Proposed Overtime Changes

[Mr. Miyagi]

I think it's long overdue for the NFL to make some changes for the overtime format. This "whoever wins the coin toss wins the game" format has got to go. How often have you winced when the Bills went into overtime (and that's a lot this season) and lost the coin-toss?

I like the proposal of a team must win by 6 points. But the drawback is that games could go very very long. In tennis, you have the tie breaker that could go on forever. And this is football, players get a lot more tired playing. So maybe if we play the race-to-6 format for 2 possesions per team, and then revert to the college overtime format, kind of like penalty kicks in soccer?

"There figure to be a number of proposals, from the competition committee and even individual franchises, presented at the annual league meetings in Phoenix next month. None of the proposals are likely to mirror the overtime system currently used by colleges. Here is a look at a few possibilities:

There will almost certainly be a proposal that calls for each team to get at least one possession. If the first team scored a field goal or touchdown, the opponent would get a chance to match or exceed that. If neither scored after two possessions each, the overtime would move to sudden death.

A proposal being championed by the league office would require a team to score six points to win. That would eliminate games being determined by one field goal.

Pittsburgh owner Dan Rooney is considering a proposal that would give both teams at least one possession. If the team that gained the ball first scored a touchdown, its opponent would have to also score a touchdown, but go for a two-point conversion, on the ensuing series." ...more (http://espn.go.com/nfl/columns/pasquarelli_len/1504220.html)

[Throne Logic]

I say they just flip the coin a bunch of times. Best out of 5 wins.

[The Natrix]

I'm not worried about losing the toss in OT this upcoming season because our D is going to be solid.

In general, I don't mind the current format. However, if it was up to me, I would go with the "first team to 6."

[Ð]

I think time + 1/2 after 8 hours, double time on Saturdays & double time + 1/2 on Sundays & holidays is more than fair.

[The Spin Rx]

The current NFL sudden Death system is MUCH superior to the gimmicky college JOKE of a system. Even if there is no change, it would not upset me. A simple fact is that in the history of the NFL the team winning the coin flip went down to score and win on the first possession is only 28%. This is not absurd.

What is so wrong with having an overtime game won by a field goal? Isn't that how hundreds and thousands of regulation games end? Why should it be any different just because it is overtime? Why make it a gimmick? If you can not win the game in 60 mins, why should you get any brake in an extended period? I don't see the logic in that.

The overtime *sudden death* is just an extension of the clock winding down at the end of the game. If you can't play good defense, tough luck you lose. In regulation, as the clock winds down, if you can't play good defense, tough luck you lose. There is no difference. Think about it....the last few moments of the game is exactly like sudden death. As the clock ticks down...there are no 2nd chances. The game of football has a clock for a reason. This is not baseball. You don’t get the bottom of the 9th. If regulation ticks down, and you pull out the last min score, YOU WIN. Overtime is just an extension of the last second score.

The College system takes the punt and kickoff teams off the field completely. Look at the Arkansas Vs Ole Miss game. Taking out special teams for 6 overtimes is just a total joke. Perhaps it is exciting, but it might as well be decided by Kill the man with the ball to me.............

I want the game to be decided with the SAME rules the core game is ruled by. Just me. If you have the best return man in the game why take his game COMPLETELY away? This only benefits the team with WEAK special teams. What if special teams and punt return teams are one of your teams’ strengths? Why penalize you? Why give the other team an edge by not having to face them?

[WG]

Originally posted by Throne Logic
I say they just flip the coin a bunch of times. Best out of 5 wins.

:lol:

May the best team win... :scared:


As well, just gotta make sure it's not the ref who did the Pittsburgh O/T flip w/ Bettis a couple of years ago.

[Jman]

Coin flips, possessions, PSH!!! Okay heres what we do. Each team captain engages in a little system I like to call...

Rock Paper Scissors...:idea:

best outta three:punchu:

[justasportsfan]

I'd say it should be a dance off between the cheeleaders.

[Pride]

The question needs to be asked, if Chad Morton doesn't return the KO in week 1, are we really discussing this right now?

The fact of the matter is, even if we do change the rules to 6 points first wins, we still lose that game.

I am in agreement with The Spin Rx (Formerly known as ExpansionBlues). If you aren't good enough to stop the team on D or STeams, then you deserve to lose.

I would be in favor of going to a system where the Away team always gets the ball first in the overtime. That way, we elimate the stupid coin toss, and makes the home team play defense first.

This would make for a more exciting last 2 minutes in the 4th quarter if the home team has the ball, they are more likely to go for the TD than a tying FG.

[Ð]

Paper, rock scissors at the 50 yd line. Best two out of three wins.
Stampsies, no erasies.

[The_Philster]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


:lol:

May the best team win... :scared:


As well, just gotta make sure it's not the ref who did the Pittsburgh O/T flip w/ Bettis a couple of years ago.

Two things about that.
One, Phil Luckett is now a back judge and they have two officials with the referee now to verify what is called.
Two, that game should have never come down to OT anyway. The ions had two blatant calls go against them. One was on a fumble call/non-call and the other was a TD by Johnnie Morton that was called a non-catch. The way I look at it, Pittsburgh got a lucky break even getting to see OT as they hadn't deserved it in the first place.

[LouGrant]

Awesome Post, Spin Rx.


It's simple- Play defense, Play special teams. If you fail to do either, you lose. Why reward a team with an explosive O for not covering the other 2/3rds of the game?


I think the recent surge in coin flip winner = OT winner has to do directly with the new kicking ball. The NFL wanted more returns and less touchbacks. To accomplish this, they moved the spot of the tee as far back as possible.

After that, they introduced a dead ball only on kickoffs. Notice that only a handfull of guys can reach the endzone these days? This increased dranatically the returns for a TD this season, and now you get drive starts at the 30-40 yard line instead of the 20.

Of course you will get a significant increase in coin flip winners/OT winners.

[Typ0]

Good analysis Rx but I do see some holes. First of all, at the end of regulation a team is limited in their time to score. So a team may get the ball back with 1:30 on the clock and have to score in that time. That is going to effect their play calling very much. At the beginning of OT though they have 15 minutes to score. This is quite a significant difference yet your arguement says there is little to no difference between the end of regulation and the OT period. Basically, the clock is not ticking down for the first team to get the ball in OT.

You assertion about the special teams is excellent. Myself, I would hate to see the OT period changed so it didn't reflect the way regulation was played that would be a serious downgrade to the game.

I do think the score six points rule is quite interesting because right now the objective in regulation is to score a TD but you will take a field goal if you can. However, the objective in OT is to score a field goal but you will take a TD if you can. In this fashion the six point rule seeks to make OT play out more like regulation because it brings the objectives of the periods more into line with each other. Additionally, the defensive play would become important both for the offense and defense because a team with a well performing defense would be more likely to opt to kick a field goal in regulation than a team with a poorly performing one.

[Typ0]

I also wanted to add if two teams play to a tie in regulation that means they are evenly matched or at least on that day are evenly matched. It's a shame to see the game decided on one possession on OT because obviously neither team could get the job done in regulation. I understand what you guys are saying about changing the rules but it also looks like winning the coin toss in OT is a serious advantage right now and that has to be addressed. The game needs to be settled on the field with a result that is not biased by a coin toss.

[The_Philster]

I don't think the coin toss winner really has a serious advantage. Sure they get the ball first but if they really deserved to win, then they would be giving it their all on the OT opening kickoff.

[Typ0]

I think it's a big advantage because the offensive team has the power to end the game. The team with the last possession of the 4th quarter is more a function of the clock management of the second half of the game. Additionally, if that team scored at the end of regulation that means the defensive team has been on the field for two consecutive series. It's the defensive side of the ball that suffers most from fatigue.

The six point rule addresses this because it forces the offensive team to score a TD if they want to win the game. Winning with a field goal pretty much reduces the field to 70 yards for the offensive team. Another thing I like about the six point rule is it just makes a lot more options during the OT period and I think that would be fun.