Patriots Local News:

SOURCE:Providence Journal


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:Boston.com


SOURCE:WEEI


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:USA TODAY


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:Patriots.com


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:WEEI


SOURCE:Boston Sports Journal


SOURCE:CBS Boston


SOURCE:Boston Sports Journal


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:TheAthletic


SOURCE:TheAthletic


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:USA TODAY


SOURCE:ProFootballTalk.com


SOURCE:USA TODAY

Patsfans.com

Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: N/A

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:

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

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by sb1, Jan 21, 2019.

?

Should both teams get a possession in OT?

  1. Yes

    24 vote(s)
    16.9%
  2. No rules are fine as they are

    118 vote(s)
    83.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sb1

    sb1 Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Messages:
    11,114
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    Ratings:
    +12,596
    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.
     
    • Agree Agree x 8
  2. Froob

    Froob Independent Investigator & pliable af PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    27,885
    Likes Received:
    4,983
    Ratings:
    +36,126
    I think so, but losing on a touchdown is a lot easier to swallow than losing on a field goal. I doubt many are *****ing if the Chiefs win.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  3. everlong

    everlong Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    8,485
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    Ratings:
    +4,752
    Another rule change because of the Patriots? Stop the presses.
     
    • Winner Winner x 18
    • Thank You Thank You x 4
    • Funny Funny x 3
  4. PF_SU

    PF_SU Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    468
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    No, the current OT rules are fine as they are. Don't want to lose with your offense never having gotten a shot? Just stop them from scoring a TD.
     
    • Winner Winner x 13
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. NYCPatsFan

    NYCPatsFan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,811
    Likes Received:
    229
    Ratings:
    +574
    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?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. A Defiant Goose

    A Defiant Goose In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    Messages:
    3,967
    Likes Received:
    1,005
    Ratings:
    +6,398
    Nah. It's overtime. It's good enough we got rid of the "actual sudden death" where just a field goal wins it. You give up a TD it SHOULD be game over
     
    • Agree Agree x 9
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. PATSYLICIOUS

    PATSYLICIOUS Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    15,985
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Ratings:
    +6,678
    No

    I couldn’t help but laugh listening to local sports radio this morning (Pittsburgh area) and the next segment was going to be whether ot rules need changed. Id be willing to bet my life savings that if the chiefs won the toss and scored a td to win nobody would be saying a damn thing about the rule.
     
    • Agree Agree x 7
    • Winner Winner x 6
    • Thank You Thank You x 4
  8. One-Be-Lo

    One-Be-Lo In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,682
    Likes Received:
    1,109
    Ratings:
    +5,250
    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.
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Taco

    Taco Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2018
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    109
    Ratings:
    +686
    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.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 6
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Fixit

    Fixit Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    7,377
    Likes Received:
    1,091
    Ratings:
    +7,482
    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.
     
    • Winner Winner x 10
    • Agree Agree x 5
  11. RIpats88

    RIpats88 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    668
    Ratings:
    +3,113
    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.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  12. sb1

    sb1 Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Messages:
    11,114
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    Ratings:
    +12,596
    If the college rules come to the NFL I really think we will see plenty of 82-76 scores in games that drag on. Something like that would fundamentally change the sport in the wrong way. I have zero interest in an NFL with scores like that.

    No thanks.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  13. slam

    slam In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,174
    Likes Received:
    888
    Ratings:
    +5,930
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Love Love x 1
  14. carmelo15

    carmelo15 Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    904
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +933
    Ya I think they should change it cause only the offensive players get payed in OT right.

    The ****
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. 1960Pats

    1960Pats PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    10,671
    Likes Received:
    3,139
    Ratings:
    +12,215
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. PF_SU

    PF_SU Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    468
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    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.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. Raymond

    Raymond In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,270
    Likes Received:
    346
    Ratings:
    +2,069
    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.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  18. bormio

    bormio In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    May 9, 2016
    Messages:
    4,016
    Likes Received:
    1,053
    Ratings:
    +6,948
    Any system that gives both teams an automatic shot favors the second team. Even the college system. NFL got this right. Yesterday the first team won one and the second team won one.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. luuked

    luuked Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Messages:
    17,736
    Likes Received:
    6,256
    Ratings:
    +33,141
    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.
     
  20. tasmlab

    tasmlab Starting QB, won 20 SBs, number is retired PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    654
    Ratings:
    +3,543
    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.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

FORUM SEARCH: CLOSE
For searches w/multiple
players add commas
(Ex: "Tom Brady, Julian Edelman")