Overtime rule needs change

[GridironGuzzlers 3]

I think it would be more interesting and strategic if you knew ahead of time who gets the ball first in OT. instead of a coin toss, let it be the home team, or the visiting team, or the team who won or lost the opening coin toss. would sure affect strategy more at the end of the game if they knew who would get the ball first in OT. BTW the college OT is horsesh__.

[jaxjag 43]

I think it would be more interesting and strategic if you knew ahead of time who gets the ball first in OT. instead of a coin toss, let it be the home team, or the visiting team, or the team who won or lost the opening coin toss. would sure affect strategy more at the end of the game if they knew who would get the ball first in OT. BTW the college OT is horsesh__.

 

There is nothing wrong with NFL OT either. Except this year it will change for the play-offs because too many people overreacted last season. This year, only 1 of 16 teams receiving the ball in OT have scored on their first possession and the kicking team has won the majority of games.

 

Wait until the play-offs - when a team loses that would have won under the traditional rules!

[Gepetto 987]

Winning a coin toss in overtime and then getting a decent return, a penalty, both and a play or two and kicking a field goal to win is dumb. OT playoff rules are now perfect.

[rip316 0]

Winning a coin toss in overtime and then getting a decent return, a penalty, both and a play or two and kicking a field goal to win is dumb. OT playoff rules are now perfect.

 

Well the teams played 4 quarters to get to overtime, make plays and score more points than the other team and it won't get to the OT coin toss. Give up a long run back on special teams, too bad your special teams suck. Don't be stupid and get a dumb penalty. There are three components on each team, offense, defense, and special team, if one of these units can't get it done too focking bad you loose.

[RicemanX 20]

What's crazy is that the stats for OT games this season.

Only 40% of the teams that win the coin toss have won.

[nobody 2,040]

BTW the college OT is horsesh__.

 

I'm glad you said this. Anyone who prefers the college OT rules is my enemy for life, but now we are brothers for life.

[phan a tic 6]

I think it would be more interesting and strategic if you knew ahead of time who gets the ball first in OT. instead of a coin toss, let it be the home team, or the visiting team, or the team who won or lost the opening coin toss. would sure affect strategy more at the end of the game if they knew who would get the ball first in OT. BTW the college OT is horsesh__.

 

 

Agreed. Agreed.

 

You know I brought this up once at a game at RFK. Bears beat the Redskins for their only loss EVER at home in the playoffs. You would have thought I indicated that I was more popular than Jesus Christ. I was booed and jeered by my neighboring buddies.

 

Good post my man. Balls!

[travis_henrys_baby_momma 10]

This is radical.....I know....but:

 

If the score is tied....why must the game be stopped and then restarted, after a coin flip, under completely different circumstances (possession, field position)?

 

Why not allow play to continue until a winner is determined via sudden death? When time expires on the game clock, put 15 minutes on the clock before the next play to begin the overtime period.

[GridironGuzzlers 3]

This is radical.....I know....but:

 

If the score is tied....why must the game be stopped and then restarted, after a coin flip, under completely different circumstances (possession, field position)?

 

Why not allow play to continue until a winner is determined via sudden death? When time expires on the game clock, put 15 minutes on the clock before the next play to begin the overtime period.

Take a second to think about this and you will realize why it won't work

[travis_henrys_baby_momma 10]

Take a second to think about this and you will realize why it won't work

 

Please give me a good reason, because I see no reason why it wouldn't work. It's the same concept as when the third quarter ends....you just start the 4th quarter right where you left off at the end of the third.

 

I see no reason that the team with the ball should have to attempt a hail mary or 59 yd field goal....or otherwise face the stupid coin toss.

 

It could also benefit the team on defense as well, depending on down, distance and field position.

 

There are plenty of sports where they just keep playing if the score is tied....stopping play and tossing a coin doesn't work, and it never will work.

[GridironGuzzlers 3]

of course it can be done, my point is that it shouldn't be done for obvious reasons. Not obvious to you though so maybe you should think a little longer, or someone else will explain it before I do

[neworleansff2003 0]

quit being a d-ick smart guy. he is right, there is NO reason why it cant be done. It is how baseball and soccer both do it...they sure as hell have been played a lot longer in their current format than NFL in its current format (hell, they've only done it that way in baseball and soccer for 150 years).

 

lolamenets.

 

of course it can be done, my point is that it shouldn't be done for obvious reasons. Not obvious to you though so maybe you should think a little longer, or someone else will explain it before I do

[GridironGuzzlers 3]

quit being a d-ick smart guy. he is right, there is NO reason why it cant be done. It is how baseball and soccer both do it...they sure as hell have been played a lot longer in their current format than NFL in its current format (hell, they've only done it that way in baseball and soccer for 150 years).

 

lolamenets.

I thought someone here would know sports. Baseball does not use a clock, completely different scenario with innings. And yes soccer does stop play at the end of regulation to start a new period, as does basketball and hockey. Not sure how you could miss that.

And in case you didn't notice, in football, when the half is over according to the clock, it's over. They don't start the 3rd qtr where the 2nd qtr left off. Imagine some scenarios. Score tied near the end of the fourth quarter, The team with the ball has no urgency. Wouldn' matter if there was 4 min. 1 min. or 10 seconds. They could try to run out the clock so when sudden death starts they go down and score. Or on the other hand imagine being down by a touchdown with a couple minutes left. It wouldn't matter when you score because the other time would have unlimited time to break the tie and win. Idiotic. We would just throw the clock out the window in these situatuion. The clock is a very important element in football.

[travis_henrys_baby_momma 10]

I don't think we need to get all chippy in this thread....pretty sure the NFL isn't monitoring the outcome of the discussion.

 

Like I said, extending regulation play would be radical. People would definitely have arguments against it.

 

Like Guzzlers said, a team could run some clock and make their field goal try during "sudden death". However that really doesn't change much, as teams currently run down the clock to make their FG attempt the last play of regulation (in other words-- it's still sudden death).

 

Personally, I think it would be more fair and less arbitrary that the methods currently employed by the NFL and NCAA.

 

The fairest system would be to simply play an additional 15 minutes and accept the result....win, lose or draw. That is basically what they do in soccer and basketball (except no draws). But that will never happen in the NFL.

 

By the way, I was thinking of sports like volleyball and tennis where you just keep playing, without interruption, if the score is tied.

[GridironGuzzlers 3]

once again those sports do not use a clock, so there's no comparison. The clock is an integral part of football especially at the end of the game, and you suggest throwing it out the window. Radical, yes. Inane, yes. Not being chippy, just intelligent and logical. Just a friendly debate

[nobody 2,040]

I like the plan to just continue on. Fock a clock. I ain't going to be a slave to no clock. You can, but not me.

[neworleansff2003 0]

once again those sports do not use a clock, so there's no comparison. The clock is an integral part of football especially at the end of the game, and you suggest throwing it out the window. Radical, yes. Inane, yes. Not being chippy, just intelligent and logical. Just a friendly debate

[nobody 2,040]

The only thing the rule Travis Henry's Baby Mama proposed would change is a situation where a score was tied with the clock winding down. The team with the ball would be less inclined to press to get into field goal range. Whoop de doooo!@$#!@#

 

I think Travis Henry's Baby Mama has a pretty good suggestion here.

[LunaTick 29]

NFL OT rules exist for one reason and one reason only.

 

Television Contracts and Prime Time Schedules.

 

Because the current system is so limiting, the impact of OT games on a networks Prime Time programming is negligible.

Thus, the league gives a benefit to the networks, the contract for televising the games is improved.

 

 

However, I don't care for a system where in a party doesn't have a chance to rebuttal score.

If you got the ball first and didn't score. Too bad.

But if you kicked/defended first, give one opportunity before calling the score.

Would change the decision by some teams to FG kick vs going for a td.

 

Some have suggested in such a system that if the initial receiving team in OT scores a TD than game over.

 

I don't agree with that, if you only give a party a shot if a fg. Come on.

[dj88 0]

Why would you essentially give the team with the ball last in the 4th qtr with a tie game extra time to score? That makes no sense. No urgency at all. No last second heroics. Free time?

 

It's game over after 4 qtrs. If it's tied then it's overtime aka new game.

 

I don't like this suggestion at all.

[nobody 2,040]

Why would you essentially give the team with the ball last in the 4th qtr with a tie game extra time to score? Because the game is tied and they have the ball

 

That makes no sense. No urgency at all. No last second heroics. Free time?

It's not free time. The score is tied, and you won't be losing your awesome last second heroics. This would only come into play if the game were tied, and sometimes teams just play conservative and go into overtime.

 

It's game over after 4 qtrs. If it's tied then it's overtime aka new game.

Which is nothing like any overtime ever.

 

I don't like this suggestion at all.

That's because you live in a box scared of change

 

Why flip a coin to start the overtime instead of having a scrum for the ball? Why sudden death if it's a new game? All we are trying to do is get a winner and move on with our lives. The current system isn't any fairer than this one. Viva la Travis Henry's Baby Momma!!!

[JT 137]

YES! Anything that makes the NFL more like soccer has to be good!

 

Not quite sure why an overhaul is needed when fewer than half of games are decided by the OT coin flip possession.

[lod001 1,237]

The latest ignorance proposed by the Titans org is that the team that gets the ball 1st HAS to score a 2 point conversion after the TD in order to win outright. How focking stupid. What kind of idiot comes up with a rule that doesn't address the problem at all?

The Colts & Eagles propose both team get the ball but no idea what happens after they both score a TD? My guess is the game goes on which is somewhat fair.

But the real fix is a 10 minute OT period. Kinda like...it used to be!!!!!....play a timed period. 

[weepaws 2,460]

Keep it the way it currently is.  

 

[nobody 2,040]

Someone back in the day proposed that if the first team scores, the second team has to score in less plays.

[weepaws 2,460]

Interesting if a team was to score in one play.  

[lod001 1,237]

That kinda shows how stupid the current rule is. Lets say they kickoff and the team runs it back. They win and even the D never has a chance to stop them. They always love to say 'well the defense had their chance'. No, a coin flip won the game.

[Ray_T 591]

1 hour ago, nobody said:

Someone back in the day proposed that if the first team scores, the second team has to score in less plays.

this is one rule the CFL did a bang up job with.

both teams get to touch the ball in overtime at least once but there are no 1 point converts.  all possessions start on the opposing teams 35 yard line.  if you score a TD, you are going for 2.   if you make it, the other team needs to match to make the overtime continue.   if you dont make the 2 point convert, the other team can win if they get a TD and convert theirs.

its fast, its exciting.  every possession is on the outer edge of the scoring range for FG's.   so if you move the ball, you are likely scoring points but if you give up a sack early in the drive, possibly not.

I"ve watched it.  its exciting.

[AxeElf 787]

As a fantasy owner, I think each team should have 10 possessions in overtime.  The team that scores the most on their ten possessions wins.

If they're still tied, they play a second 10-possession period.

[weepaws 2,460]

It should remain the same.  

[polecatt 403]

If you really want to make it "fair"

Give each team one possession and the  score after that, is the result.

Don't worry about time or scoring a FG or a TD, or a 2 pt conversion. Each team gets one possession, the winner wins or it's a tie.

Or if you really wanted to get crazy with it, do kind of like soccer.

Kick FGs until one team is up. Start at the old PAT spot, then move it back 5 yards each round, when one team hits and the other misses, it's over

[weepaws 2,460]

This is what they should do, if the team that gets the ball first scores a td they win, if they don’t score or only score a fg, the other team gets a shot at scoring a fg to tie it up or a td too win , and they keep going unto a team scores a td and the other doesn’t match it.  

Now that’s enough.  

 

[nobody 2,040]

I'm not a big fan of having teams start at certain yard line.  Special teams are part of the game.  What they should do is have both offenses playing at the same time going opposite directions.  First score wins.

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

I can't believe that everyone needs to concoct some bull crap way to break a tie.  Just play another full quarter, it's not that hard.  If it's still tied, then the game ends in a tie.  If neither team can win in 5 quarters, neither one deserves to win.

In the playoffs, keep going until someone wins.  Play a 6th quarter, then a 7th, then an 8th.  Not.  That.  Hard.

[Utilit99 4,099]

2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I can't believe that everyone needs to concoct some bull crap way to break a tie.  Just play another full quarter, it's not that hard.  If it's still tied, then the game ends in a tie.  If neither team can win in 5 quarters, neither one deserves to win.

In the playoffs, keep going until someone wins.  Play a 6th quarter, then a 7th, then an 8th.  Not.  That.  Hard.

Seriously. If they feel so strongly about player safety, Call the game a tie at the end of the 4th. If they want overtime, just start over with a coin flip and play a full quarter.

Two options that don't change how the game strategy is played out.

[weepaws 2,460]

Why not just keep how it is today? 

[nobody 2,040]

I say you give each team a possession no matter what.  If they both score, they game then becomes a pentathlon and the players need to compete in the events. 

[lod001 1,237]

12 hours ago, weepaws said:

Why not just keep how it is today? 

Because its really stupid. In the last 3 years there have been 3 teams that got screwed by a coin flip in the playoffs & SB. 

The lame excuse has always been, 'well the defense should have done its job'. That's the excuse because those people have nothing else. Imagine the 1st team running a kickback vs the 2nd stringers special teams unit. Then the excuse would change to 'well they should have played special teams better.' 

[Donkey 34]

21 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I can't believe that everyone needs to concoct some bull crap way to break a tie.  Just play another full quarter, it's not that hard.  If it's still tied, then the game ends in a tie.  If neither team can win in 5 quarters, neither one deserves to win.

In the playoffs, keep going until someone wins.  Play a 6th quarter, then a 7th, then an 8th.  Not.  That.  Hard.

A lot of fans don't like ties. And you can't play 6,7 or 8 quarters in the playoffs, huge competitive disadvantage to the team in the next round.

[jrokh 569]

8 hours ago, nobody said:

I say you give each team a possession no matter what.  If they both score, they game then becomes a pentathlon and the players need to compete in the events. 

I like this idea, but instead of the traditional pentathlon they should do some version of that contest in college where the first team to drink a case or keg of beer, a bottle of whiskey, smoke an eighth of mary jane, and eat a pie of Pizza and down a tray of jello shots, gets the W. I'd be all in for that.