Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz
I’d get behind play a 15 minute quarter. Then sudden death if still tied.
In the playoffs that is.
Im sure the league wouldn't mind this either, but like what we saw yesterday, defenses are completely gassed by that point. Playing another 15 minutes would probably lead to more injuries in the eyes of the PA, so unlikely they would agree.
There really isnt a simple solution and the NFL model is just as appropriate as the NCAA way of doing things IMO.
Dont want to lose in OT? Dont let your opponent tie you.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
They already played a 60 minute game in a sport where every play is a car crash. This isn’t soccer.
There’s nothing wrong with the NFL’s playoff OT format - it’s as close to real football as you can get while incorporating sudden death.
If you want the ball back, keep the other team out of the endzone.
Players are going to get hurt, and that's just going to suck for the games that come after. Both defences were spent last night, never mind another quarter on top of that.
Why not just use the college overtime rules. They work fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis
College OT rules are terrible too, handing teams the ball in scoring range is boring. But every OT format will be flawed. Make it first to 8 and the team who goes first still has the advantage; make it a 15 minute quarter and the team who gets the ball first has the advantage of being able to shape the clock. There is no perfect solution here.
College / CFL rules would be okay, just need to start out of field goal range so the offence has to at least move the ball.
But I do like the first to 8 concept, that’s actually pretty good.
I really wanted the Chiefs to lose but I have no issue with the NFL OT rules. One team had to win that game and that's what happened. The reality is that the Bills had the game won with 13 seconds left and they lost it on the ensuing defensive series. I get that the Chiefs offense is great and all but even a mediocre defense should not give up 44 yards in 10 seconds at an end of the game situation. The defense once again couldn't make a stop in overtime and they got the result they deserved.
College / CFL rules would be okay, just need to start out of field goal range so the offence has to at least move the ball.
But I do like the first to 8 concept, that’s actually pretty good.
Maybe start from the 50 yard line. Kinda sucks when the first team blows it completely and comes away with nothing, that the second team just runs 3 up the gut (or 2 if it's CFL) for 1 yard gains then trots out the kicker as the drive already starts on the cusp of FG range. At least team #2 still needs a couple first downs first.
I wonder how it would play out if you had to start with a 2nd and 10 from your own 25 yard line. Essentially you only have 3 plays to get the first drive going. This way if you chose to get the ball first you are giving up something for that choice.
__________________ "Some guys like old balls"
Patriots QB Tom Brady
After thinking about the potential for OT changes and reading some articles and other boards online, these are some of the ideas I like that I haven't seen mentioned here. Reminder, no perfect system so we're looking for the fairest system.
- Give each team a defined possession, say four minutes. Obviously whoever wins the toss will always defer, but I added my own little twist to even things a bit, but make it so any fourth down failure by the team who gets the ball first does not result in a change of possession at the dead ball spot, rather the other team gets it on their 25 (basically a touchback).
- Continue the coin flip rotation from the beginning of the game. The Chiefs on Sunday deferred after winning the toss, so since they get to select for the second half, the Bills would get to choose for overtime. Would make end of game strategic decisions far more interesting, and wouldn't guarantee most teams defer to start. Would keep that you need a touchdown to win, not sudden death outright.
- Continue the game. Overtime becomes an extension of the fourth quarter rather than a new quarter. So let's say the fourth quarter ends with it 2nd and 9 at the 34 yard line, that is where overtime resumes. Again would bring more intrigue into end of game decision making. Would keep that you need a touchdown to win, not sudden death outright.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
After thinking about the potential for OT changes and reading some articles and other boards online, these are some of the ideas I like that I haven't seen mentioned here. Reminder, no perfect system so we're looking for the fairest system.
- Give each team a defined possession, say four minutes. Obviously whoever wins the toss will always defer, but I added my own little twist to even things a bit, but make it so any fourth down failure by the team who gets the ball first does not result in a change of possession at the dead ball spot, rather the other team gets it on their 25 (basically a touchback).
- Continue the coin flip rotation from the beginning of the game. The Chiefs on Sunday deferred after winning the toss, so since they get to select for the second half, the Bills would get to choose for overtime. Would make end of game strategic decisions far more interesting, and wouldn't guarantee most teams defer to start. Would keep that you need a touchdown to win, not sudden death outright.
- Continue the game. Overtime becomes an extension of the fourth quarter rather than a new quarter. So let's say the fourth quarter ends with it 2nd and 9 at the 34 yard line, that is where overtime resumes. Again would bring more intrigue into end of game decision making. Would keep that you need a touchdown to win, not sudden death outright.
The middle is better than the third, but both could have teams playing for ties late in a game, which unless you are the NHL, is not a good thing to incentivize. It has the the potential to take away from the urgent drama at the end of tight games.
- Each team gets an offensive possession at opposing team's 10 yard line
- Have to score a TD to win the game (no FGs)
- If neither team scores, repeat
- If both teams score, move the ball back to the 20 yard line and repeat in 10-yard intervals until one team doesn't score
College and CFL overtime is the way it is because asking college or CFL teams
To drive 80 yards and score could take half an hour.
NFL teams don’t need that handout.
Um no. It’s because the game would take forever to finish. You could easily have a 5 or 10 minute drive, plus stoppages and timeouts. It would take an hour for each team to get 1 possession. And then what if they both score and you have to play it again?
After thinking about the potential for OT changes and reading some articles and other boards online, these are some of the ideas I like that I haven't seen mentioned here. Reminder, no perfect system so we're looking for the fairest system.
- Give each team a defined possession, say four minutes. Obviously whoever wins the toss will always defer, but I added my own little twist to even things a bit, but make it so any fourth down failure by the team who gets the ball first does not result in a change of possession at the dead ball spot, rather the other team gets it on their 25 (basically a touchback).
- Continue the coin flip rotation from the beginning of the game. The Chiefs on Sunday deferred after winning the toss, so since they get to select for the second half, the Bills would get to choose for overtime. Would make end of game strategic decisions far more interesting, and wouldn't guarantee most teams defer to start. Would keep that you need a touchdown to win, not sudden death outright.
- Continue the game. Overtime becomes an extension of the fourth quarter rather than a new quarter. So let's say the fourth quarter ends with it 2nd and 9 at the 34 yard line, that is where overtime resumes. Again would bring more intrigue into end of game decision making. Would keep that you need a touchdown to win, not sudden death outright.
Those are also some intriguing ideas. Regarding the third option, would that mean in this case that since KC kicked the FG as time expired Buffalo would receive the kickoff for OT as that would be the natural progression?
Um no. It’s because the game would take forever to finish. You could easily have a 5 or 10 minute drive, plus stoppages and timeouts. It would take an hour for each team to get 1 possession. And then what if they both score and you have to play it again?
It’s probably this too.
But in the NFL, I think you make the teams play real football as much as you can. It’s a race to score 6.
Similar to how It’s fine (sorta) to decide international hockey via shootout.
Don’t bring that #### to the NHL.
You want the ball back, stop em. It’s all well and good to complain the other QB doesn’t get the ball when the other QB is Josh Allen.
If next week the Rams and 49ers go to OT and Matt Stafford goes deep to Cooper Kupp for the win, nobody is going to be mad Jimmy G didn’t get a chance to respond.
Besides, if a team has an amazing Defence, it might arguably benefit them to kick the ball away, make the opponent punt, and now all they need to do is get into field goal range.
__________________
Mom and Dad love you, Rowan - February 15, 2024
Last edited by GreenLantern2814; 01-25-2022 at 11:58 AM.
But in the NFL, I think you make the teams play real football as much as you can. It’s a race to score 6.
Similar to how It’s fine (sorta) to decide international hockey via shootout.
Don’t bring that #### to the NHL.
You want the ball back, stop em. It’s all well and good to complain the other QB doesn’t get the ball when the other QB is Josh Allen.
If next week the Rams and 49ers go to OT and Matt Stafford goes deep to Cooper Kupp for the win, nobody is going to be mad Jimmy G didn’t get a chance to respond.
Besides, if a team has an amazing Defence, it might arguably benefit them to kick the ball away, make the opponent punt, and now all they need to do is get into field goal range.
Playoff overtime should probably somehow involve both teams having an opportunity on offense.
As is it's kind of like declaring a winner in a ball game after one team scores in the top of the 10th
It's not like NFL OT rules are set in stone. Not long ago any first score used to win.
I don't know why handing the ball to someone in scoring range is so boring... you each get a red zone possession and after you've both had your chance, most points wins.
Mainly I just want to see this #### in the NFL playoffs.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Playoff overtime should probably somehow involve both teams having an opportunity on offense.
As is it's kind of like declaring a winner in a ball game after one team scores in the top of the 10th
It's not like NFL OT rules are set in stone. Not long ago any first score used to win.
It’s NFL football. You can play 15 innings of baseball and the only guys who’ll really feel it are the catchers and the bullpens.
Winning a coin toss and kicking a field goal is dumb. The whole point of the rule as it’s written is to avoid that.
21% of OT games since the rules were changed have ended on 1st possession touchdowns.
The NFL doesn’t want marathon unending OT games like hockey. The purpose of OT is to end the game. Every play, every series, is a potential extra ACL tear, concussion, not to mention the lack of revenue from games going to OT - the NFL doesn’t get paid extra for that.
Teams have 60 minutes to win the game. They’re not guaranteed The same number of possessions. Nobody cries about it.
The #1 defense in football should’ve earned its money. Or not let Mahomes get into FG range in 13 seconds.
__________________
Mom and Dad love you, Rowan - February 15, 2024
Or not let Mahomes get into FG range in 13 seconds.
Honestly this is 100% why I don't feel terrible for Buffalo. They made a lot of mistakes in those last 13 seconds, starting with the touchback.
In terms of OT though...from a fan perspective I would have loved to see Allen get a chance to respond. Those are the type of back and forth moments that leagues just wait for to build their brand and stars.
But from a GM/league perspective I do get it, end the game, get the players off the field and don't risk more injury.
