NFL considering going back to original sudden death OT

[sb1]

NFL will consider reverting to true sudden-death overtime

When it comes to overtime, the NFL previously has decided not to let perfect be the enemy of good.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

I’m ok with the way it is now but this is fine too. Might be a way to shorten games in another pandemic season.

The “unfairness” that Florio always talks about is totally moot. You had your chance to win the game in regulation and you didn’t. The coin toss is 50-50. And you still have to score to win. Sounds fair to me.

 

[sb1]

It’s a lot better than this:

Ravens to propose revolutionary "spot and choose" overtime procedure

The overtime rules are poised for a potential shakeup far more intriguing than a simple reversion to true sudden death.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

 

[masterbouncer]

if the defenses were acutally allowed to play like they did early 2000s than I am fine, currently the offenses are to much favored with the way how refs are calling the game, so its basically a coin toss away to fix the game

 

[Kontradiction]

Wow. This is actually a great idea by the NFL for once. It should have never been changed in the first place.

 

[farn]

I can live with any of the three : the current, the BAL proposal, and sudden death... I mean, teams have 60min to win. I can't cry if they were unable to finish the job within regulation.

 

[Ross12]

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.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

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.

Just eliminate overtime and decide the game by Twitter votes

 

[sb1]

I’m glad the Pats didn’t need OT to beat the Polian Colts back in the day. Who knows what kind of mess OT would be today if they did.

 

[Nikolai]

I kinda figure they're going back to the old OT rules now that 1) it didn't affect the Pats, who won two huge games with the current rules and 2) the Pats are no longer the obvious dynastic threat they once were.

I'm hoping dialing back the "Polian Peyton" rules comes next.

 

[luuked]

It’s a lot better than this:

Ravens to propose revolutionary "spot and choose" overtime procedure

The overtime rules are poised for a potential shakeup far more intriguing than a simple reversion to true sudden death.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

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.

 

[Kontradiction]

Just eliminate overtime and decide the game by Twitter votes

“Which team name is more racist?” That should be the Twitter vote to decide the contest.

 

[Triumph]

“Which team name is more racist?” That should be the Twitter vote to decide the contest.

The Browns.

 

[lancerman]

Here's the deal. The only fair ways to deal with a tie at the end of regulation are to either end it in a tie or add an additional quarter like the NBA. The game is too brutal and none of the players want the latter, and fans are unsatisified with the former.

You didn't win in 60 minutes. At that point, the only goal is to artificially induce a winner to end the game.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

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.

I think this is brilliant. Analogous to sharing a cake - one person cuts, the other chooses. Clearly the fairest of all proposals, and adds some very interesting strategy. Advantage Belichick.

 

[Twentytothree]

It’s a lot better than this:

Ravens to propose revolutionary "spot and choose" overtime procedure

The overtime rules are poised for a potential shakeup far more intriguing than a simple reversion to true sudden death.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

I was fully prepared to hate the Ravens proposal, but it makes perfect sense. Let the teams figure out where the equilibrium point is. I would love to see this.

 

[sb1]

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.

Feels like it's overthinking things adding gimmicks and complexity to solve a problem of "fairness" that doesn't exist imo. Let's face it we all know why this even came up for discussion.

There's still going to be a coin toss with this proposal. And unless a team has a historically great defense why wouldn't any team in this era choose offense every time?

 

[venecol]

Since players hate OT, just have ST decide it soccer style:

1. Each team kicks 5 FGs from 25 YL, alternating between teams.
2. Visiting team starts (no coin toss).
3. If still tied go to sudden death FG moving up to 30 YL, then 35 and so on until one team misses.
4. No ties ever again.
5. Kickers will be more valuable.

 

[sb1]

Here's the deal. The only fair ways to deal with a tie at the end of regulation are to either end it in a tie or add an additional quarter like the NBA. The game is too brutal and none of the players want the latter, and fans are unsatisified with the former.

Sounds like BB is in favor of that option - a half-quarter mini-game with no sudden death. Players won't like that and in a pandemic season I can't see that happening.

 

[Nehalem]

if the defenses were acutally allowed to play like they did early 2000s than I am fine, currently the offenses are to much favored with the way how refs are calling the game, so its basically a coin toss away to fix the game

Its not just that offense is favored. They also moved the touchback to the 25 from the 20. Given how good some kickers are you might only need to advance the ball 35 yards to kick the game winning field goal.

 

[luuked]

There's still going to be a coin toss with this proposal. And unless a team has a historically great defense why wouldn't any team in this era choose offense every time?

The coin toss is made less relevant and thus uncertainty is being taken out of the game that is supposed to be based on skill.

Depending on how close one of the teams is fine taking the ball to their own endzone there will be an inflection point where teams will chose defense over offense. As others have said.. the search for this equilibrium will be fun.