what Brady did was not skillful or significant in the outcome.

re-read what I wrote, both teams have a chance to win a hockey face-off due to skill, there is no skill involved in a coin flip at midfield.

I read that.  I'm not sure why you're arguing this.  I'm at a loss.   "Coin flip" doesn't determine the winner.  You still have to play.  Of 87 games, the coin toss winner won 45 times.  That's a 51.7% winning percentage.   Over 87 games that's basically 50-50.   That's NOT an advantage, except in the most technical of senses.   (You should also know that despite there being "skill" involved, most hockey teams fall in the 48-52% range in winning face-offs, and, despite conventional wisdom, there is almost no correlation between winning face-offs and winning games; it's essentially a coin flip).

[Stadler]

The amazing thing is NE did everything they wanted to do - shut down Hill and Kelce, protected Brady, ran the ball, got pressure on Mahomes all day, etc. - and still needed OT to win.

That kind of misses the point of "Belichick Football", though; the only word in that entire sentence that has any meaning to Belichick is "win".   Doesn't matter how, when, or who.   Just "win". 

[King Postwhore]

Bill Belichick has said it before.  I should be able to challenge everything.  Still only have the 2 challenges.

Let have t like the NHL were the main office reviews the calls.  It would move the game so much faster.

I'm not sure that would make sense. If they make it so judgement calls like PI are review able, they would just be rejudging judgement calls. The way it is now, the only things that can be reviewed are black and white plays - goal line, out of bounds, fumbles, etc.... where clear black and white evidence can be observed. PI is a judgement call. Sure the one in the Saints/Rams game was over the top obvious, but most aren't going to be that obvious.

I think it's clearly frustrating for Saints fans, I know I'd be ticked, but overall, I think it's just part of the game.

Take a read.  Kev, you too.


https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/03/bill-belichick-why-not-let-coaches-challenge-everything/

Yeah I get his stance, he wants control, not surprising 

I still think it's a bad idea, a slippery slope, and that it doesn't make a ton of sense. What makes more sense, like I said, is to have clear, provable, black and white rules be reviewed. PI, for example, is not that.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/03/bill-belichick-why-not-let-coaches-challenge-everything/

I get the logic. I just think it is a slippery slope. 

Imagine a game-winning TD at the end of a game being overturned because a challenge flag was thrown and the ref decided an offensive lineman held (which, as I said before, can be hold on nearly every play).

They still limit the amount you can challenge.  For me, if your going to have this technology then everything is open.  If not get rid of challenges.   HDTV has ruined this part of the game.  We fans see too much now.  LOL

[TAC]

That’s a good point Joe. People sitting on their couch should not have a better advantage than the people that actually have to make the calls.

[T-ski]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

I know it isn't relevant because the team with the ball first has an advantage.

And your hockey analogy is poor because a face-off involves both teams with an opportunity to win with a players skill, which isn't the case with a coin flip.

Bart just proved - with stats - that there IS no advantage, or at least not a statistically significant one.  And there IS ability involved; please don't try to make your case that what Brady did was not skillful or significant in the outcome.

re-read what I wrote, both teams have a chance to win a hockey face-off due to skill, there is no skill involved in a coin flip at midfield.

I read that.  I'm not sure why you're arguing this.  I'm at a loss.   "Coin flip" doesn't determine the winner.  You still have to play.  Of 87 games, the coin toss winner won 45 times.  That's a 51.7% winning percentage.   Over 87 games that's basically 50-50.   That's NOT an advantage, except in the most technical of senses.   (You should also know that despite there being "skill" involved, most hockey teams fall in the 48-52% range in winning face-offs, and, despite conventional wisdom, there is almost no correlation between winning face-offs and winning games; it's essentially a coin flip).

would it surprise you to know that since the overtime rules changed in 2012, 4-of-6 playoff OT games have been 1st possession wins?

[mikeyd23]

They still limit the amount you can challenge.  For me, if your going to have this technology then everything is open.  If not get rid of challenges.   HDTV has ruined this part of the game.  We fans see too much now.  LOL

That’s a good point Joe. People sitting on their couch should not have a better advantage than the people that actually have to make the calls.

Well I get what you guys are saying, but the game is played for the fans, not the players or the coaches. So it actually kinda makes sense that the fans can see an ever-increasing amount of replays and angles. That's what the NFL wants, it keeps conversation and coverage pointed their way, good or bad, it doesn't matter. The NFL has shown us, in a variety of ways, that they consider all press good press.

[rab7]

would it surprise you to know that since the overtime rules changed in 2012, 4-of-6 playoff OT games have been 1st possession wins?

The OT rules actually took effect in the 2010 playoffs, and were applied to the regular season in 2012.

So really it's 5-of-7 (2011 Tim Tebow 80 yard TD on the first play of OT)

Actually, it's only 5-of-8, I missed another

2011: Broncos beat the Steelers on the first play of OT.
         Giants beat the 49ers in OT, but not on the first possession.

[El Barto]

would it surprise you to know that since the overtime rules changed in 2012, 4-of-6 playoff OT games have been 1st possession wins?

Not really. For one thing you're more likely to come across elite players who can takeover a game. I listed the four this season which were mammoth drives by Brees, Rogers, Brady, and Ezekiel Elliot. Another thing is that there is no playing for a tie in the playoffs. Like I mentioned, NE always seems to play with some authority, looking TD or bust in OT.

And like I said before (and Kev later hinted at), the missed kick rule applies. When some lout goes out and misses a 37yd game winner, the team doesn't blame him. Every player on the team will say there were plays that they could have made that wouldn't have put him in that situation. Don't want to lose the coin toss? Don't let the game go into OT.

And for those people bent out of shape about it, the league probably will change the rules. The NFL is content to leave things alone, but something that seems to favor the Patriots is always a big impetus for a rule change.

[cramx3]

The playoff rules are fine IMO just because the Patriots won doesn't mean we need to change anything.  To me, if you drive the field in the NFL in OT you did enough to win at that point in the game.

[T-ski]

my arguments have ZERO to do with the Patriots.

[cramx3]

My comment wasnt directed at you, just a general statement on my feelings and I do feel like many people are mad about this simply because it ended up with the Patriots winning.

in other news

do we have laser gate?  https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nfl-investigating-laser-pointed-patriots-tom-brady-arrowhead-stands-151156296.html

[El Barto]

do we have laser gate?  https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nfl-investigating-laser-pointed-patriots-tom-brady-arrowhead-stands-151156296.html

How can there be a gate where the Patriots are victims? 

Pretty sure this happened a lot in one of the Mexico City games. I'm not sure it's ever been a problem for QBs. It screws with pilots because they're in a somewhat dark environment, focused onto a narrow field of vision, and behind glass that reflects the laser about. I'm not sure a QB would notice such a thing even if it glanced over his eyes. 

[cramx3]

Yea, I'd be curious if Brady even was aware and if it had any impact.  You'd think he would have complained if it did get in his eyes.  But yea, if this was reversed and Mahommes had the laser, it would certainly be lasergate.

[Stadler]

If the current rules are okay, how come no team EVER has put their defense on the field first in OT after winning the toss?

That's not really relevant, though, because regardless of whether the other team touches the ball, you DO need points, and there's no "second half kickoff" to strategize about.  I would NEVER, EVER opt to kick off in OT, because even if you settle for a FG, the other team STILL needs to put points on the board to keep the game going.  It IS sudden death (of a sort) after all.

(And by the way, this is the case in hockey too; if I win the face-off, and take the puck down and score, we don't give the other team "one breakout chance".)

Either way, the ire is just that the Pats are good at this.  If you made OT a full 15 minute quarter, there'd still be the problem, because in the last two games, Brady put together a drive in each game that ate more than half the quarter.   I think if he drove the ball down, scored a TD and ate 8, 9 minutes out of the quarter, people would still find a way to complain.

I know it isn't relevant because the team with the ball first has an advantage.

And your hockey analogy is poor because a face-off involves both teams with an opportunity to win with a players skill, which isn't the case with a coin flip.

Bart just proved - with stats - that there IS no advantage, or at least not a statistically significant one.  And there IS ability involved; please don't try to make your case that what Brady did was not skillful or significant in the outcome.

re-read what I wrote, both teams have a chance to win a hockey face-off due to skill, there is no skill involved in a coin flip at midfield.

I read that.  I'm not sure why you're arguing this.  I'm at a loss.   "Coin flip" doesn't determine the winner.  You still have to play.  Of 87 games, the coin toss winner won 45 times.  That's a 51.7% winning percentage.   Over 87 games that's basically 50-50.   That's NOT an advantage, except in the most technical of senses.   (You should also know that despite there being "skill" involved, most hockey teams fall in the 48-52% range in winning face-offs, and, despite conventional wisdom, there is almost no correlation between winning face-offs and winning games; it's essentially a coin flip).

would it surprise you to know that since the overtime rules changed in 2012, 4-of-6 playoff OT games have been 1st possession wins?

Nope.  Six is not a meaningful sample. That's one win away from... 50-50.  Which is no advantage.

[Stadler]

do we have laser gate?  https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nfl-investigating-laser-pointed-patriots-tom-brady-arrowhead-stands-151156296.html

How can there be a gate where the Patriots are victims? 

Pretty sure this happened a lot in one of the Mexico City games. I'm not sure it's ever been a problem for QBs. It screws with pilots because they're in a somewhat dark environment, focused onto a narrow field of vision, and behind glass that reflects the laser about. I'm not sure a QB would notice such a thing even if it glanced over his eyes.

And rock stars.  It's deadly for rock stars.

https://youtu.be/Vdaq2L2MWy4
https://youtu.be/1w-OiSag0iM

[bosk1]

I don't think you need statistics to show that the coin flip is a random means of conferring an obvious advantage to whoever wins the coin flip.  The outcome in a small sample size does not necessarily reflect that.  I think this is one of those cases where you can just step back and use some "common sense" to know that it confers an artificial advantage.

But that said--so what?