Competition Committee is considering new rules for overtime.... Here is link to PFT : http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/27/more-on-modified-overtime-proposal/ I like this.... What you guys think of this?
As long as it doesn't effect playoff games I guess it's alright. Personally I like the way it's been since before I was born.
basically if the 1st team scores a TD the game ends. if the first team kicks a field goal....the other team gets a chance to match it with a fg....or win with a TD.....if the team doesnt kick a FG or a TD they lose. if they tie with a FG....it now becomes sudden death. i love it btw
It would make me enjoy a game going to OT. Creates strategy in everything, from the coin toss or weather or not you kick a field goal. It would make Overtime so much more entertaining.
Personally I don't think it goes far enough. I love the college system and wish the NFL would use that system for every game (except preseason).
I think a lot of teams would go conservative if that were the arrangement. Removes some of that sense of urgency if you've got another 15 minutes to go. As a fan, I love that (even though I hate it at that very moment ). And there's also the question of length of games themselves (hours). Also, I can't see the NFLPA agreeing to a full quarter. I would think a rule change of that scale would have to involve them and ownership. CBA/contracts might have to be adjusted, etc. But with your idea in mind -- and you being a basketball guy -- what would you think of a 7-minute overtime?
I guess the only problem would be other programs that are suppose to be on after the game will be pushed back even longer
I like the current system, never really understood the argument for both the teams having to have a possession, if you can't play defense you lose. I guess with the college system around people have started to think the NFL one is broken but I have never thought its broken. I've been watching football for over 30 years and for about 25 of them no one cried about the overtime system, ties are rare and if you can't play defense you lose sounds pretty fair.
I totally agree but only if they ignored the statistics. It would create some funky numbers and make a mockery of the record book.
I agree with you. I don't understand the notion that the current system isn't fair. What? You're team has to play with only 10 guys if you lose the toss? That would be unfair. Man Up, Go out and play defense and get a stop. Quit whinning. I don't have time for whinning.
I agree as well, if you can't defeat the other team in 60 minutes of play, and your defense and/or special teams can't hold the opponent from scoring immediately, then yes of course your team can lose without touching the ball in overtime. Go out there and outplay the opponent over 60 minutes to win the game! Then in overtime outplay them on defense if you lose the coin toss, that's why your players earn millions of dollars, to make big plays when it matters most. I would rather see more ties than rules like full 15 minutes of overtime. Take the Bengals/Browns overtime game earlier this year... came very close to ending in a tie after 14+ minutes of OT because at the end neither team played well enough to deserve to win! However... of all the suggestions for modified overtime rules, this proposal sounds like it would be a nice little compromise between the 'sudden death' and 'both teams get the ball' arguments. Adds new levels of strategy while still encouraging teams to go "all out" and get/stop the score at the end of the game. But in a close game, teams should do everything they can in the 4th quarter to get the win, instead of counting on overtime, and these set of rules moves more in the direction of playing conservative in an effort to win in OT... win the game in 60 minutes! 'Balancing' the overtime rules diminishes the significance of regulation and the 4th quarter. In my mind it's fine for a playoff game to be decided in OT without both teams getting a possession. The Vikings this year had the chance to kick a game-winning field goal against NO, but they turned the ball over with an interception and blew it! The Colts last year had the entire 15 minutes of the 4th quarter of their playoff game vs SD to win the game, but they were out-played by the better team that day and they didn't score a single point!
All the overtime talk takes reminds me of Matt Hasselbeck in 2004 they won the toss and "We want the ball we will score." Al Harris jumped the route and game over
I don't think there's any need to change for what, 5,6 games a year? and I can only remember the Arizona, Green Bay game this year of a playoff game going to OT in recent history.
I think both teams should be allowed at least one possession regardless of how the first team scored. But the prosed new rule is better thaqn the current one.
Thought I was going be the only one who likes the current system. Just like the argument that a bad call at the end of a game didn't cause you to lose because you had other opportunities, I feel the same way about complaining you lost the coin toss so you lost overtime. There was sixty minutes where you had a chance to show you were better. Not to mention you do have the opportunity to play defense and stop them or get a turnover, ask the Cardinals. Let's not forget the Titans game we had this season too. It's all just a matter of opinion and preference though, and I don't mind the college system. However, for the NFL I like the current system. I also personally find it just as exciting as a system that allows for each team to have a possession. If your team gets the ball you're hoping for them to get into field goal range, hanging on every play, and hoping they don't turn it over. If the other team gets the ball you're desperately hoping the defense can make a stop.
Its an improvement but it still doesn't make a ton of sense. I say just play an extra period of either 10 or 15 min and whoever is winning when the clock hits 0 wins the game. Other sports such as basketball, and hockey have a shortened period of time after regulation and im not sure why football cant if it was 10 minutes.
Sure we had 60 minutes to show we were better. a "coin toss" doesn't give you a true winner if the loser never got a chance with the ball. That's MO.
OMG... they stole my idea! this was pretty much my idea in the game thread after the saints/vikings game ended in OT. Naturally, I LOVE IT. Both teams in a sense at least get a chance, in all ways of the game. Im all for it.
Way over thought.....how hard is it to simply say both teams simply need possession of the ball in OT.....thats it. Not score TD game over....or worse, if only score FG the other team gets a try to tie or take lead....no....both team must posses the ball (via turnover, kickoff, punt, etc) at least once....after that....the first lead wins. simple....
Possessions in hockey and basketball are a lot different than football though, and hockey is sudden death like the NFL. Having basketball as sudden death would be silly and doesn't work. Well just the way I look it is loser of coin toss never got a chance because they didn't play defense. If Miami loses an OT game without having the ball I don't feel like they got cheated or the other team isn't a "true winner", I just wish the defense would have made a stop. I guess worst part is a coin toss does give one side an advantage, but whether they use the college system or the proposed one that won't change. This new rule won't affect too many games and I don't mind any system they use, just not sure the current one is broken like it seems to be suggested all the time.
C'mon !!!!!! You already have Donovan McNabb totally confused as it is with the OT rules right now!!!!!!!!
I agree that it would be silly, but sudden death is sudden death. In basketball, both teams have equal chances to win. If both teams have to play D, then one will have to make a stop. THAT would declare a real winner. Point is, both teams need the same chance/s.
I don't buy the argument that both sides need the ball at least once in OT. They had their chance at fair. They had 60 minutes of fair. You didn't take care of business the first 60 minutes? Well, now you either win the coin toss or man up and play some defense.
I'm not sure about that. Extra inning baseball games, and OT basketball and Hockey games still count the stats. I don't think it would be that big of a deal. If it were the college style, where you start from the 30 yard line, then I'd agree with you.
FTR, I do think both teams should get the ball at least once. Football is the only sport that does this. While many think it's boring, this is why I still believe baseball is the purest of sports. All these rule changes make me dizzy.
That's a two way street IMO. BOTH teams had 60 minutes to put the game away..neither did. To add a totally random coin toss in there IMO tips the scale heavily in one teams favor, which is an unfortunate way to end any game. The random factor needs to be taken out of the picture completely. That said I hope they don't vote this rule in. It only applies to the playoffs and is not enough. If they vote this in then I'm afraid we'll end up with 10 years of this system before the decide to fix it correctly. I quite honestly hate watching the current format where a team can win the coin toss, play it save with dunk and dunk passes to get within FG range to end the game. It's unimpressive and a snooze to see teams play for a FG rather than a TD.
The problem with the current system is that the team winning the coint toss in OT has won the game 60 percent of the time since 1994. Before then, field goals weren't such an automatic thing, and the overtime results weren't nearly as weighted by the results of a coin flip. The way I look at it, football has never been afraid to tweak rules to maintain the competitive balance as overall play improved. (See the moving back of the kickoff line for an example.) This should be no different. That said, I think that such a rule change should be as subtle as possible, and as such I don't favor the college overtime rules being implemented in the NFL. I can also see the players making a full overtime period a non-starter, as your chance for injury could increase.