What a surprise - Falcons want to change OT rules

[BobDigital]

There will never be a completely fair over time. Even if you give both teams 1 possession at the 25 ala college the team that goes 2nd will always have the edge cause they will know what they have to do to win/tie.

Unless you make 2 mini quarters it won't work and then the game gets way too long and it is possible to have over time again very easily. Sometimes your D just needs to make a play.

Also lets not pretend the Falcons didn't have a chance. Both teams had a chance to score on every play. The Falcons had a chance to get a turnover every play.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

Falcons had "no chance" because their defense had been utterly blown off the field and were so out of it that the game was a foregone conclusion after the coin flip. It's a 3-phase game. The Falcons defense did have a chance to get a turnover or stop the Patriots, and blew it. Fix the Falcons defense.

Don't complain about the rules not giving you a "chance" when what you mean is "I wanted my offense out there because they were dominant this season and our defense was a major liability at that point in the game."

 

[Hammer of Thor]

I say just remove the subtly of this whole process and make a new amendment to the CBA:

"Anytime a team the Patriots wins the Super Bowl, whatever it is they do best shall be outlawed for the next league year, and any rules that benefit them will be redacted."

At least then we can mentally prepare for it.

Updated for accuracy.

 

[slam]

I always think it's silly to try to change the rule after you lost the game. This, tuck rule, ineligible receiver, etc. It'd be like trying to outlaw helmet catches after the first Giants Super Bowl. What's the point? It might benefit you next time.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

If this passes, I'm one step closer to giving up on the NFL for good. Is this what the league is really coming to now? I don't like how a team won, so let me propose a change and if gets passed just like that? Player safety is one thing, but this is something entirely different. The Colts started this slippery slope and there doesn't seem to be any stopping it. They want parity and they don't care what they have to do to achieve it. I guess what that means now is let's stop the Patriots any way we can.

#integrity #protecttheshield

It's like watching a sport run by a bunch spoiled teen-aged girls and the worst of them was named commissioner.

 

[bormio]

We had an excellent long thread about the merits of various OT scenarios earlier. What the Falcons GM wants to do gives the 2nd team all the advantage, which is why the NFL went the way it did - where is created different advantages for each team. Winning the coin toss is not always a big advantage, but it was for the Patriots whose offense was crushing the Atlanta defense at that point in the game. Tough nougies - get a better defense.

 

[GodBrady]

I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole this as sour grapes. For all we know,
Thomas Dimitroff has been in favor of changing overtime for years (lots of players/coaches have). The article makes it sound like Dimitroff issued a press release demanding change. In reality, someone probably asked him about it and he responded with a topical answer.

 

[XLIX]

I always think it's silly to try to change the rule after you lost the game. This, tuck rule, ineligible receiver, etc. It'd be like trying to outlaw helmet catches after the first Giants Super Bowl. What's the point? It might benefit you next time.

That's how I feel about these too. I don't think they should change the OT rule but if they did, the rule change is as likely to help us as hurt us.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I say just remove the subtly of this whole process and make a new amendment to the CBA:

"ANYTIME THE PATRIOTS wins the Super Bowl, whatever it is they do best shall be outlawed for the next league year, and any rules that benefit them will be redacted."

At least then we can mentally prepare for it.

I amended it for you...

 

[Ras-IR Dowling]

Maybe they should also petition to change the length of a game from 4 quarters to 3.

 

[AtomicDawg]

Ok this is ridiculous. How does 5 less minutes make it more entertaining and exciting?

And the fact that Polian was involved also is not surprising. He was probably involved in the Oscar fiasco too.

 

[PatsBoy12]

We had an excellent long thread about the merits of various OT scenarios earlier. What the Falcons GM wants to do gives the 2nd team all the advantage, which is why the NFL went the way it did - where is created different advantages for each team. Winning the coin toss is not always a big advantage, but it was for the Patriots whose offense was crushing the Atlanta defense at that point in the game. Tough nougies - get a better defense.

Yeah, or simply don't be the first team in history to blow a 25-point lead in a SB. This really ****ing upsets me. This league is **** now. It feels we'll just have to look over our shoulders after every Lombardi because butt-hurt owners can't figure out how BB and the bunch keep assaulting them with no Vaseline. They'll never have the grasp on the game and rule book the way BB does. They'll never have a QB like the one we have. ****, WE may never again have a QB like the one we have when he planned when he leaves. But all that be damned. Any try to beat them on the field when you can simply try to beat them in the off season by petitioning rule changes? By the way, how has that really worked out for the league so far? Answer - Not well.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Maybe they should also petition to change the length of a game from 4 quarters to 3.

Exactly! Or why not just institute a mercy rule. When I was a kid my cousins and I would end a game of whatever it was - Super Tecmo Bowl, Madden, etc. - if you feel down 21-0, which was later amended to just 21 points down at any point in the game. We have a large family and this was the best way to make sure everyone got to play at least one game during family gatherings. The NFL might as well do it to make sure every team gets a chance to beat the Patriots. Just call the game whenever a team gets up on them by 21 points or so. Then the chances of OT are moot. Oh, and have the rule instituted only during Patriots games.

And I normally don't like to get involved in these conspiracy theories anymore because I feel our fan base has become overly sensitive in recent years, but this reeks too bad to be ignored. That's two rules this off season, the other being jumping over the line on FG's and extra points, that seems to directly correlate to something the Pats executed to win. It's pathetic.

 

[PlanB]

let it end in a tie and give out "Super Bowl Participant" trophies so no one's feeeewings get hurt

 

[jmt57]

How about this:

Regular Season: No overtime, for player health and safety issues.

Playoffs: Utilize the current OT rules since it is an elimination game.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Sometimes the money shot opportunity is just not there.

 

[Froob]

I actually agree to be honest, one team shouldnt have such a huge advantage on a coin flip. Why should one team have to play defense? Atlanta wasn't winning either way though.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I actually agree to be honest, one team shouldnt have such a huge advantage on a coin flip. Why should one team have to play defense? Atlanta wasn't winning either way though.

BREAKING NEWS: Falcons believe both sides of the coin were heads. Harvey Harvey Harvey Dent (Joker voice).

 

[PatsBoy12]

let it end in a tie and give out "Super Bowl Participant" trophies so no one's feeeewings get hurt

The Colts approve of this message.

 

[fourhour]

Tom Brady flipped the coin in overtime? Looks like Slater to me?

Patriots win Super Bowl LI overtime coin toss