Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Rules Of Overtime Need To Change


Nickclone

Recommended Posts

After watching the Steelers squeak by with a win in OT, I've been thinking that maybe it's time to change how OT works. In basketball and baseball, its whoever has the highest score after the end of the time or inning that decides the winner. In hockey and soccer its the first one to score that decides the winner in OT.

However, football is different. Its the first one who scores who wins and I think that needs to change. I think we can all agree whoever wins the coin toss has the advantage of winning in OT, right? I don't think the advantage should be decided by something as random as a coin toss. I know its supposed to be fair, but seeing as how the advantage is giving to one team and not the other...well that makes it not so fair.

I think OT should go one of two ways:

1. Give a time limit, the winner is the team with the most points after time is up.

2. After one team scores, the other team gets the ball and has a chance to score. They only get one drive and if they turnover the ball or can't convert, they lose.

Thats my two cents.

P.S. Steelers suck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I dont like the overtime rule except when the Redskins win the toss and drive down and score. I don't think the rule will be changed anytime soon though. I've come to accept it as part of the NFL game.

*edit* Snowman is right. Your D has a chance to make a play and get the ball. It def still is frustrating to lose in overtime without getting a sniff of the ball on offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ugh, I hate the current overtime rules. Packers got the short end of the OT stick last season losing both coin-tosses and both OTs.

A great point I heard about how its even worse than it seems, is that a defense could be on the field for an entire drive, and do its job and stop the opposing offense, forcing overtime. They're tired, having just been on for an entire drive. Unfortunately, their team lost the coin-toss, so after just successfully stopped a drive, they're thrown RIGHT back out onto the field with hardly a chance to catch their breath.

A tired defense is an easy defense.

edit: also statistics support the team that won the coin-toss by 60%, if I remember correctly. That is unacceptable.

A sport is supposed to be balanced with each team having an equal chance at winning. When you take away that balance, then what's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree. It's fine the way it is. It's not like the team that kicks off doesn't have a chance to score. Stop the other team and get the ball back for your offense! Do your job, and you will get a chance to score.

true, but the team that wins the coin toss has a significant advantage. all they have to do is score. the team that loses the toss has to stop the other team AND score. they don't earn that advantage, they get it by chance. a coin toss shouldn't have that much impact on a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree. It's fine the way it is. It's not like the team that kicks off doesn't have a chance to score. Stop the other team and get the ball back for your offense! Do your job, and you will get a chance to score.

No.

Its bull****.

The team that wins the toss wins something like 80% of the time. Overtime shouldn't be that affected by a coin toss.

NFL overtime is ****ing stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. After one team scores, the other team gets the ball and has a chance to score. They only get one drive and if they turnover the ball or can't convert, they lose.

I completely agree with you and I think most fans do. This looks like the best way to do it. Where do you start each drive though? Do it like in college?

Also this could have incredible statistical ramifications. I think there would be a runningback putting up a 20 td season every year. It would skew the numbers from then on. And would make fantasy football even more wild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.

Its bull****.

The team that wins the toss wins something like 80% of the time. Overtime shouldn't be that affected by a coin toss.

NFL overtime is ****ing stupid.

I think its only 60%, but that's still a ridiculous advantage for something ascribed to a team rather than achieved.

I think even not having overtime would be a better system than the current one. Just leave it as a tie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe if the Titans didn't do prevent defense they you wouldn't have even made this thread. Prevent defense never works, i hate it.....but i had the line so once it went into OT i made bank so who really cares.

may not have been made this game. This thread comes around all the time after a team gets screwed in OT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its only 60%, but that's still a ridiculous advantage for something ascribed to a team rather than achieved.

I think even not having overtime would be a better system than the current one. Just leave it as a tie.

I think its definitely more than 60% but whatever.

Point is, a coin toss should have no effect on the game.

The coin toss to start the game (as far as I know) has very little effect on the outcome and having a coin toss to determine who gets the ball in OT is stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just need to tweak it, make it similar to college rules, but don't start at the oppositions 30 yard line, kick off like normal and use the whole field, give both teams the same chance to score. Once 1 team scores the other team has a chance/possession to, if they don't keep the drive alive after 4 downs.. they lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought the college/high school OT was much better. I remember in a high school game we went into 4 overtimes. The other team scored first before our offense got onto the field. We each had strong offenses and slightly below average defenses. I was playing both sides of the ball, we couldn't stop them, they couldn't stop us. They scored first in OT but couldn't match us after 4. We proved to be the better team in the end. Had it been NFL rules we would have gone home losers because a coin toss took half of our team (the better half) out of the game while keeping their better half on the field.

You need to allow all units of the team to be involved. A team is not only a defense or offense. Sure you can say "if they can't make the stop they don't deserve to win" but what if it's a tie on a 40-40 offensive shootout and neither defense has made a stop all day. If a team gets the ball in OT and goes straight down the field for a score are they really the better team? The other team would probably do the same thing if they got the opportunity because both teams had weak defenses, but because of chance nobody ever knows.

It's stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would go a long way if they would make it the first team to have at least a 4 point lead wins in OT rather than who can kick a field goal first. Being able to get past the 30 yard line should not be the determining factor in who wins the game

Agreed - I've said this as well in conversations before. I think if as a minimum this change could be made it would at least swing the coin toss advantage pendulum back in a significant way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fine with the overtime. It's the possibility of a tie that annoys me.

I really don't think an NFL game should be allowed to end in a tie. Ever.

That being said, I wouldn't object to both teams having at least one possession.

Edit: Why is this in the Stadium? and not ATN?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree. It's fine the way it is. It's not like the team that kicks off doesn't have a chance to score. Stop the other team and get the ball back for your offense! Do your job, and you will get a chance to score.

I agree with this. The players already play 20+ games a year not including the playoffs.

Doing this would be like playing back-to-back games in mere minutes. You wouldn't have star players in the league anymore because they'd all be injured. You're right, football is different, physically different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

true, but the team that wins the coin toss has a significant advantage. all they have to do is score. the team that loses the toss has to stop the other team AND score. they don't earn that advantage, they get it by chance. a coin toss shouldn't have that much impact on a game.

It's a never ending cycle though. The first team that gets the ball will always have the advantage, with or without a rule change. The other teams defense has a great chance of being gassed first. All the while the offensive teams defense is sitting on the bench.

They don't win by chance. They win by doing their job and punching it in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.

Its bull****.

The team that wins the toss wins something like 80% of the time. Overtime shouldn't be that affected by a coin toss.

NFL overtime is ****ing stupid.

Well, sounds like you're just spreading the BS now.

Overtime doesn't need two possessions

By John Clayton

ESPN.com

Now that instant replay was voted in permanently by NFL owners, overtime has replaced it as the main topic of offseason debate.

The competition committee believes overtime has developed flaws. Teams winning the coin toss are winning overtime games with more regularity.

The committee proposed some minor rule adjustments at last week's owners meetings, but owners voted against making any changes. While there won't be any changes this season, it will remain a topic of discussion.

What drives me crazy is all the inane talk of going to a two-possession system in overtime that would guarantee each team gets the ball.

Fortunately, only about a dozen teams support the change to two possessions. A couple of years ago, then-commissioner Paul Tagliabue tried to garner support for two-possession overtimes. He was shot down.

Colts coach Tony Dungy said it the best when he called overtime a problem that might not have a solution. Every time he hears an alternative it has holes. Each fix creates more problems. It's best to just leave it alone, but that won't happen.

Those who are in favor of going to a two-possession system in overtime don't appreciate the risks. Their cry is that it's silly to have a coin toss determine a game. In my opinion, it's sillier to try to come up with some democratic way of creating a level field in overtime.

The NFL never will go to the college rule of lining up teams at the opponent's 25-yard line and seeing if they can match scores. Such a system would ruin a history of statistics and create havoc for fantasy players. Don't forget the fantasy players because they are an important partner in the growth of the NFL.

Here's the bottom line of the whole overtime argument: The current system reduces ties, so it accomplished its mission. Under the current rules, there have only been three ties in the past 14 seasons. In a league with a 16-game season, a tie is the worst. The late-season fight for the playoff is so close, you don't want to have ties muddling the playoff picture.

And that's what will happen if the league tries to ensure two-possession overtimes. Scoring is tough, but it is becoming pretty apparent teams are getting better at driving for last-minute field goals. Kickers are coming off the greatest season in NFL history. They made 81 percent of their field goal attempts. Next season, the league will be diligent in making sure the new footballs used by kickers -- K balls -- will be worn down by the fourth quarter and possible overtime.

Each game will have an official whose only job is to watch the K balls. He will number them from 1 through 12 and make sure the No. 1 ball stays in play until it's lost. As the ball gets worn down during the game, holders won't have to worry about a ball that is too slippery and kickers won't have to kick a brand new ball that feels like a rock.

If the league goes to a system that ensures two possessions, there is a good chance each team will be able to drive for a field goal. In eating up 10 minutes of the 15-minute overtime with two field goal attempts, the chances of a tie increase. While some people might cry for a second overtime if the first one ends in a tie, the thoughts of a four-hour football game are ridiculous. Too many injuries. And the result still might be a tie. Plus, I don't like what a two-possession overtime would do to the strategy of the game. Overtime is sudden death. It's one of the most exciting entities in sports. One play can end the game. That's great drama.

Under the two-possession overtime, the team that wins the coin toss probably would kick off to see whether it must score a touchdown or a field goal to win the game. Plus, a two-possession overtime would have a significant impact in the final two minutes of regulation, causing teams to be even more conservative. The NFL wants a game with an offensive mind-set. But with a two-possession overtime, coaches would be playing not to lose instead of playing to win at the end of games.

That's not good for football.

It damages the concept of going for touchdowns to win games in the final two minutes. One of the great aspects of the past two seasons has been the multiple scores in the final two minutes of games. Top quarterbacks such as Peyton Manning and Tom Brady have become masters of two-minute drives for scores. Why take that excitement away?

The competition committee has a great grasp of the situation. It knows that the numbers say something needs to be changed. There has been a rise in the percentage of teams that win the coin toss winning games. That percentage went from 55.9 during 1994-97 to 64.6 for the next four seasons. And after it dropped to 60 percent for 2002-05, it went up to 63.6 last season.

But going to a two-possession system in overtime isn't the answer. Moving kickoffs from the 30 to the 35-yard line would help and I'd be in favor of doing that. But mandating a two-possession overtime simply will be wrong and it would hurt the game.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2826668

The bold refutes your claim. 80% ha!

The entire article is actually a good read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. This thread is in the wrong forum as it is not Skins related.

2. This point was brought up by NFL Network crew, Rich, I believe after the game so don't make it sound like you came up with the idea. ;)

3. If a team can't win in regulation deserves to be in sudden death and if they are good they have an opportunity to stop the other team and get the ball back and try to win instead.

4. Have a great day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fine with the way the rules are now but i would like to see it change a bit as well. It would be nice to see if one team scores in OT that the opposing team gets one chance on offense to either tie it or take the lead. If they don't on that first drive then the games over

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the rules of overtime change I hope they don't have to play all 15 minutes, just let each team have a possession and then if it's still scoreless than you could say the other team had a chance to score

Of course you don't want one of those college football overtimes where the score will be on steroids, and you start from the 20 or 30 of the opponent. Just give the ball to the team that wins the coin toss, and should they score, just kick off and see if the other team can tie or win the game with a touchdown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the rules of overtime change I hope they don't have to play all 15 minutes, just let each team have a possession and then if it's still scoreless than you could say the other team had a chance to score

Of course you don't want one of those college football overtimes where the score will be on steroids, and you start from the 20 or 30 of the opponent. Just give the ball to the team that wins the coin toss, and should they score, just kick off and see if the other team can tie or win the game with a touchdown

What's wrong with playing all 15 minutes? That's the way they do it now.

I agree with your second paragraph, which is along the lines of what the OP wrote in his second paragraph. If the team with the ball first scores, give the other team a chance to match their score. If they do, you keep playing until one team is ahead after having an equal amount of possessions, or until 15 minutes are up. And keep kickoffs, punts, etc involved.

Of course, unlike last year's Chargers-Colts playoff game, probably wouldn't have mattered last night. At the end, Tennessee's offense was gassed, while Big Ben was rolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...