IrepDC Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 The college style overtime can hurt players. They are not robots that can just play forever to please us. The NFL players are worth to much to have the risky college overtime. Unfortunately, we have seen some players pass away do to over working, in the college style overtime the chances of these men getting seriously hurt increases a whole lot. I understand that everyone wants to be entertained but you have to look at this from a players stand point as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBChick Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I think OT should be held like a scrimmage.. So many plays to score, both teams gets the same ammount of plays. It's fair. Short and isn't sudden death. Which seem to be the complaint a lot of people have on OT, sudden death isn't fair. Which I don't agree with btw. All I got to say.. after having sat through that Kentucky vs Arkansas game that went through 7 overtimes... believe me when I say suddden death may be the better answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Last week, the Steelers tied their game with a minute left, and New England drove down & scored to win the game at the gun. Should Pittsburgh get another chance to tie? That might sound asenine, but that's the overtime argument in a nutshell. Overtime was never a problem until a couple of years ago. Some media tool said that overtime games are decided by "coin flips", and enough people bought into that thought that the theory took off. You didn't lose the game because you called heads instead of tails (especially since everyone knows tails never fails). You lost the game because your defense couldn't stop the other team. HUH? How is that even remotely the same? New England won the game in regulation and both team had multiple opportunities to manage the clock and the game. OT is an extra period of play and if you feel that one team's defense should be able to stop the other or they lose then why shouldn't both team's defenses be required to stop their opponent? Sudden death OT has always been a problem. Just because you didn't realize it until this media "tool" pointed it out to you doesn't mean that there weren't complaints about it in the 70s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
202Chaz Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 They should get rid of the TIE because thats silly to have no winner in a game. Thats what makes us Americans in someone has to win and someone has to lose. Anything else would be foriegn.......If the teams don't like overtime blow the other team out then you wont have to worry about increasing your risk of injury or fatigue. As long as Sean Taylor's in this league there's always risk of injury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I am liking the first team to score 6 points in OT idea. It will never happen but it is a great idea. I also think an 8 minute or so quarter in the playoffs would be a decent idea for that scenario. Most imporantly, I think both teams should have to have opportunity for specials teams, offense, and defense to play in OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrepDC Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Everyone is still forgetting that too much extra gameplay is dangerous. You have some of the best athletes in the world out there but playing 4 and 5 hours of football can hurt someone. This is not like basketball, this is a very PHYSICAL sport and the human body can only take so much punishment. This is not ancient Rome when they could just make the Gladiators fight to the death for entertainment. They are there to entertain us but some of us are kinda pushing it. Anyone who has ever played full contact football should know how hard it is on your body. This is just a game people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimReefa Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 First of all, the college overtime system is much less fair than the NFL system. The loser of the college OT coin flip is put at a huge disadvantage. If you're on defense first, and the other team scores a TD, you know you have to go for it on fourth down when it's your turn. If you go on offense first, you kick a field goal on 4th down, without knowing if that'll be good enough to tie or not. It is exciting to watch, I'll grant you, but it puts too much on the coin flip. With the pro OT system, the team that kicks off is at the potential disadvantage of not having a chance to score, but that is countered with the fact that they'll be starting with the field position advantage. Normally, the receiving team will be starting their possession from the 25 yard line, or thereabouts. If the defense can stop them quickly, their team's drive would start from around the 40. I think I remember reading somewhere that the team that won the coin toss ended up winning 51% of the OT games, historically. If that's true, it's tough to ask for a fairer system... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidenreich Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 HUH? How is that even remotely the same? New England won the game in regulation and both team had multiple opportunities to manage the clock and the game. OT is an extra period of play and if you feel that one team's defense should be able to stop the other or they lose then why shouldn't both team's defenses be required to stop their opponent? Sudden death OT has always been a problem. Just because you didn't realize it until this media "tool" pointed it out to you doesn't mean that there weren't complaints about it in the 70s. I still haven't realized that sudden death OT is a problem. I think it's a fine system. How far does it go? There isn't a fair system out there. One of the options I've heard is that each team gets the ball, then it goes to sudden death. So lets say Team A scores, then Team B scores. So now it goes to sudden death. Team A gets the ball & scores. How many times would this happen before Team B's supporters started complaining that they only got the ball once? I would guess five times tops.... As for my New England/Pittsburgh scenario. I see losing in overtime just like losing at the gun. When there's a minute left in the 4th quarter, the defense should say "Damn, we have to hold them here or we're going to lose." They should think exactly that way in overtime as well. Not "Hoepfully we'll hold them, but if not, our offense can bail us out...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveStrongSkins Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Everyone is still forgetting that too much extra gameplay is dangerous. You have some of the best athletes in the world out there but playing 4 and 5 hours of football can hurt someone. This is not like basketball, this is a very PHYSICAL sport and the human body can only take so much punishment. This is not ancient Rome when they could just make the Gladiators fight to the death for entertainment. They are there to entertain us but some of us are kinda pushing it. Anyone who has ever played full contact football should know how hard it is on your body. This is just a game people. Spoken like a true drama queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrepDC Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Spoken like a true drama queen. Have you ever played football? Have you ever played any sport? You sound like a spectator who knows nothing about what it is like on the field. When you say I am a drama queen are you implying that I am soft? Ask anyone who has EVER been on the field with me and they will tell you that I am the exact opposite. I have played this game for a long time. You should appreciate the fact that you are getting an opinion from an actual football player. Nothing I said about overtime's is a lie or exaggeration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I still haven't realized that sudden death OT is a problem. I think it's a fine system. How far does it go? There isn't a fair system out there. One of the options I've heard is that each team gets the ball, then it goes to sudden death. So lets say Team A scores, then Team B scores. So now it goes to sudden death. Team A gets the ball & scores. How many times would this happen before Team B's supporters started complaining that they only got the ball once? I would guess five times tops.... Each team having an equal number of possessions in OT is fair. I don't see the problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VASkinsGurl Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I love it when we come out on top......but when we don't it is drunken bitterness. So I am at 50-50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 How do you feel about overtime? As I always tell whoever my boss is at the time: "fook that man, if I can't do my job in my contracted hours you're asking too much of me. I'm off to the pub have fun" :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 In the immortal words of Michigan State coach Duffy Daugherty after Ara Parseghian elected to run the clock out and settle for the tie when #1 Notre Dame played #2 Michigan State in what some consider The Game of the Century in 1966: "A tie is like kissing your sister." I have no problem with the current overtime format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I like OT in general but sudden death is stupid. People say that if your defense can't stop the other team than you deserve to lose. But what if both teams have great offenses and not so great defenses? The team that wins the coinflip obviously has a huge advantage. It's unfair and I've never liked it. I think the NFL should use the college system. This may also be better for the players as it doesnt require them to move as far down the field. And ties suck, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveStrongSkins Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Have you ever played football? Have you ever played any sport? You sound like a spectator who knows nothing about what it is like on the field. When you say I am a drama queen are you implying that I am soft? Ask anyone who has EVER been on the field with me and they will tell you that I am the exact opposite. I have played this game for a long time. You should appreciate the fact that you are getting an opinion from an actual football player. Nothing I said about overtime's is a lie or exaggeration. I know for a fact you arent calling me out. I was a first team all region wide receiver my junior year, as well as a all region QB my senior season. I also played 2 college seasons before being diagnosed with cancer.This is my medical redshirt year. I h ave played countless overtime games. 4 of which in high school and 3 in college. I said exactly what I mean, you are a drama queen. Dont use your petty high school experiences to speak on an NFL overtime in which you know NOTHING about. I have much more experience then you and not even I have thrown that garbage argument out there. You know why? because high school and college overtimes are way different from the pros. If you want proof to back this up. Go to the washington post archives and search an article titled "Wharam's Grand Opening" Since you think you are so great and are the only person on this site to play in an overtime game. The article is about me catching the game winner in guess what? overtime. Hows that for "never playing a sport" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zorak Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Here's a simple situation, that is better than college overtime: the first team up by 4 or more points in overtime wins, or whoever has more points at the end of the overtime period wins (if no one is up by more than 3). This get rids of the lame single field goal to end it on the first drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYFootballGIANTS Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I think I remember reading somewhere that the team that won the coin toss ended up winning 51% of the OT games, historically. If that's true, it's tough to ask for a fairer system... Yes, I do believe I have seen the same statistic as well. That stat should prove to you that the 'coin toss decides who wins' argument is wrong. Both teams have an equal chance of winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I agree with Livestrong....give each team a chance to score, and when one team finally doesn't match the others score, the game ends (or it could be the game would end in a tie no matter what at the end of a 15 minute period). Also, don't make it like the college OT......make special teams a part of the equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Man Burgendy & Gold Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 You guys are acting foolish. Sudden death is cruel and that's just the way I like it cause football is cruel and will break your heart. Going back and forth just takes to much time and is far to diplomatic for a football game. Football is about going in and taking the hand your dealt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triple6mafia Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 They should use the college rules for overtime. There should never be a tie in a game. One of my cousins describes a tie as, "it's like kissing your sister." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinzelwashington Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 No Overtime, Cause Its Going To Be No Contest.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamshatterer Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 The college Ot is so much more exciting to watch. The National Championship game in '03 Ohio St vs Miami was one of the best football games I have ever seen, period. Th's because of the OT system they have.In the NFL the first team to get into field goal range wins, that is so boring. The only reason they do that is to keep the networks happy so the game doesn't go longer than they want it to.:point2sky I agree. I love the drama, but the college OT is wayyyyyyyyy more exciting to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 nfl overtime is perfect as it is. why should both teams get the ball? either your offense is good enough to score or your defense is good enough to stop somebody. if they're not, you deserve to lose. I disagree. I hate the sudden death aspect of overtime; I think they should switch to the NCAA format, for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woofer Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 I like overtime, but I always thought the sudden death part of it could be better. I think the winner should be the first to 6 points -- if you score a touchdown then you should win, but not kicking a 40 yard field goal. Two field goals while holding the other team to nothing is much more deserving of a win. That's a good idea - 1 field goal is not enough. Two in a row would do it. The first team to pull ahead by 6 points wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.