Boomer and Shannon should be ashamed of themselves

[t.j 35]

When I looked up the data a few years ago, for the modern era, the team that won the coin toss in NFL overtime games has won the game something like 64% of the time!! That is an atrocious. Bill Cowher hit on the point in NFL Today this morning when he led off by playing a clip of the San Diego crowd going wild when they won the coin toss. However Cowher did not do a good job driving the point home. WHY does the crowd go wild because they won a coin toss? That's the question he needed to make Boomer and Shannon answer. It does suck that a team's offense or defense might not play in overtime (which is the main thing Cowher went on to harp on) but that is a secondary issue to the problem that the team who wins the coin toss has a time-proven huge advantage to win the game.

 

Boomer is an irresponsible jackass because he argues against it from a misleading standpoint (and I've heard him harp on this on the radio too), his argument is that only x% of the time does the team that receive go down and score on their first drive. (Boomer says it's 30% but last time I checked, a few years ago, it was more like 40% so Boomer is probably lying on top of being making a misleading argument to begin with). But that's not the point. Even if you don't win on that first drive maybe you punt the other team into bad field position, or win it on defense later. They may only win it on the first drive 30-40% of the time, but they also win it later in overtime an additional 20-30% of the time.

Bottom line, the team that wins the coin toss has a HUGE advantage, everyone knows it and that's why winning the coin toss is a big deal. Winning the coin toss SHOULDN'T be a big deal, and the overtime rules need to be scrapped.

 

I've been saying this for years, but I'm sorry, I had to rant, it really pisses me off seeing Boomer and Shannon screw up the issue and mislead the general public at a time when there was some controversy and people might have actually been motivated to demand change if they were presented with the real issue (64% wins for the coin toss winner) instead of the irrelevant issue (30-whatever percent of OT games won on the first drive).

 

P.S. Hey Boomer, eat shit with your "How much money does Freeney make?" argument. Here's a question for you, how much money does the Chargers defense make? Apparently not enough to have to do anything in overtime.

[roroco 75]

CBS commentators never let facts get in the way of a good story.

[roroco 75]

I should mention that I do like the way the overtime is played right now for the following reasons:

 

A) If you use a college system, then the team that is on offense second has a huge advantage of knowing what they will need to win. You could force both teams to go for the TD, but that is not an elegant solution.

 

The college system also hurts defensive minded teams. A D-centric team wins games on field position using stops and punts to get into a better situation to score. The college system favors teams with good offenses that can score in a red zone situation.

 

C) Along those line, the college system completely disrespects special teams.

 

D) Using just extra full periods can lead to very long games which hurt that team later in the playoffs.

 

 

 

I know the way the system is set up right now is not the best, but what would you suggest in a game where you cannot have penalty kicks?

[Cuse9 128]

So why not just have another 15 minute quarter? Then it still keeps all aspects of the game in play. It doesn't matter who gets the ball first. It doesn't matter if you're better at defense or offense. It's simply one more quarter.

[roroco 75]

So why not just have another 15 minute quarter? Then it still keeps all aspects of the game in play. It doesn't matter who gets the ball first. It doesn't matter if you're better at defense or offense. It's simply one more quarter.

Because if they are tied after that, then what? That is too much game.

 

I wouldn't actually mind one extra 10 minute quarter followed by sudden death - the team to receive in the extra quarter would get the ball first in sudden death.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

How about we just take field goals out of the overtime? Someone suggested you must score a TD to win. Doesn't eliminate the coin toss but it does give the kicking team a better chance.

[Cuse9 128]

How about we just take field goals out of the overtime? Someone suggested you must score a TD to win. Doesn't eliminate the coin toss but it does give the kicking team a better chance.

That's not fair either. Then the Lions would never win a game.....oh wait!

[FlaHawker 24]

Since the kickoff was moved to the 30 yard line, the team that won the coin toss in NFL overtime games has won the game something like 64% of the time!! That is an atrocious fact. Bill Cowher hit on the point in NFL Today this morning when he led off by playing a clip of the San Diego crowd going wild when they won the coin toss. However Cowher did not do a good job driving the point home. WHY does the crowd go wild because they won a coin toss? That's the question he needed to make Boomer and Shannon answer. It does suck that a team's offense or defense might not play in overtime (which is the main thing Cowher went on to harp on) but that is a secondary issue to the problem that the team who wins the coin toss has a time-proven huge advantage to win the game.

 

Boomer is an irresponsible jackass because he argues against it from a misleading standpoint (and I've heard him harp on this on the radio too), his argument is that only x% of the time does the team that receive go down and score on their first drive. (Boomer says it's 30% but last time I checked, a few years ago, it was more like 40% so Boomer is probably lying on top of being making a misleading argument to begin with). But that's not the point. Even if you don't win on that first drive maybe you punt the other team into bad field position, or win it on defense later. They may only win it on the first drive 30-40% of the time, but they also win it later in overtime an additional 20-30% of the time.

Bottom line, the team that wins the coin toss has a HUGE advantage, everyone knows it and that's why winning the coin toss is a big deal. Winning the coin toss SHOULDN'T be a big deal, and the overtime rules need to be scrapped.

 

I've been saying this for years, but I'm sorry, I had to rant, it really pisses me off seeing Boomer and Shannon screw up the issue and mislead the general public at a time when there was some controversy and people might have actually been motivated to demand change if they were presented with the real issue (64% wins for the coin toss winner) instead of the irrelevant issue (30-whatever percent of OT games won on the first drive).

 

P.S. Hey Boomer, eat shit with your "How much money does Freeney make?" argument. Here's a question for you, how much money does the Chargers defense make? Apparently not enough to have to do anything in overtime.

Boomer and Shannon screw up the issue? What facts have you provided to prove them wrong? None

[t.j 35]

I know the way the system is set up right now is not the best, but what would you suggest in a game where you cannot have penalty kicks?

 

There are any number of solutions that are better than the current pitiful system.

 

-The college system gives a much smaller advantage to the team winning the coin toss, and it's far more exciting.

-Supposedly the league has considered moving kickoffs to the 35 yard line for overtime. Overtimes would still be lame, but you'd have MUCH closer to 50% of games won by the coin toss winner.

-I saw a suggestion that teams could bid on what yard line to start off at! Whoever is willing to start further back, gets the ball. It's hacky but it would still be better.

-There was a "first-to-six" proposal... you have to score 6 points in overtime to win. Someone did the math and found that this would be far more fair to the coin toss loser. It's a little strange but one advantage is there would be a decent chance for all units (both teams' offense, defense, kickoff, kick return, punt, punt return, field goal, field goal defense) to get involved.

-Play a full period. The team winning the coin toss would still have an advantage, but a much smaller one. I know it's a lot of football, and these games might not be exciting either, but increased fairness would still be worth it.

-You could modify the college system to speed it up by starting from the 10 or 15 instead of the 25. Sure you start in easy field goal range but the 25 yard line is pretty easy field goal range for NFL kickers too. Another way you could speed it up is to force teams to go for 2 starting with the first overtime round rather than the third.

 

There is probably an even better system that hasn't been suggested yet. The first step is the NFL needs to accept that it has a problem, THEN make a serious effort to address the problem. That isn't going to happen when people involved with the league misconstrue the issue as having to do with the importance of offense vs the importance of defense.

[t.j 35]

Boomer and Shannon screw up the issue? What facts have you provided to prove them wrong? None

 

I guess you missed the part about 64% of teams that won the toss won the game.

[FlaHawker 24]

I guess you missed the part about 64% of teams that won the toss won the game.

You said Boomer was lying. You provided nothing to back that up, You fail. As for the 64% well I guess the defenses should earn their money and stop the offenses. End of story and crying.

[t.j 35]

You said Boomer was lying. You provided nothing to back that up, You fail. As for the 64% well I guess the defenses should earn their money and stop the offenses. End of story and crying.

 

It takes a hell of a long time to look up all the data. I am working on it. At least unlike Boomer I am not going on national TV and stating incorrect numbers as fact. Instead I am on a message board questioning his numbers and stating other numbers with a disclaimer that they may be outdated. Besides, I noted that whether or not Boomer's 30% first-drive-win figure is accurate is not the important part, accurate or not it is still misleading because it hides the real issue which is wins by the coin toss winner.

 

Anyway, you are the last person on this forum that should ever criticize someone else for crying. I'm not sure why I made the mistake of even humoring you with a response considering who I was dealing with, but this will be the last time I do so.

[FlaHawker 24]

It takes a hell of a long time to look up all the data.

I stopped reading right here. You FAIL

[Inspiration 0]

Field-goal kicking contest

[gemynd 0]

Cheerleader dance-off?

[Phurfur 70]

[phan420 0]

It takes a hell of a long time to look up all the data. I am working on it. At least unlike Boomer I am not going on national TV and stating incorrect numbers as fact. Instead I am on a message board questioning his numbers and stating other numbers with a disclaimer that they may be outdated.

 

Since the kickoff was moved to the 30 yard line, the team that won the coin toss in NFL overtime games has won the game something like 64% of the time!! That is an atrocious fact.

No disclaimer in that statement. You did the same thing you are accusing him of doing...spouting out nonsense unless you have something to back it up. Until then...

 

[roroco 75]

No disclaimer in that statement. You did the same thing you are accusing him of doing...spouting out nonsense unless you have something to back it up. Until then...

 

Per.... http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dl.../811280361/1019

 

"Unfortunately, the statistics mostly back up the NFL. Since the current overtime format was adopted in 1974, teams who won the coin flip have won the game only 53.2 percent of the time."

 

That is just the first article I found. I am sure there are others out there, but it seems to be fairly 50/50 as to who wins the game when they win the coin flip.

[t.j 35]

Per.... http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dl.../811280361/1019

 

"Unfortunately, the statistics mostly back up the NFL. Since the current overtime format was adopted in 1974, teams who won the coin flip have won the game only 53.2 percent of the time."

 

That is just the first article I found. I am sure there are others out there, but it seems to be fairly 50/50 as to who wins the game when they win the coin flip.

 

You really can't include data from as far back as 1974. The NFL didn't go to kickoffs at the 30 yard line until 1994. The overtime results changed drastically at that time.

 

By the way, that statement is part of the problem. People including data since 1974 and saying it backs up the current system. Well I'm sorry, data from before 1994 has no bearing on whether the current system works! And whether or not the coin toss winner scores on their first drive also is not what tells us whether the current system works. Yet those are the two arguments I see people use to dismiss the idea of change, over and over again.

 

No disclaimer in that statement. You did the same thing you are accusing him of doing...spouting out nonsense unless you have something to back it up. Until then...

 

 

My bad. I should not have said fact. I did not realize I had said that. Still, I am on a message board and not national TV. Also, I assure you the current number is atrocious, whether it's actually 64% or something slightly less. BTW, I'm guessing Boomer is using all-time numbers to get his 30% (pre-1994), in which case I was wrong to say he lied but even more justified in criticizing him for being misleading.

[Evil Genius 0]

Solution: Simply give both teams a chance. Highest score after equal number of possessions.

 

So the second team knows what they need - who cares? - they have to deal with added pressure because if the other team scored first, there is a mandate to match or exceed.

 

Even if playing second has an edge, it is less of an advantage than needing but a first-drive field goal to win it.

 

However, if this luck-based edge is troublesome, then eliminate the coin toss in this instance, and always let the home or visitor go first, depending on League philosophy, and at least it's a known edge, going in.

 

I might add that this conjectural format keeps special teams, and eliminating fumbles, crucial. All aspects of the game have integrity.

 

It's elegant and strategically interesting, while giving both teams a reasonable shot to win it.

[IronCity Steel 0]

Solution: Simply give both teams a chance. Highest score after equal number of possessions.

 

So the second team knows what they need - who cares? - they have to deal with added pressure because if the other team scored first, there is a mandate to match or exceed.

 

Even if playing second has an edge, it is less of an advantage than needing but a first-drive field goal to win it.

 

However, if this luck-based edge is troublesome, then eliminate the coin toss in this instance, and always let the home or visitor go first, depending on League philosophy, and at least it's a known edge, going in.

 

I might add that this conjectural format keeps special teams, and eliminating fumbles, crucial. All aspects of the game have integrity.

 

It's elegant and strategically interesting, while giving both teams a reasonable shot to win it.

 

If the OT rules do get changed, I would like to see the kickers eliminated. I still keep sudden death, but a team needs to either score a TD or safety to win.

[FlaHawker 24]

What's the point of this? Fairness? Life isn't fair. In OT the offense who gets the ball first has a chance to score. The defense has a chance to stop them. Pretty simple. End of story.

[BMoney 0]

mcnabb would like to know who gets the ball for the second OT...thanks

[Quickolas1 80]

maybe if the colts had made a 3rd and 2 with about 2 minutes left to play, they wouldn't have had to worry about OT

 

?

[cribdog 0]

How 'bout this for an overtime rule, I just thought it up, let me know pros and cons.

 

Play 10 minute overtime period, but make the winner whomever is ahead any time after 10 minutes. So, if it is tied 7-7 and time runs out, you just continue playing until one team scores, sudden death. The team that has the ball keeps the ball, same down and distance like the 10 minutes never ran out. You don't have to flip a coin and kick-off again, you just keep going. If that team is down at the 1, they may score on the very next play and win.

 

Seems like this would take all the luck out of it, as both teams should get the ball within 10 minutes. It would not take forever, as some team would score eventually, they would just need a fg to end it after 10 minutes if tied. Most of the time 1 team would probably be ahead, and it would just end at 10 minutes.

 

Thoughts?

[roroco 75]

How 'bout this for an overtime rule, I just thought it up, let me know pros and cons.

 

Play 10 minute overtime period, but make the winner whomever is ahead any time after 10 minutes. So, if it is tied 7-7 and time runs out, you just continue playing until one team scores, sudden death. The team that has the ball keeps the ball, same down and distance like the 10 minutes never ran out. You don't have to flip a coin and kick-off again, you just keep going. If that team is down at the 1, they may score on the very next play and win.

 

Seems like this would take all the luck out of it, as both teams should get the ball within 10 minutes. It would not take forever, as some team would score eventually, they would just need a fg to end it after 10 minutes if tied. Most of the time 1 team would probably be ahead, and it would just end at 10 minutes.

 

Thoughts?

That is what I said on the other thread 3 hours ago almost verbatim.... FYI... I still like sudden death.

[phan420 0]

What's the point of this? Fairness? Life isn't fair. In OT the offense who gets the ball first has a chance to score. The defense has a chance to stop them. Pretty simple. End of story.

Exactly! I forget who the broadcaster was that said this last night, but he had the same type of remarks. It's not like the team that wins the coin toss gets to go out there and just kick a free field goal...

 

The team that loses the coin toss gets to put their defense out there and try to stop the other offense...if they can't do it and it adds to the "stats", then so be it.

[Yippie Skippy 0]

Eliminate the OT. If neither team is good enough to win then it ends in a tie.

[robertd52 0]

Eliminate the OT. If neither team is good enough to win then it ends in a tie.

 

Playoffs?? Dont talk about Playoffs!!! PLAYOFFS???????

 

Come on now.

 

In playoffs you could say that the team thats home field advances in the event of a tie....

 

Im sure thatd go over swell....

[Milwalkeysbeast 0]

Make it as close to a shootout as possible. Give both teams a chance from the 20 yard line with no field goals. Keep going back and forth until someone wins.

[neworleansff2003 0]

ok francis, how about this:

 

take a piece from the soccer world....refs keep a seperate clock that runs during ANY play stoppage for penalties/challenges (probably adds up to AT LEAST 15 minutes per game).

 

If a game ends in tie, then that time starts running, BUT it does not stop (ie, no timeouts, no stoppage for penalties)...you play until it runs out. If score still tie, then its a tie. if it is a playoff game, you turn the clock off at this point and its sudden death.

 

 

hella cool.

[kwibby 0]

I brought this up before so here goes.. the team that wins the flip if scores a td wins the game, but if they only score a field goal

the other team can only win if they score a td on their drive... no field goal try for them... if team that wins flip does not score then next team to score wins. i think this would be fair and exciting.

[edjr 5,568]

Why do we even have OT?

 

I say make them win it in regulation.

 

If they tie? fock them both, send them both home.

[surferskin 30]

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...333219&st=0

 

The people have spoken.

 

College OT >>>> NoFunLeague

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I hate Shannon, but Boomer is solid.

 

I think that Boomer was not lying, but was using a larger sample of data than tj is. Over a longer period of time, the number of teams winning the coin toss has a smaller impact. That is just the numbers.

 

With all of that said, I agree that the current OT format is broken.

[MJCtaxi 0]

You said Boomer was lying. You provided nothing to back that up, You fail. As for the 64% well I guess the defenses should earn their money and stop the offenses. End of story and crying.

 

 

By the way if 30-35% of OT games are won in the first possesion, then 65-70% of games get both defenses on the field, which I feel is a fair percentage.

I am also a a big stat guy, if you go to college rule OT, then you'll have too many 5 and 6 TD pass performances right? I would be completely against that. Great for fantasy football but not for the NFL.

[roroco 75]

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...333219&st=0

 

The people have spoken.

 

College OT >>>> NoFunLeague

The college overtime system is stupid. It is good in the college ranks where they disrespect defense and focus solely on high powered offense. For the NFL, you need to allow the defenses to do what they do... control the field of possession.

[surferskin 30]

The college overtime system is stupid.

Well, that's settled then.

[surferskin 30]

 

By the way if 30-35% of OT games are won in the first possesion, then 65-70% of games get both defenses on the field, which I feel is a fair percentage.

I am also a a big stat guy, if you go to college rule OT, then you'll have too many 5 and 6 TD pass performances right? I would be completely against that. Great for fantasy football but not for the NFL.

Who gives a fock about the stats? This isn't baseball. Leave FF out of it for a minute. It's more fun to watch and it's the fairest way.

 

BTW, if the NFL adopted an OT more like college...they wouldn't have to start at the 25. Maybe the 50 would work.

[Franknbeans 46]

so sorry about your Colts