9 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Its the solution with the least amount of shuffling- and yet still play the game.  If they wish to call the game - they dont have to move anything.

To call the game would mean the call is either it ends in a tie, or the Bengals win since they were leading. 

 

Anything other option will take a major undertaking of moving games, schedules, not that it COULDN'T be done....  But looking for the path of least resistance

Understood.  The path you choose was one straight through the hearts of the Bills' players and coaches though.  I prefer to add a Week 19 to the schedule... It means nothing for the teams that are eliminated from the playoffs.  It gives the playoff teams ALL a week off before the playoffs (likely meaning that teams won't be resting starters this week) and the 1 seeds each get a 2 week bye (unless the Bengals or Bills end up wrestling the 1 seed away from the Chiefs, they would only get a 1 week bye per usual.  And the Bills and Bengals wouldn't get any bye before heading into the playoffs as the 2 or 3 seed... Of course, pending the results of this Sunday... The Bills and Bengals might both lose because they might not be emotionally ready for another game, even by Sunday... and in that case, I could see the Bills and Bengals deciding to not play that game and just give the Bengals the win... allowing them to win their division, and take the 3 seed, while the Bills end up with the 2 seed either way... which is basically how they were seeded going into the game (since KC had already won, they were a half game up on the Bills for the 1 seed).

12 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

SO much more logistics at work than just rewriting the schedule. Hotels, PLanes, TV Crews, Programming - it's way more involved. 

Not that complicated at all to move the playoffs back a week.  It is exactly the same logistics as it would be anyway, just a week later.  The league is used to that kind of 'chaos', as are the teams.  They'd even have an extra week to work out the details with a Week 19 added for the Bills/Bengals.  It would actually be very simple.

If the league decides to postpone this game to a week 19, I wonder if that changes how the Giants approach our game since they would get a week off anyway to rest players. 

FWIW its not just losing the bye. The 2 and 3 seeds probably have to play 2 of the 3 best AFC teams where the 1 will only get 1 of them at most.

Its not the top priority today but it is a big deal when they shift back to caring about the season.

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Understood.  The path you choose was one straight through the hearts of the Bills' players and coaches though.  I prefer to add a Week 19 to the schedule... It means nothing for the teams that are eliminated from the playoffs.  It gives the playoff teams ALL a week off before the playoffs (likely meaning that teams won't be resting starters this week) and the 1 seeds each get a 2 week bye (unless the Bengals or Bills end up wrestling the 1 seed away from the Chiefs, they would only get a 1 week bye per usual.  And the Bills and Bengals wouldn't get any bye before heading into the playoffs as the 2 or 3 seed... Of course, pending the results of this Sunday... The Bills and Bengals might both lose because they might not be emotionally ready for another game, even by Sunday... and in that case, I could see the Bills and Bengals deciding to not play that game and just give the Bengals the win... allowing them to win their division, and take the 3 seed, while the Bills end up with the 2 seed either way... which is basically how they were seeded going into the game (since KC had already won, they were a half game up on the Bills for the 1 seed).

That option is a possibility as it only affects 12 games, and the schedule of SB week. And most of those playoff games are not set anyway. So it's a distinct possibility

Im back this morning, yall ready for me

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

If the league decides to postpone this game to a week 19, I wonder if that changes how the Giants approach our game since they would get a week off anyway to rest players. 

 

Can't do that.  What are you removing the bye week between the Super Bowl and championship games? 

4 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

I know we don't have any answers outside of Hamlin suffered Cardiac Arrest on the field, but my biggest question is how such a routine tackle could cause that?  I've seen guys pound on their own chest celebrating harder than he got hit from Higgins.  

Trying to understand what some of our medical folks on here have said and others.  Some on twitter (too many opinions) are comparing this to Chris Pronger taking a 100 mph frozen rubber puck slap shot to the chest and I can't even comprehend that comparison.  Football padding is far superior to hockey.  Even the way Hamlin tackled Higgins, he appeared to be falling in the same direction as him.  Just seemed so routine and having a hard time comparing that hit to a fast ball or slap shot to the chest.  I'm far from a Dr, just trying to understand as the situation unfolds.  Is this a Jon Dorenbos situation where something has gone undetected?  Just waiting and praying for a positive update on Hamlin.

 

Youre only considering one part of the equation of force when you are focusing on those objects moving at 100mph. They weigh a couple ounces. Higgins is 200lbs plus the weight of his equipment moving at about 23mph. And you also have the additional force that Hamlin's body generates combining with that of Higgins. They literally do generate the same forces as car crashes on the football field.

The other aspect for commotio cordis, specifically is timing. The hit needs to be timed perfectly during ventricular repolarization. That occupies about 1% of a cardiac cycle (heart beat). 

Commotio Cordis specifically is diagnosed with the absence of any pre-existing arrhythmia, and no structural damage to the heart. 

Due to the forces generated by football hits, something other than commotio cordis is possible because there certainly can be enough force to actually injure the heart. I think @eagle45 alluded to cardiac contusion last night which is high on the list of possibilities as well.

If the league had any creativity, I'd recommend using college football over times or first to have 5 TDs (win by 2) to fit the games in.

5 minutes ago, olsilverhair said:

Im back this morning, yall ready for me

good morning to you sir

3 minutes ago, NCTANK said:

good morning to you sir

back atcha nctank, what part of nc you from?

1 minute ago, olsilverhair said:

back atcha nctank, what part of nc you from?

Lake Norman area

Terrible scene in last night game!  Noticed that the S players are most often involved in violent collisions.  Epps is the hardest hitting S, Blinkenships is a bit less but not by much.  The kick-return players are also involved in many compacts.  When players of opposite sides running at full speed collide, the impact on the bodies is very high.  The league needs to figure something out to prevent serious injuries.

3 minutes ago, Penn7980 said:

Terrible scene in last night game!  Noticed that the S players are most often involved in violent collisions.  Epps is the hardest hitting S, Blinkenships is a bit less but not by much.  The kick-return players are also involved in many compacts.  When players of opposite sides running at full speed collide, the impact on the bodies is very high.  The league needs to figure something out to prevent serious injuries.

 

Thia seemed like a complete freak occurrence though.  Nothing at all about the collision looked out of normal or extreme or anything like that. 

3 minutes ago, Penn7980 said:

Terrible scene in last night game!  Noticed that the S players are most often involved in violent collisions.  Epps is the hardest hitting S, Blinkenships is a bit less but not by much.  The kick-return players are also involved in many compacts.  When players of opposite sides running at full speed collide, the impact on the bodies is very high.  The league needs to figure something out to prevent serious injuries.

2 hours ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

I wouldn’t call it innocuous 

 

As I thought on it, I did wonder if Hamlin suffered from the same issue as Jerry Lawler that he references in the first tweet; would make a lot of sense.

I just hope Hamlin is going to be ok and those in the Bills and Bengal orgs get the help they need. Not nice to see.

13 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Youre only considering one part of the equation of force when you are focusing on those objects moving at 100mph. They weigh a couple ounces. Higgins is 200lbs plus the weight of his equipment moving at about 23mph. And you also have the additional force that Hamlin's body generates combining with that of Higgins. They literally do generate the same forces as car crashes on the football field.

The other aspect for commotio cordis, specifically is timing. The hit needs to be timed perfectly during ventricular repolarization. That occupies about 1% of a cardiac cycle (heart beat). 

Commotio Cordis specifically is diagnosed with the absence of any pre-existing arrhythmia, and no structural damage to the heart. 

Due to the forces generated by football hits, something other than commotio cordis is possible because there certainly can be enough force to actually injure the heart. I think @eagle45 alluded to cardiac contusion last night which is high on the list of possibilities as well.

The momentum involved (or more specifically the change in momentum) is the key.  You are correct about that.

 

A baseball was lined directly off the forehead of Rob Dibble (IIRC) and was a massive shot.  He was injured pretty badly... big cut, concussion, etc.  The ball hit almost squarely and fell to the ground pretty much right in front of him.  Almost all of the momentum of the ball was absorbed by his cranium.  At some point this season, I forget exactly when, might have been last year... a line drive was hit back at the pitcher (I can't recall who) and the ball bounced off his head and went out towards the outfield afterwards.  No blood, a serious knot on his head, but he didn't miss a start.  The ball's momentum wasn't changed as drastically by that deflection than the square shot to the forehead.  Dramatically different severity of injury, even though the same mass was involved in both situations and basically the same speed... aka being faster than either pitchers' reflexes to be able to defend themself or get out of the way.

Not to overlook the grave situation that happened last night- Just switching the topic a bit.

Sundays Game vs the Saints- The team and the coaches coached and played the game as if they knew it wasn't a must have game. The team played like this game didn't matter much- even though it did. But we all knew - they knew, they only needed to win one of the next two games. - And other than the Dline- they played uninspired football.

The coaches- played vanilla offense and defenses, as if it were preseason. Stayed away from the run game? Like why?  Just think this all falls back on the coaches. 

13 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

 There is more than just the two teams in each game that has to play the game.  Networks, crews, travel bookings, tons and tons of money.  It’s not about if certain teams would be happy because they get an extra week.  Again, pausing an entire leagues activities because of one player isn’t feasible.  

Again, no one is seriously suggesting that this will happen.

4 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Not to overlook the grave situation that happened last night- Just switching the topic a bit.

Sundays Game vs the Saints- The team and the coaches coached and played the game as if they knew it wasn't a must have game. The team played like this game didn't matter much- even though it did. But we all knew - they knew they only needed to win one of the next two games. - And other than the Dline- they played uninspired football.

The coaches- played vanilla offense and defenses, asw if it were preseason. Stayed away from the run game? Like why?  Just think this all falls back on the coaches. 

That's the weird part.  Just running the ball is a rather vanilla attack in its own right, isn't it?   Inside zone, outside zone, power.   They didn't have to get exotic with the run calls, and still likely would have put themselves in a better situation to win than they did with the pass happy offense they threw out there.

20 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

But didn’t Lawler suffer the episode sitting down doing a broadcast?   When did he suffer that trauma?  

Lawler wrestled a match and collapsed at the commentary desk shortly after. Last night was closer to what happened to Chris Pronger in the 1998 NHL playoffs. 
 

 

9 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Not to overlook the grave situation that happened last night- Just switching the topic a bit.

Sundays Game vs the Saints- The team and the coaches coached and played the game as if they knew it wasn't a must have game. The team played like this game didn't matter much- even though it did. But we all knew - they knew, they only needed to win one of the next two games. - And other than the Dline- they played uninspired football.

The coaches- played vanilla offense and defenses, as if it were preseason. Stayed away from the run game? Like why?  Just think this all falls back on the coaches. 

I’m pretty sure even if you let me or pretty much anyone of us on the blog be the play caller and just went vanilla we could’ve gotten us more the 2 yards on 3 plays. frankly cause knowing the saints run defense was bad most of us would’ve run it on first and second down with sanders and likely gotten more than 2 yards 

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I’m pretty sure even if you let me or pretty much anyone of us on the blog be the play caller and just went vanilla we could’ve gotten us more the 2 yards on 3 plays. frankly cause knowing the saints run defense was bad most of us would’ve run it on first and second down with sanders and likely gotten more than 2 yards 

I think Sanders is more injured than they’re letting on. And so they thought they could have minshew throw to win. They also don’t trust Scott or gainwell to carry the load if sanders isn’t well enough. That’s the only thing I can think of 

8 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I get that.  You said it was "reasonable”.  I say it isn’t "reasonable”.   
 

Now can we move back to silly gifs?  Or are we still in the "thoughts and prayers” phase of the morning?  

 

16 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Join me!

5 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I think Sanders is more injured than they’re letting on. And so they thought they could have minshew throw to win. They also don’t trust Scott or gainwell to carry the load if sanders isn’t well enough. That’s the only thing I can think of 

I don’t disagree with you about Sanders knee. I mentioned during the game when he ran off the field to the sideline that he was limping pretty noticeably and it didn’t look good. And then, when I rewatch the game, I thought the exact same way when I saw it. I want to say it was midway through the second quarter where you see it. then again in the second half the game they called 10 rushes for sanders. So if you thought his knee was that bad, then he shouldn’t have been out there and you definitely shouldn’t have given him 10 touches in the 2nd half. 

tbh gainwell over the last 2 games has actually looked pretty good when he’s gotten touches. That td run (while called back) was a great job by him finding, hitting the hole and exploding through it (that’s what she said). 

4 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I think Sanders is more injured than they’re letting on. And so they thought they could have minshew throw to win. They also don’t trust Scott or gainwell to carry the load if sanders isn’t well enough. That’s the only thing I can think of 

 

Join me!

Not trusting Gainwell and Scott- might be the case, but then this was the perfect game to give them the chance and tell them exactly that- Guys, we need you, go prove to us and everyone you can carry the load. ..... You challenege them.