aeg

I see too many issues with that ... why punish a team if they chose to go with a game plan that emphasized passing (perhaps the opponent run D is too good)? Or punish a team that loses the takeaway battle so the TOP is slightly in the other team's favor? Will teams start using defensive TOs to cut down the opponents TOP?

The auction idea is not terrible, IMO, it is just not realistic (and more than a little weird). Also, for better or worse, it takes away the special team's aspect of the opening KO of OT. If your team has Eddie Royal or Devin Hester, you might not be so happy about it.

I'd say to get rid of OT completely or switch to the college rules in the regular season.

Post-season, play additional periods (probably shorter than a full quarter, maybe 7.5 minutes or 10 minutes) in their entirety until one team is ahead.

Wax Frog

LOVE this! In fact, Pats-win-based emotions aside, I really never have liked kneeldowns in any context. If the defense has virtually no shot at getting the ball back, why not spare me the silly pseudo-genuflecting and allow the ref to do one big runoff?

jmt57

The first consideration by the NFL with overtime does not involve us, the fans, unfortunately. Games are set to fit into a timeframe for the networks. Though they do get to run more ads, their schedules get messed up with long overtimes. And players are spent after 60 minutes of play, with an increased likelihood of injuries. So although a 15-minute overtime period seems to be the fairest idea, that's probably not going to go over and is why it is not in effect now.

In my opinion there are two problems with the current overtime setup. One of course is that a team could lose the game without ever getting the ball on offense. Imagine baseball going to extra innings and the first team to score wins, without the other team getting a chance to bat! The other problem I have is that strategy and what you are trying to accomplish is drastically altered. There is no point in risking going for a touchdown; all you are trying to do is kick a field goal since a touchdown and field goal now have the same value.

I would say two five-minute periods with teams alternating kickoffs might be the way to go. That, or a minimum of one possession for each team, and if the score is still tied at that point revert to the current overtime rules.

Regardless, I think there should still be some form of overtime. If I'm not mistaken it was put into effect partly because too many teams were playing for the tie, especially on the road, making for some boring 4th quarters that left fans very unsatisfied, and also mucking up the standings.

Gwedd

I would still say that OT should be for use only in the playoffs, and then, run as a full 15-minute period, with whomever is ahead at the end being the winner.

Wolfpack

And yet another thread demonstrating why OT won't change... Even amongst those who think it needs to be changed, there is no consensus on what exactly to change it to.

DW Toys

Simple solution? Eliminate field goals in OT until 2 minutes left in OT. Why two minutes? Because who would want to see say a Lions and Redskins OT game with a tie if at all possible.
This would add a major element of field position in every OT game.
DW Toys

stinebot

Here is how it should be:

Regular season- One 15 minute overtime. Basically a fifth quarter. If it is tied at the end of that then the game ends in a tie. No sudden death. The entire 15 minutes is played.

Playoffs- Same thing, but if at the end of the fifth quarter it is still tied a sixth is played. Fifteen minute "quarters" are added as necessary until one ends with a winner.

tuckeverlasting

one 10 min. ot period and if it's tied after that , it's tied.

__________________
john clayton is super chicken and doug gottlieb is a thief .

Tip_Drill_81

I've always liked this idea best. However, I'm still torn between whether i believe there should be ties or not (ie: keep having 10min periods until a winner is decided, like baseball).

For the people that like "first to score 6 wins"... i've read an argument against this that went: what happens if one team scores a FG, and the other team does not score??? The games ends in a 20-23 tie???

I believe basketball and hockey (old format) had the best OT's. Absolutely NO ONE complained about the format. That's why i think the additional shortened OT period (10min) is the best idea. There wouldn't be any disputes, and the OT coin flip would not matter as much as it does now.

alamo

The players don't want longer games. TV doesn't want longer games. The league doesn't want longer games. Any minimum point limit or mandatory posessions by definition lead to longer games.

The current system provides the shortest games. It's not that unbalanced. A minor tweak (move the OT kickoff yardline) would almost eliminate the imbalance. I think that's the best solution, though even that isn't perfect either.

If you don't think it's fair? Never let it get to overtime. That is something every team has in its control.