OT format thoughts

[chasa]

overtime should be both teams kicker taking turns kicking field goals from further and further back, first one not to match the other loses.

Start with and extra point, then a 40 yarder, then a 50 yarder, then a 55, then 60.

If both kickers hit a 60 move it back to 65. if both make that it's a tie.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Any of the proposed schemes with the kickers dueling FGs are terrible.
Let one guy determine what the other 45 did without their participation sucks big time.

 

[Ring 6]

Honestly.

I think both teams should have a chance at the ball. Regardless.

I know I wouldn't be able to sleep if we had come back and lost thst damn game over a coin flip.

But you wouldn't lose over a coin flip you'd lose because your defense failed.

Get a 3 and out and you have a huge advantage.

 

[mosslost]

Any of the proposed schemes with the kickers dueling FGs are terrible.
Let one guy determine what the other 45 did without their participation sucks big time.

Octagon cage fight between each teams best black belt.

 

[mosslost]

That doesn't seem fair though, because if the first team scores, that means the second team gets the knowledge that every drive is 4 down territory, so while the first team has to decide if they are going to go for it or punt, the second team gets to go for it every time.

Also the second team gets to decide which side of the field they defend, which provides huge benefits in outdoor stadiums.

That is why you just play the whole quarter, over and over if necessary. Treat it like another "4th" quarter each time if still tied.

 

[Ring 6]

The real solution is an overtime quarter but that will never happen.

 

[chasa]

Any of the proposed schemes with the kickers dueling FGs are terrible.
Let one guy determine what the other 45 did without their participation sucks big time.

those 90 guys had 4 quarters to take care of buisness.

Hockey seems to do okay with shootouts.

 

[XLIX]

those 90 guys had 4 quarters to take care of buisness.

Hockey seems to do okay with shootouts.

They don't use shootouts in the post season.

 

[The Gr8est]

No it's not 'nuff said'. The 2nd team has a distinct advantage in knowing how the first team did on their posession. It's no fairer than the current system, and probably much less so.

Not only would the 2nd team know how much they would need to score, they would be in four down territory the entire time they had the ball.

 

[festy1986]

The players *did* decide the game. When NE's offense scored a TD, the players decided the outcome.

I understand the logic. I respect your opinion. I just disagree.

 

[festy1986]

Not only would the 2nd team know how much they would need to score, they would be in four down territory the entire time they had the ball.

Yes and I understand why that seems unfair. However at that point, should they score it can be sudden death. The fate of a coin flip didn't ultimately tip the scale.

It can't be debated that a coin flip tipped the scale. It can be debated if the players did or not.

I know in your heart of hearts you couldn't live with losing that game with Brady not having a chance to touch the ball

 

[fnordcircle]

I like that the logical conclusion of Deion's whining is basically infinite chances are required if the team that wins the coin toss scores.

Under Deion's system if the Pats scored first then the Falcons should get the ball. OK, fine, then what if the Falcons tie it up and then the Patriots score in the following drive. Do the Falcons deserve a shot then too? Because it's the same issue with an uneven number of OT possessions.

Essentially what Deion's whining advocates is that the team that loses the coin toss gets all the advantages.