New OT Rules

[GusFrerotte]

Dumb concept all around. IF the team that wins the coin flip goes down and scores a TD it is game over. Not much of a change to be honest. Why is vying for a FG so bad. It is just as exciting if not more. If you really want to be fair about it just play another quarter and see who is ahead at the end of the additional 10- 15 minutes. The best concept for OT that won't drag on for another quarter is just adopt the NCAA OT rules. I don't see why they want to eliminate FGs to win an OT game.

[davy]

I agree with BHA, screw overtime just have ties.

Playoffs remain same.

[SirClintonPortis]

Peyton Manning still wouldn't be happy because Sproles scored a TD in that 2008 playoff game.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by davy

I agree with BHA, screw overtime just have ties.

Playoffs remain same.

Better yet, lets have ties in the playoffs and then have matches were 3 teams face off in a single game. Now that would be awesome...and confusing. Oh and no 3 point stances allowed.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Big C

i dont like that proposal. why not just play a 15 minute overtime and treat it like an extra quarter? whoever leads at the end wins. no need to get all fancy with "each team gets a posession unless they score a touchdown on the first drive".

The only problem I see with the additional 15 minutes is the additional time it will take and it running into other games. Then god for bid its a late MNF game that then goes into overtime. I say just let both teams O's have the ball once and then its done. Very easy and very fair.

[firstdown]

I say each team gets to pick a player and let them have a fight to determine who wins. Think about the presure on them to fight until they have nothing left for their team. They have to be a starter or some who plays on all ST plays.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Big C

i dont like that proposal. why not just play a 15 minute overtime and treat it like an extra quarter? whoever leads at the end wins. no need to get all fancy with "each team gets a posession unless they score a touchdown on the first drive".

Indeed.

They're worried about TV time/injuries, but if the problem with the game is that sudden death is bad for competition, get rid of sudden death.

Don't create a stupid, arbitrary series of events that ultimately result in sudden death. The simplicity of the current system is what is good about it. Prior to the coin flip, each team has an equal chance to win.

This rule change would eliminate much of the value of the coin flip, but it does nothing to address the inherent short-changing of a sudden death system.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Indeed.

They're worried about TV time/injuries, but if the problem with the game is that sudden death is bad for competition, get rid of sudden death.

Don't create a stupid, arbitrary series of events that ultimately result in sudden death. The simplicity of the current system is what is good about it. Prior to the coin flip, each team has an equal chance to win.

This rule change would eliminate much of the value of the coin flip, but it does nothing to address the inherent short-changing of a sudden death system.

I think the randomness of the coin flip is what upsets people the most. In fact under this system they could do away with the coin flip, and just revert to 1st quarter play. I don't see this rule as an arbitrary series of events, but instead a reasonable introduction of balance into a slightly unbalanced methodology. While the coin flip at the beginning of the game gets balanced with the second half kickoff, nothing in the current setup balances the randomness of the OT coin flip.

[SirClintonPortis]

Basically, the probability of winning the game is 10 percent above 50-50 for the coin toss winner under the current NFL game, with the passing game given much leeway as it is now. Make 'em go the distance. Touchdowns are more "convincing", for lack of a better word, and utterly BS PI calls won't result in a >90% chance of a FG to seal the deal.

[budw38]

I say play another 4 qtr's . How about no fg's or extra points during regulation , just td's / 2 pt conversions and safeties ? That would reduce the need for OT , IMO .

[tryfuhl]

1) play an extra quarter; will be a lot of resistance due to fatigue/injury concerns

2) matching system, however not starting at the 25, starting with kickoffs

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Lotus

And if you didn't stop the other team in overtime, blame your defense

this is why it's not fair

football is played with 2 sides of the ball primarily and a third unit used in "special" circumstances

it shouldn't come down to just one team doing it properly

we had something interesting in wrestling.. 1st ot period whoever scored first.. if there was no score then the 2nd OT ended up with someone in advantage (one wrestler top, one bottom), whichever held their opponent or escaped/reversed in that short period won

you can argue that adding another OT period would be ridiculous, but so is 5 periods to wrestling

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by firstdown

The only problem I see with the additional 15 minutes is the additional time it will take and it running into other games. Then god for bid its a late MNF game that then goes into overtime. I say just let both teams O's have the ball once and then its done. Very easy and very fair.

This is something very important that nobody had mentioned beforehand, the effect on network coverage.