OT: The NY Times Solution to Fixing OT: Hold an Auction

[Bobs My Uncle]

I vote for a 15 min OT continuation after regular time. No sudden death but the full 15 min OT to decide the victor. In the OT period teams will be given a choice to kick a single point convert after a TD or to try for a 3 point convert. The goal here is to entice going for 3's in order to not end up with typical tied scores. If the teams still remain tied after the 15 min of OT then BOTH teams forfeit a previous win for being uncooperative, going in the hole if needed

 

[Gwedd]

Really; Get rid of ot and let it end in a tie. If neither team can win it in 60 minutes, so be it. It will all sort out at the end of the season, when that tie may keep a team out of the playoffs. That should be enough incentive to go for the win, instead of take a knee to get to ot.

I agree completely. The only time that Overtime is appropriate is in the playoffs. In that situation, simply play for the full 15 minutes, rather than sudden death scoring. If, at the end of OT, both teams are tied, then decide it with a coin toss between the two coaches.

respects,

 

[IcyPatriot]

Why don't they simply keep the game going ... switching sides like they do between quaters ... play the entire 15 minutes ... 2 time outs each and no challenges.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

This 2003 fan proposed solution remains as nutty as when it was discussed ad nauseum in this June thread after it was rehashed in a NYT blog.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...nion-proposed-auction-overtime-games-fan.html

 

[Rob0729]

Silent auction?!? That isalmost as stupid as the NY Post's idea of playing a game of Musical Chairs to determine who gets the ball first.

 

[jbb9s]

Silent auction?!? That isalmost as stupid as the NY Post's idea of playing a game of Musical Chairs to determine who gets the ball first.

Not really. Academically, auctions are a very efficient way to distribute goods and services as it perfectly matches a price point in which the producer and consumer surplus is nearly zero - although the winner's curse will cause the winning bidder to pay X more than the second highest bid in a secret auction. In your example, musical chairs is akin to a coin flip (both are chance events) so you are ultimately (and ironically) making a smug and sarcastic suggestion that is ultimately just as good as an idea than the one implemented now.

The auction on the other hand awards the ball to the team that places the highest value on it (inversely correlated to field position start) which is the fairest way to do it.

 

[Ring 6]

Just go the XFL rules. Put the ball on the 50 and each team has a player start at his goalline whoever gets it gets the ball. Thats less stupid than an auction.
I see 2 choices that I would agree with.
1) Eliminate OT
2) Keep the rules the same

 

[Kontradiction]

I still prefer sudden death in OT.

But instead of the coin flip, the team that wins the TOP in the game, gets to receive kickoff.

That's a pretty solid idea.

As for this auction, leave it up to the New York Times to come up with something like this. I still prefer the College OT rules because I think they are more exciting, but the injury level that could/would be sustained by using that in an NFL game is convincing enough not to adopt it. A playoff game, one which a victor MUST be decided, using that system would be absolute murder on the winning team.

 

[Bill B.]

How about we do like hockey does and have a shootout. Each QB stands at the 50 yard line and has a receiver run to the end zone being covered by a DB. You have a lineman count to 5 before rushing the passer so the QB has a limited to pass. Each team gets five tries. The team with the most TDs gets a point and wins the game.

I know this is stupid, but not as stupid as having this auction. The shootout is the worst thing to happen to hockey. Just have them play te whole 15 minute quarter. If it is still tied, then it is a tie.

 

[PatriotWarrior]

Leave it to New York to make a stupid suggestion. Sounds more like they want to decide the outcome of OT to be more like a game show. I wonder how many people will actually take this idea seriously.

 

[aeg]

But instead of the coin flip, the team that wins the TOP in the game, gets to receive kickoff.

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]

Really; Get rid of ot and let it end in a tie. If neither team can win it in 60 minutes, so be it. It will all sort out at the end of the season, when that tie may keep a team out of the playoffs. That should be enough incentive to go for the win, instead of take a knee to get to ot.

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]

A Better Way to Decide Overtime in the N.F.L. - The Fifth Down Blog - NYTimes.com

So what happens if they both pick the same number, or they both pick 1, then 2, then 3, and so on?

OT Needs fixing, but IMHO this is a stupid solution.

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.

 

[Tip_Drill_81]

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

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]

I like the idea of first to 6 points wins. 1 TD or 2 FGs.

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.