Be honest: Do the OT rules to end games need changing?

2020 Patriots Season:
Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: vs Raiders
Pick Results: LAS: 2.2% at NE: 97.8%
Sun
Sep 27th

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:

Should both teams get a possession in OT?

  • Yes

    Votes: 24 16.9%
  • No rules are fine as they are

    Votes: 118 83.1%

  • Total voters
    142
Status
Not open for further replies.

sb1

Pro Bowl Player
I guess not surprisingly there’s more handwringing this morning over the OT rules having the Patriots walk off another TD. I doubt there would be as much concern if it went the other way but I digress.

Some like Florio think the college rules would be better to let both teams get a shot with the football. I really hope we never see that here.

I didn’t like a cheap FG winning the game but I do like very much a TD doing it. I think it’s fine as it is.
 

NYCPatsFan

In the Starting Line-Up
I was first against it, but taking the long term view and seeing how the league has turned the game - and made it more popular - by focusing primarily on offense and scores, I realize that it is probably best to give the chance to both Os when the game goes to OT.

After all, when teams invest so heavily on the O and the prime attraction of the team are the QB/RB/WRs, why not let both of them shoot it out again when everything is even?
 

One-Be-Lo

In the Starting Line-Up
I think the OT rules are something the NFL actually got right for a change.

You have all of regulation to win the game. Once OT starts, the stakes should change.

You lose the coin toss, fine get a turnover, stop, or at least hold them to a field goal.

You give up a long TD drive to start OT, go cry to your mama, you deserve to lose.

It's called Football, not Offense, or Quarterbackball. 3 phases to the game, and I think people, us included, forget that sometimes.
 

Taco

Third String But Playing on Special Teams
For the regular season leave it as is games have to end. For the playoffs both teams should get one offensive possession. After that first team that scores wins.
 

Fixit

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
Let's say that the rule is changed so that both teams get the ball, and if the second team ties it, next score wins (this is the most common rule proposal I've heard). Pats score a TD, then KC answers with a TD of their own. Tie ball game, next score wins.

THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME SITUATION AS THE CURRENT RULE, EXCEPT NOW JUST A FIELD GOAL CAN BEAT YOU.

Don't want to lose? Play some ******* defense.
 

RIpats88

In the Starting Line-Up
No,

If the cheifs wanted to win they couldv' stopped the patriots on any of those 3rd and 10's and stopped them from getting a touchdown. They had plenty of chances to prevent a touchdown.

On the other end, the Saints got the ball first and threw an interception. Don't see anyone complaining about OT rules there.
 

slam

In the Starting Line-Up
College system is the worst! Anything but that.

It should stay as is. But if it has to change at all, I'd suggest this: If first team scores, the 2nd team can't attempt a score that would tie the game. If the first team gets a FG, the 2nd team has to get a TD. If the first team gets 7, the 2nd team has to go for 2 if they score. If the first team converts a 2 point conversion after a TD, game over.
 

1960Pats

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
I didn't think the rules should have been changed in the first place. If you can't stop a team from scoring (in any way) then you deserve to lose.

Now that the Pats have won twice in the playoffs using the new rule I'm sure they'll be changed to give each team a chance with the ball.

Let me tell you how that will work out. The Pats will be in a big playoff game that goes into OT and Slater will call heads, the Pats will win the toss but Belichick will take the defer option. That way the Pats will know what they'll need to win and Brady will get the job done.

Then, five years later, the NYFL will change the rules again and Tom, Bill and Ernie will come up with the solution.
 

PF_SU

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
Let's say that the rule is changed so that both teams get the ball, and if the second team ties it, next score wins (this is the most common rule proposal I've heard). Pats score a TD, then KC answers with a TD of their own. Tie ball game, next score wins.

THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME SITUATION AS THE CURRENT RULE, EXCEPT NOW JUST A FIELD GOAL CAN BEAT YOU.

Don't want to lose? Play some ******* defense.
Absolutely. If you want to change OT rules the only logical way to go would be to get rid of sudden death altogether and adopt an NBA-style OT... which nobody wants to see. Otherwise you are just arbitrarily postponing the issue.
 

Raymond

In the Starting Line-Up
Oh, now we are concerned with this because St Patrick didn't get the ball in OT?

I like the fact that the team with nerves of steel can have an edge in OT. Everybody doesn't get a trophy, OK?

You want to win the game then take care of business in regulation.
 

luuked

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
The entire thing is a cluster**** to begin with. Personally I would do completely away with the sudden death aspect of it and let the teams play a full 15 minute period.

Right now the team that chooses to receive assumes the risk that their opponents can finish the game with a FG if you fail to convert. And we were in three 3rd and longs yesterday where each might have been a season ender. At least there is a fair exchange of risk/value there unless your defense just went through about 80 snaps and is gased.

Just guaranteeing a possession doesn't change too much about the coin flip affecting things too much anyway. Because if you do that teams will just chose to kick instead as there is no danger of never getting the ball in the first place and as the second team to possess you might be able to win with a FG.
 

tasmlab

Starting QB, won 20 SBs, number is retired
PatsFans.com Supporter
I think they are fine and liked the recent change to require a TD over a FG.

The only fix I would do is replace the random coin flip with some other metric that relates to how the game was going. I don't know what it would be, maybe whomever had longer TOP or more total yards would get to choose to receive/kick first. But I'm nitpicking at this point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top