NFL Overtime Changes
Thought I'd put this to a BtB poll.
So my idiotic friend posed an idea that amazed me in its possible intelligence (considering the source) on how to "fix" the NFL overtime.
Very simple: first team to 6 wins. So you need two field goals or a touchdown. It's not field-goal sudden death, it's not going to piss off people who hate the college shoot out format, it's not necessary to take an eternity.
I'm not sold on it yet, but I think I like it, and definitely more than the current system.
What do you think?
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
0 recs |
21 comments
Comments
OT Change Idea
Here’s my suggestion:
Dont tell the opposing team’s QB that a game can end in a tie and let him cake his way through OT.
Of course, I speak of Don McNabb….hahaha…what a moron!!!!
by Victor79 on Nov 17, 2008 6:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
That's just amazing
What an idiot…then to go on and say, can you imagine if it was a playoff game that ended in a tie?
ROFL
by mhuff13 on Nov 17, 2008 8:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LMAO
I just watched the BSPN crew debate how a veteran QB could not know the rules of overtime.
T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003
by APerfectStar on Nov 17, 2008 7:25 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Can you imagine if that was Romo
It would be 24/7 news.
by mhuff13 on Nov 17, 2008 8:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you cant have endless games
Leave it the way it is. It’s rare that games end in a tie. Teams have five quarters to settle game. If you change the rules and have a team that plays the following thursday night, that team would be spent after the first quarter of the following game if they had to play two or three extra quarters the sunday before to try to win the game with a TD.
by Deke on Nov 17, 2008 7:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
with his suggestion of needing 6 to win you could still have ties
you just don’t win on a FG. but you could still play only one OT quarter.
in fact it would make ties more likely.
by scottmaui on Nov 17, 2008 9:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Anybody else think the college football OT format is rinky dink?
I think it’s a little silly especially when you get into 6 OT’s and 70-63 basketball scores. It’s way too favorable to the offense to start out in field goal range and is such a crapshoot it doesn’t matter how much better one team might be than the other. I strongly believe if you gave each team the ball at the 50-yard line most of those games would end within 2 OT periods. Also, starting the OT at the 50 would increase the odds of the defense making a stop instead of the way it is now which is shockingly lopsided in favor of the offense.
by MadMick on Nov 17, 2008 8:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I kind of like it
really puts the pressure on the kickers to make every kick.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Nov 17, 2008 8:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you on this one
The scores just get out of hand, and the numbers get inflated.
I don’t like the current NFL system, but the college option isn’t the answer either IMO
by mhuff13 on Nov 17, 2008 8:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Kickoff from the 35
I think the main complaint with FG sudden death is that is gives such an advantage to whoever wins the toss, leaving too much of the outcome up to chance.
Here’s a good discussion of this proposal. It is from 1994 so this question has been around for a while.
Some basic points:
- Prior to 1994 when the kickoff was moved back 5 yards to the 30, who won the toss did not significantly affect the outcome
- Since 1994, nearly one-third of overtime games have been won on the first possession by the team that received the ball first, and there is a 99.99% statistical certainty that the coin flip has made a difference in the outcome of the game over the last 10 years
- The first-to-six proposal does decrease the probabilities that the receiving team wins the game, but it also increases the probability of a tie
Considering that, my proposal would be to have the OT kickoff only from the 35. If prior to 1994 when the kickoff was at the 35 the impact of the coin toss was not statistically significant, that seems like the most simple, easy solution to the question.
by scottmaui on Nov 17, 2008 9:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think they should just play one more quarter.
Instead of making it sudden death, just play the extra quarter and take the final score. If it’s still a tie, then so be it, but both teams have a fair shot. You would still get the coin toss, kickoff, etc.
I like the college format, but the NFL will never do it due to the effect on stats and the points tiebreaker.
by Baked Potato Soup on Nov 17, 2008 9:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I like this idea..
one more quarter, at the end the score is the score.. NO suddend death…
the college format is, well, for college… handing professionals field position that is pretty much already scoring field position is pretty rinkey dink…..
ties only happens once every few years, out of hundereds of games, so it’s not like players should be worried about playing a BUNCH of 75 minute games….
I don’t think there is a fair / non ‘wuss’ way of INSURING there is NOT a tie…. i think ties suck, however if one team can’t beat another team in regulation PLUS another 15 minutes (or some other pre – determined amount of time) then on that day at that time they were equal and the score might need to reflect that…
by stephena on Nov 18, 2008 12:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It would add more excitement to the end of games, too.
If a team is hurting, they might be less likely to play for the tie at the end of the game and take a chance at some Hail Mary plays and other stuff. Whenever I see a team start kneeling it down or calling dive plays with a minute left and the score tied, I hope they lose in OT. Teams would probably take the chance a little more often rather than expose their players to possible injury from the 5th quarter. And that 5th quarter would be great, too, especially once one team scored. The coaches would have to really use some strategy and clock management.
by Baked Potato Soup on Nov 19, 2008 11:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dueling possessions
My simple solution would be to give each team an equal number of possessions only within the flow of a normal game instead of giving each team the ball at a predetermined spot on the field the way they do in college or allowing a team that ended an overtime period on offense to also start the next OT on offense.
For example, if the team that won the toss scored a field goal on its opening possession the other team would have a chance to extend the game with a field goal or win it outright with a touchdown. Like the college game, this would go on until the team with the even numbered possessions (2nd, 4th, 6th) failed to match whatever score the opposing team had put on the board.
Of course, defensive touchdowns no matter which team possessed the ball first would end the game since a turnover would……
A.) constitute a change of possession if the first team to receive the ball committed the turnover.
B.) or in a scenario where the team with the opening kickoff failed to score but the other threw a pick-six on its only possession that could be considered as the other team still managing to score in the first overtime period even if technically they would have had an extra possession due to having received the opening kickoff. This would be an extra wrinkle giving the defense incentive to run a turnover back to the house so as to not give the other team another possession and end the game immediately.
by MadMick on Nov 17, 2008 10:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
+100
There are definitely some changes that could be made to make college a little better, such as not having basketball scores by the end of the 5th OT, but I like it way more than the NFL format. If you give the opposing team’s offense a chance at scoring, it takes away from the “Win the coin toss, Win the game” thought.
by AikmanNailedMySis on Nov 18, 2008 9:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The over-riding consideration
by the league is to minimize injuries through extra play. You’ve got teams that have just just spent an entire game beating each other up. The prospect of extending that even further with a rule change beyond what’s currently in place has no chance of happening. Look no further than the AZ game – Pro Bowl QB lost for 3 games, Pro Bowl punter lost for the season. No need for fundamental rule change when it only happens every 6 or so years.
Lastly, a great line by Trey Wingo to the effect, the Iggles had 5 Quarters to beat CIN and still couldn’t do it.
'You can recognize true genius by this: all the dunces are in confederacy against you' - Sir Francis Bacon
by tdships on Nov 18, 2008 8:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think
the kickers should have to arm wrestle on the 50 to decide the games. Go Folk!
by sublimezg on Nov 18, 2008 9:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Leave it the way it is…
If you lose the coin toss than play some damn defense.
by gee-roj on Nov 18, 2008 9:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
college
i like the college OT, but move the starting position out of FG range. make them earn at least a couple first downs to be in FG position.
I commented. You're welcome.
another transplant from The Blue & Silver Report
by bulldog jeeper on Nov 19, 2008 7:21 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 



















