NFL considering going back to original sudden death OT

[BobDigital]

The NFL is considering it because the rule change didn't hurt the Patriots isn't that why it was changed the first time?

 

[XLIX]

The NFL is considering it because the rule change didn't hurt the Patriots isn't that why it was changed the first time?

Iirc, the change to the OT rule was made in the wake of the NO-Minny NFCCG where the almighty Brett Favre never got a possession in OT because NO kicked a FG.

(I know it was a couple years later after that game they actually made the change but I believe that game was the primary impetus)

 

[fourhour]

It think that is worse than just allowing the game to end in a tie.

Consider the case now where a team gets the ball around its own 20 with the game tied. Its an exciting situation as the team tries to quickly drive down the field for a score.

With your scenario they have all the time in the world, as if the regulation runs out the game just continues.

Intuitively I think the end of the game should mean something.

But no game should end in a tie regardless of when it happens in the season, and there certainly shouldn't be a different set of rules between the regular season and playoffs. Continuing the game after regulation until any score produces a win is the way to go. Too many people crying THEIR team didn't get the ball, yada, yada... Stop putting yourselves into that position in the first place.

Eliminate punting after the clock runs out too, make them play or turn over the ball. More strategy.

 

[venecol]

But no game should end in a tie regardless of when it happens in the season, and there certainly shouldn't be a different set of rules between the regular season and playoffs. Continuing the game after regulation until any score produces a win is the way to go. Too many people crying THEIR team didn't get the ball, yada, yada... Stop putting yourselves into that position in the first place.

Eliminate punting after the clock runs out too, make them play or turn over the ball. More strategy.

I don't understand your proposal. Are you saying that after the clock runs out, the team that has the ball can continue to play where they were in the field?

You want them to continue beyond the 15 minutes w/o a break?

 

[Nehalem]

But no game should end in a tie regardless of when it happens in the season, and there certainly shouldn't be a different set of rules between the regular season and playoffs. Continuing the game after regulation until any score produces a win is the way to go. Too many people crying THEIR team didn't get the ball, yada, yada... Stop putting yourselves into that position in the first place.

Eliminate punting after the clock runs out too, make them play or turn over the ball. More strategy.

Why the hate for ties?

The rules already allow for a tie after 10 min OT period anyway.

At a certain point if the score is still tied a tie is really the correct result anyway. It seems silly decide playoff positioning due to winning a game after 7OTs? Its essentially arbitrary.

Now obviously if too many games result in ties that is unsatisfying. But I think doing away with OT and having 12-16 ties a year would be acceptable amount. And that is assuming that teams don't change their play calling at the end of a game to try and get the win instead of a tie since there would be no OT.

 

[Deus Irae]

But no game should end in a tie regardless of when it happens in the season, and there certainly shouldn't be a different set of rules between the regular season and playoffs. Continuing the game after regulation until any score produces a win is the way to go. Too many people crying THEIR team didn't get the ball, yada, yada... Stop putting yourselves into that position in the first place.

Eliminate punting after the clock runs out too, make them play or turn over the ball. More strategy.

There's nothing wrong with a regular season tie, beyond the gamblers crying, which I care nothing about.

 

[sb1]

Just kill OT altogether. OT will never be "fair" for everyone. If it's tied in regulation then that's it.

Then watch the hilarity in the standings and trying to figure out playoff spots

 

[fourhour]

I don't understand your proposal. Are you saying that after the clock runs out, the team that has the ball can continue to play where they were in the field?

You want them to continue beyond the 15 minutes w/o a break?

Yes, provided they have a play to be made, 1st down or other. Same as end of 1st or 3rd quarters, without a clock. Sudden death situation.

 

[venecol]

Yes, provided they have a play to be made, 1st down or other. Same as end of 1st or 3rd quarters, without a clock. Sudden death situation.

That would reward coaches like Reid and others that are terrible at managing the clock and using TOs. No thanks. Plus D is gassed in 4th qtr, that wouldn't be fair to them. Need a break at EOR.

 

[PatsDeb]

How is the Ravens proposal bad ?

It would add more strategic thinking ("how many yards do I want to spot?"), take out uncertainty from a key situation in a game and reduce the impact on ST at a point where both teams are most likely pretty tired already.

If you want fairness then it is not uncertainty you are after but a risk/reward situation where both teams have to deliberate how much to give like in this proposal.

How could it even work? If you "win" the coin toss, choose to spot the ball first, and pick your own 40 yard line, then the other team is going to choose to play offense and have a short field. If you choose to play offense first, then your opponent is going to spot the ball on your one yard line (or as far away from their own EZ as possible). If you choose to play defense first, then your opponent is going to spot the ball as close to your end zone as they can, and you've given away your "best chance to win" first crack at the ball in OT. The only way to get an advantage under this scenario is to win the coin toss and make your opponent choose first.

Honestly, what's wrong with the new rules? I think they've improved the game in the area that was the problem - that the team to win the coin toss had an unfair advantage.

 

[neuronet]

I’m surprised they aren’t changing it back to sudden death, with the caveat that the team who gets the ball first is always the one that media members and random people on Twitter like more.

If you lose, you get covid

 

[Deus Irae]

How could it even work? If you "win" the coin toss, choose to spot the ball first, and pick your own 40 yard line, then the other team is going to choose to play offense and have a short field. If you choose to play offense first, then your opponent is going to spot the ball on your one yard line (or as far away from their own EZ as possible). If you choose to play defense first, then your opponent is going to spot the ball as close to your end zone as they can, and you've given away your "best chance to win" first crack at the ball in OT. The only way to get an advantage under this scenario is to win the coin toss and make your opponent choose first.

Honestly, what's wrong with the new rules? I think they've improved the game in the area that was the problem - that the team to win the coin toss had an unfair advantage.

There was no problem. As it does so often, the NFL messed with something that didn't need to be messed with.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

How could it even work? If you "win" the coin toss, choose to spot the ball first, and pick your own 40 yard line, then the other team is going to choose to play offense and have a short field. If you choose to play offense first, then your opponent is going to spot the ball on your one yard line (or as far away from their own EZ as possible). If you choose to play defense first, then your opponent is going to spot the ball as close to your end zone as they can, and you've given away your "best chance to win" first crack at the ball in OT. The only way to get an advantage under this scenario is to win the coin toss and make your opponent choose first.

Honestly, what's wrong with the new rules? I think they've improved the game in the area that was the problem - that the team to win the coin toss had an unfair advantage.

PatsDeb,
I understood the proposal to be, coin toss winner picks the ball spot and end zone to defend. The coin toss loser gets to decide offense or defense.
Example, pats jets tie. Pats win toss and pick 15 yard line and defend the open end of Gillette. if jets decide to play offense, the ball will be placed at their 15 yard line, they would have to drive 85 yards to score. If the jets decide to play defense, the ball will be placed at the Pats 15 yard line and the Pats have to drive 85 yards to score. The strategy is about field position, can the jets offense drive that far to score or can the jets defense stop and force a pump flipping field position.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

They should stop messing around with OT, the current implementation of the rule is the closest to "fair" the NFL has come on this one.

Still think college OT rules would be better, fair and more entertaining for fans

 

[fourhour]

That would reward coaches like Reid and others that are terrible at managing the clock and using TOs. No thanks. Plus D is gassed in 4th qtr, that wouldn't be fair to them. Need a break at EOR.

Of course there would be a break, just like the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters. Having another coin toss and kick-off isn't necessary. FTR, I don't hate ties, just don't think the game should end that way. They can't end in a tie during the play-offs.

I'm probably seriously alone on this but I would like to see the punt eliminated. If you can't kick a FG, play for a first down. Real game changer!

 

[venecol]

I'm probably seriously alone on this but I would like to see the punt eliminated. If you can't kick a FG, play for a first down. Real game changer!

Even if you're on your own 10 yard line?

 

[fourhour]

Even if you're on your own 10 yard line?

Yes, consider it a penalty for not making first downs! Offense vs Defense game!

 

[Kontradiction]

Yes, consider it a penalty for not making first downs! Offense vs Defense game!

Terrible idea.

 

[Froob]

Awful idea. Old way stunk. Teams would stop when they got inside the 20 and kick.

I have no idea why anybody liked the old way better. The new way was a good compromise. I can handle losing by an opening TD, that’s fine. The field goals were weak.

 

[Deus Irae]

I have no idea why anybody liked the old way better.

It's because the old way was better.