New Overtime Rule for Playoffs

[Steve102]

7 on 7, no linemen. Just get it over with already.

 

[Sicilian]

Don't like it. Oh well.

Gonna be weird to see the coin toss winners in OT in the playoffs kick off instead of receiving. Teams will obviously want to know what they need to do when they get their possession.

I still think they'll choose to receive. Because if each team scores a TD, they'll get first crack at what then becomes sudden death.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think the problem is that kickers have become too good and they moved the touchback up to the 25.

So previously to have a good chance to win on a FG you had to go from the 20 to say the opp28 for a 45y FG. So you had to go 52 yards.

Now FGs over 50 are almost routine and you start at the 25. So you only have to go 40 yards.

Maybe the correct solution is to make it sudden death, but you need a TD for either team to win.

No more cheap FG playoff wins.

And in the regular season you probably end up with more ties, but not a great many more, and wins are satisfying and fair.

The "problem", such as it is, is caused by the NFL changing the game so much that offense has a huge advantage over defense, particularly in must-have-it situations with good QBs. The impact, in the era of free agency and the salary cap, has been about 10 points per game, and that's even when you count the games with bad QBs. Note the data, and note it, in particulary, from 1993 to the present:


NFL Average Scores per Game 2000-2020


You can't get more "fair" than a 50/50 coin flip. Yet, somehow, people rant about it not being "fair" that a team that had 60 minutes to win the football game now has to play "next score wins", when everyone in this country knows that "next score wins" is a perfectly fair way to end games, and is what players have been doing for, probably, as long as scoring sports have been played.

 

[Sicilian]

The "problem", such as it is, is caused by the NFL changing the game so much that offense has a huge advantage over defense, particularly in must-have-it situations with good QBs. The impact, in the era of free agency and the salary cap, has been about 10 points per game, and that's even when you count the games with bad QBs. Note the data, and note it, in particulary, from 1993 to the present:


NFL Average Scores per Game 2000-2020


You can't get more "fair" than a 50/50 coin flip. Yet, somehow, people rant about it not being "fair" that a team that had 60 minutes to win the football game now has to play "next score wins", when everyone in this country knows that "next score wins" is a perfectly fair way to end games, and is what players have been doing for, probably, as long as scoring sports have been played.

I think we can add this to the list of changes the NFL makes that runs contradictory to their message of "we need to protect these players". Alongside adding additional games, it's hard for me to believe the NFL actually cares about player health when they keep making it harder for games to end quickly.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

The NFL was influenced by recency bias and a recent statistical anomaly.

For all NFL games the W/L split for winning the OT coin flip or not is something like 52/48. But in the playoffs over the last decade or so it is something like 80/20.

It was likely to revert to the mean, if they didn't tinker.

Oh well...

 

[SHOWTIME15]

The "problem", such as it is, is caused by the NFL changing the game so much that offense has a huge advantage over defense, particularly in must-have-it situations with good QBs. The impact, in the era of free agency and the salary cap, has been about 10 points per game, and that's even when you count the games with bad QBs. Note the data, and note it, in particulary, from 1993 to the present:


NFL Average Scores per Game 2000-2020


You can't get more "fair" than a 50/50 coin flip. Yet, somehow, people rant about it not being "fair" that a team that had 60 minutes to win the football game now has to play "next score wins", when everyone in this country knows that "next score wins" is a perfectly fair way to end games, and is what players have been doing for, probably, as long as scoring sports have been played.

A coin flip is not "fair." A coin flip is luck. In a league where the rules are geared for the offense, both offenses need to possess the ball in OT, especially in the playoffs. If were talking rules from the 1980s or 1990s, it would be different. In a sudden death game, a cheap pass interference that places the ball at the 1 yard line, for example, allows the offense to get an easy score.

 

[Pape]

How long until they just play the whole OT period?

which is, ultimately, the solution to the matter.
------------------------------------
if i had my druthers, i'd go back to sudden death. i don't care about fair. wanna win? go for broke, not a tie, at the end of regulation if given the opportunity.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

A coin flip is not "fair." A coin flip is luck. In a league where the rules are geared for the offense, both offenses need to possess the ball in OT, especially in the playoffs. If were talking rules from the 1980s or 1990s, it would be different. In a sudden death game, a cheap pass interference that places the ball at the 1 yard line, for example, allows the offense to get an easy score.

Compromise - team that has the ball last at the end of regulation must kick off in overtime. Sudden death rules still apply. Takes the luck element out of it, tries to provide a general fairness with the prior 60 minutes. I know this can be gamed too, but this could be a decent starting point.

 

[Nehalem]

which is, ultimately, the solution to the matter.
------------------------------------
if i had my druthers, i'd go back to sudden death. i don't care about fair. wanna win? go for broke, not a tie, at the end of regulation if given the opportunity.

That was what I was thinking.

They seem to be slowly creeping to just playing the whole OT period out. Which I guess could work for the playoffs.

But for the regular season they should probably just eliminate OT, and if the game ends in a tie so be it. Can't get fairer than that.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

when everyone in this country knows that "next score wins" is a perfectly fair way to end games, and is what players have been doing for, probably, as long as scoring sports have been played.

And yet here we are.

I can all but guarantee you that every proposal one could make, including sudden death, gets net negative approval in a poll

 

[p8ryts]

These playoff games are so intense some teams have nothing left in the 4th quarter, now they are going to extend it more. Every year the rules have to get changed because of someone crying. Someday they will play in shorts and t shirts with flags attached.

 

[Steve102]

I think we can add this to the list of changes the NFL makes that runs contradictory to their message of "we need to protect these players". Alongside adding additional games, it's hard for me to believe the NFL actually cares about player health when they keep making it harder for games to end quickly.

They don't care about player safety. They care about optics. We said we cared about player safety!! They care about class action suits.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Compromise - team that has the ball last at the end of regulation must kick off in overtime. Sudden death rules still apply. Takes the luck element out of it, tries to provide a general fairness with the prior 60 minutes. I know this can be gamed too, but this could be a decent starting point.

Yeah but what does that mean..."team that has the ball last at the end of regulation?" Does it apply to the team that got the ball back with 10 seconds left in the 4th and just takes a knee? What if a team has the ball with 20 seconds left to go in regulation, 1st down, and just decides to punt the ball just so they can get the ball first in OT? Teams can literally keep punting the ball to the other team back and forth with seconds left to go....

 

[Pape]

But for the regular season they should probably just eliminate OT, and if the game ends in a tie so be it. Can't get fairer than that.

if the nfl can make a buck on it, then thats what they will do

 

[crawhammer]

It should just be an added 10-15 minutes of OT.

 

[MahomestoKelce]

So Team A scores TD, team B scores TD then team A kicks FG to win. In other words...the coin toss decides it just like before.

Pretty much this.

Which in turn means it may be dumb for Team B to kickoff if they win the toss.

Team A scores a TD and XP. Team A is at an advantage. Because now Team B not only has to score a TD and XP. They need to not give up a fg following said TD and XP.

Team B can win if Team A doesn't convert the 2 pt conversion. Then a TD essentially guarantee victory for Team B. Or, Team B is down 7. They get the TD. Then go for the 2 pt conversion.

The OT rules were ok. If a defense can't prevent a TD on the opening drive, why do they deserve the ball back?

This league continues to fix what ain't broken.

 

[MahomestoKelce]

I think the problem is that kickers have become too good and they moved the touchback up to the 25.

So previously to have a good chance to win on a FG you had to go from the 20 to say the opp28 for a 45y FG. So you had to go 52 yards.

Now FGs over 50 are almost routine and you start at the 25. So you only have to go 40 yards.

Maybe the correct solution is to make it sudden death, but you need a TD for either team to win.

No more cheap FG playoff wins.

And in the regular season you probably end up with more ties, but not a great many more, and wins are satisfying and fair.

That hasn't occurred since Saints beat Minnesota like 12 years ago. After that is when changes occurred.

 

[MahomestoKelce]

There have been several instances where a team winning the toss didn't win the game on first possession. Even going back to 03.

Giants@49ers in 2011 postseason
Bengals@Chiefs this year
Rams@Saints in 2018
Seattle@GB in 03
GB@Philly in 03
NYG@GB in 07
Baltimore@Denver in 2012
Carolina@Rams in 03

 

[Sfpat]

Per the PFT article, the team winning the coin toss won 10 of the last 12 playoff OT games. But 3 of those wins came after their 1st possession, thus 7-5 winning when the other team did not get the ball. Doesn't seem like enough reason to change the rules.

 

[Deus Irae]

Per the PFT article, the team winning the coin toss won 10 of the last 12 playoff OT games. But 3 of those wins came after their 1st possession, thus 7-5 winning when the other team did not get the ball. Doesn't seem like enough reason to change the rules.

Football is the perfect television sport. No matter how hard the NFL and NFLPA try to kill the league, they've not been able to. This is just a continuation of that. One day, there will come a straw that breaks the camel's back.