NFL Owners Nix Changing Overtime Rules

[Pride]

PHOENIX - NFL owners rejected a proposal to give each team the ball in overtime and delayed until May a decision on expanding the playoffs from 12 to 14 teams.

The overtime proposal received 17 votes from the 32 teams Wednesday, seven short of the 24 needed. There was one abstention — from the Oakland Raiders (news), who abstain more often than they vote.

"We don't feel that strongly about it," Raiders owner Al Davis said. "We'll go along with the feeling of the rest of the league."

MORE

[Billz_fan]

Dang, I don't mind if they wanna play with the OT rules a little. However changing the playoff structure sucks, It's all about making more money and not improving the game

That is the main reason I don't follow basketball and hockey, to many teams make the post season. I know it's only maybe going to expand 2 teams for now if it does. However expect if it does expand by 2 that the gloves will be off to add 2 more within 5 years or less.

I can't wait for a 7-9 team to get in the Super Bowl, at that point the NFL might just lose me.

[Pride]

I agree... in fact, I think they should take 2 off. Just make it the division winner that gets in.

[Buffarama]

Good because I haven't heard of a plan that makes sense. You can't give the team that was just scored on the ball, because know they are in 4 down territory for the whole drive, while the team that just scored did it on 3 downs.
The only thing that makes sense to me would be adding 10 yards for field goals to the line of scrimmage making the kicks 10 yards longer. And if you miss the kick the team gets the ball plus the ten yards. It would put emphasis on TD's. That way you can't win from the 30 yard line.
Also, no coin toss, team with the most yardage gets the ball first.

[lordofgun]

Why not just pick a game up where it leaves off in regulation if the score is tied? If a team is on the opponent's 30-yard line and time expires, the game just continues where it left off (at the opponent's 30-yard line) until a team scores.

That way there isn't the feeling of starting a new game and getting jipped by not getting the ball. You'd know the entire drive that you'd better stop them or the game will be over.

[Billz_fan]

Originally posted by lordofgun
Why not just pick a game up where it leaves off in regulation if the score is tied? If a team is on the opponent's 30-yard line and time expires, the game just continues where it left off (at the opponent's 30-yard line) until a team scores.

That way there isn't the feeling of starting a new game and getting jipped by not getting the ball. You'd know the entire drive that you'd better stop them or the game will be over.

I really don't have a problem with that theory, Especially if lets say the game is tied and team A is on the opponents 40 yard line when regulation runs out.

This would not only give team A the ball on the 40 which they deserve IMO. But it would shorten the OT process.

Game continues from the point it ended untill tie is broken.

err, sounds like a repeat of LOG's post,

umm..........I agree

[Pride]

If the clock were within 2 or 3 minutes, it becomes meaningless.

You know the game will continue as long as noone has scored.

Wont work. There is no purpose for hurrying.

2 minute drills would be extinct, and often, they are the most exciting part.

[Billz_fan]

Ok, Lets try this then

We do the coin toss at the end of regulation and play full 5 minute quarters untill the game ends with one team winning.

This should give each team a chance unless a defense just cant stop the other offense and in that case they don't deserve to win

[Herdwatcher]

Originally posted by Pride
I agree... in fact, I think they should take 2 off. Just make it the division winner that gets in.

I know baseball is a loong season, and playing that long does suck if you are out of first place by a half game at the end of the season only to have to pack up and go home. So they opened up with wild cards. I think it works fine. One gripe I have with it. The season needs to be longer by two games, one added in the beginning and one at the end to balance the amount of teams going in... More games to jusify the added teams in the playoffs.
I think more fans would be highly pissed off if their team played their ass' off to go 12-4 at not get in the playoffs. The football season is to short for just divisional winners to make it in. then, you have made the season that much shorter leaving fans unsatisfied killing one another for their football fix!
Not too long ago may 25 years or so, and I'm probably wrong, the NFL added a wild card, if I'm not mistaken, the damn Raiders beat out the Bills for the spot. I still feel the pain!

[Pride]

Herdwatcher!!!

Havent seen you in a while!

Good thoughts.

[lordofgun]

Originally posted by Pride
If the clock were within 2 or 3 minutes, it becomes meaningless.

You know the game will continue as long as noone has scored.

Wont work. There is no purpose for hurrying.

2 minute drills would be extinct, and often, they are the most exciting part.

Not so. The ONLY time a team wouldn't have to hurry is if there's a tie. And when's the last time you saw a team hurry with a few seconds left in a tie game to win the game in regulation? RARELY...unless they're already in field goal position! They usually down the ball in favor of playing OT. The 2-minute drill would still be very much in tact.

[lordofgun]

BTW, I agree with Halbert. When in doubt, PLAY MORE GAMES! You can never have enough playoff games in the NFL.

I have no doubt that within the next xouple of years, two more teams will be added to the playoffs. Most proposals get shot down the first time around.

[Herdwatcher]

Originally posted by Pride
Herdwatcher!!!

Havent seen you in a while!

Good thoughts.

Just crusin through life, I'm back in school after 19 short years.
I'm changing my career to the medical health field.
Like Dan Akroid (sp) on Saturday night live. One of his best skits.
"Fred Garvin. Male prositute!"
Only I will get to say "Brandon Mitchell. Male Nurse!"