Clayton Blog: Competition Committee recommends OT changes

WoodysGirl

U.N.I.T.Y
Staff member
Messages
79,281
Reaction score
45,648
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Committee ponders OT changes


posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 | Print Entry

Give the NFL Competition Committee a lot of credit. There isn't a lot broken on the field in the National Football League, so the committee is wise in not making many changes for the upcoming season.


The normal 10-day meeting of the committee was finished in nine days, and the only significant adjustment involved overtime. For the past few years, critics have complained about the overtimes being too predicable. The team that wins the overtime coin toss tends to have a big advantage, which has called for an outcry for the league to consider a rule change in which both teams have a chance to get the ball.

Wisely, the Competition Committee stayed away from making such a change. Instead, they studied the trends and came up with two wise adjustments.

First, the committee recommended moving overtime kickoffs from the 30 yardline to the 35. By doing that, the team that loses the coin toss won't be surrendering such significant field position. Kickers tend to tire after four quarters, so the receiving team tends to get a huge field position advantage in overtime. The move of 5 yards could allow for more touchbacks or drive starts inside a team's 30.

Second, a league official will be appointed to monitor the K-balls, the footballs basically taken out of the box and used in kicking situation. What the committee found was that too many new footballs were being used toward the end of games. A new football isn't worn. Thus, it's harder to kick long distances in cold weather. As Tony Romo found out, the ball is too slick when it comes out of the box.

The stats were pretty compelling to make some kind of a change and the K-ball had a lot to do with it. Prior to 1998, when the league went to the K-ball, the team that won the coin toss won roughly 46 percent of the overtime games. After that, the coin-toss winner won 62 percent. This should bring some better balance.

49ers coach Mike Nolan proposed a change in the interference rule. He thought pass interference penalties were too severe. A long pass in which interference is called could net a 35- to 40-yard gain for an offensive team. Nolan suggested making interference penalties a 15-yard maximum penalty.
The NFL Competition Committee voted 8-0 against such a rule change. That makes sense. Limiting the interference rule to 15 yards would allow for more cornerbacks to try more interferences when pass plays go longer than 15 yards. For instance, let's say Randy Moss was going for a 50-yard touchdown. The cornerback would be wise to tackle him and draw a penalty knowing he can shorten a 50-yard gain to 15 yards. Nolan's idea has no chance of passing.

McKinley makes sense: Alvin McKinley's four-year, $8 million deal is an interesting one for the Broncos. The Browns defensive end has a decent chance to start next to Gerard Warren as a defensive tackle. Second, the fact he is under contract could kill the Dan Wilkinson trade. Wilkinson still hasn't passed a physical. If he doesn't, the trade might be voided. Wilkinson supposedly has some knee injury problems. For McKinley, signing with the Broncos was a chance to get away from a struggling Browns team and get to a winner in Denver.

Win-win situation: The Commanders apparently didn't have to kick in any extra money to make the Adam Archuleta trade to the Bears. Instead, the Bears take over the $5 million option bonus on a three-year, $8.1 million deal. For weeks, the Bears wanted Commanders owner Daniel Snyder to pay part of the $5 million bonus. Snyder was reluctant to do that even though he was unloading roughly $19 million of the $25 million deal. Bears coach Lovie Smith wanted to acquire Archuleta, and for the Bears, it's a good deal. They get Archuleta for $2.7 million a year instead of the $5 million a year originally committed by the Bears. For the Commanders, they were able to move on from a player who didn't fit in their system. Archuleta was a winner because he rejoins a coach (Smith) who devised schemes that allowed him to be an impact player.

Green a tough move: There is good reason the Trent Green trade negotiations are moving slowly. It's not easy to find a new home for a quarterback making $7.2 million a year. How much less does he take to move on, not knowing he's going to be a starter on not? The Dolphins are interested, but they have Daunte Culpepper making $7.5 million a year. Green is looking for the right fit in a new team to leave the Chiefs. Plus, he's looking for the right salary.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
First, the committee recommended moving overtime kickoffs from the 30 yardline to the 35. By doing that, the team that loses the coin toss won't be surrendering such significant field position. Kickers tend to tire after four quarters, so the receiving team tends to get a huge field position advantage in overtime. The move of 5 yards could allow for more touchbacks or drive starts inside a team's 30.
Uh...what? They kick about 4-5 times over a 3+ hours time spand. How wussified can you get?
 

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
101,867
Reaction score
112,827
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
theogt;1428864 said:
Uh...what? They kick about 4-5 times over a 3+ hours time spand. How wussified can you get?
Hos is going to get a kick out of that one. :lmao2:
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
Hmm. Some of that stuff makes sense.

I don't care about tired kickers -- but when a vast majority of the teams who win the coin flip in OT win the game, it tells you that something might be wrong. I'd love to see how that has changed over the years with the KO location. The committee is right to look at this. Coin flips shouldn't decide games.
 

dbair1967

Arch Defender
Messages
30,782
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1428919 said:
Hmm. Some of that stuff makes sense.

I don't care about tired kickers -- but when a vast majority of the teams who win the coin flip in OT win the game, it tells you that something might be wrong. I'd love to see how that has changed over the years with the KO location. The committee is right to look at this. Coin flips shouldn't decide games.

they dont...and honestly its just a freaking excuse

stop the other team and get the ball back...its not like other teams are always getting the ball on your 30 and your expected to stop them there...you kickoff and the vast majority of the time the receiving team is starting at their own 30 or worse

if you cant force a punt then you deserve to lose

and then the more obvious answer--win the damn game in regulation

David
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
Anyone know the percentage of games won in overtime by the team that won the coin flip? I thought I remembered seeing that it was only somewhere around 55%, which I assume would be statistcally insignificant.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
dbair1967;1428930 said:
they dont...and honestly its just a freaking excuse

stop the other team and get the ball back...its not like other teams are always getting the ball on your 30 and your expected to stop them there...you kickoff and the vast majority of the time the receiving team is starting at their own 30 or worse

if you cant force a punt then you deserve to lose

and then the more obvious answer--win the damn game in regulation

David

Lame.

The team that wins the toss wins more than it loses. That means that the outcome is weighted toward luck rather than skill. You can call that an excuse, but when Mike Zimmer's ATL D doesn't even have to hit the field as the Falcons drive to our 40 and get a long FG to win in OT, you'll be signing another tune.
 

smarta5150

Mr. Wright
Messages
7,163
Reaction score
0
abersonc;1429033 said:
Lame.

The team that wins the toss wins more than it loses. That means that the outcome is weighted toward luck rather than skill. You can call that an excuse, but when Mike Zimmer's ATL D doesn't even have to hit the field as the Falcons drive to our 40 and get a long FG to win in OT, you'll be signing another tune.

I thought it was a round 50%, ironically, just a coin flip in itself.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
smarta5150;1429035 said:
I thought it was a round 50%, ironically, just a coin flip in itself.

Not so. from 1974 to 2003 (the only analysis I could find -- but it is unlikely the #s have changed) -- the team that won the toss won the game 52% of the time. 5% of games ended in a tie, so if you win the toss you only lose 43% of the time.

That's 52% vs. 43% with 5% sister kissers. That puts far too much on the toss.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
abersonc;1429064 said:
Not so. from 1974 to 2003 (the only analysis I could find -- but it is unlikely the #s have changed) -- the team that won the toss won the game 52% of the time. 5% of games ended in a tie, so if you win the toss you only lose 43% of the time.

That's 52% vs. 43% with 5% sister kissers. That puts far too much on the toss.
Know how many games? To see if it's statiscally significant?

Regardless, I'd like to see it change. I just don't like sudden death. All it takes is one break away play after 60 minutes of hard fought football.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
theogt;1429066 said:
Know how many games? To see if it's statiscally significant?

Statistical significance refers to drawing conclusions about populations based on samples. These are data from the entire population of games (350 I believe) from that period. "Significance" is not relevant to examining differences here as we are talking about population data.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
abersonc;1429074 said:
Statistical significance refers to drawing conclusions about populations based on samples. These are data from the entire population of games (350 I believe) from that period. "Significance" is not relevant to examining differences here as we are talking about population data.
Statistical significance states whether results are due to chance. Relatively smaller data sets, will have lower statistical significance. Existing games are not a "total" data set, so we don't know whether this number is accurate or just due to chance. It's impossible to conclude anything from it.
 

NextGenBoys

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,252
Reaction score
1,964
theogt;1429066 said:
Know how many games? To see if it's statiscally significant?

Regardless, I'd like to see it change. I just don't like sudden death. All it takes is one break away play after 60 minutes of hard fought football.

*Cough* Ron Dayne on Thanksgiving*Cough*
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
NextGenBoys;1429081 said:
*Cough* Ron Dayne on Thanksgiving*Cough*
Ya know...that thought might have crossed my mind while posting that. ;)
 

dbair1967

Arch Defender
Messages
30,782
Reaction score
1
the important stat to show to make the argument that the OT is unfair would be to show what % of time the team winning the toss WINS the game on that INITIAL drive

by the way as FYI, according to to Peter King the answer is 29% of the time...he says thats too much, I say its not enough to show any real advantage...71% of the time they arnt scoring on the opening drive, which means that almost 3/4 of the time each team is getting at least one posesssion

David
 

dbair1967

Arch Defender
Messages
30,782
Reaction score
1
theogt;1429066 said:
Know how many games? To see if it's statiscally significant?

Regardless, I'd like to see it change. I just don't like sudden death. All it takes is one break away play after 60 minutes of hard fought football.

same thing can happen in regulation games Theo, is that unfair?

David
 

dbair1967

Arch Defender
Messages
30,782
Reaction score
1
abersonc;1429064 said:
Not so. from 1974 to 2003 (the only analysis I could find -- but it is unlikely the #s have changed) -- the team that won the toss won the game 52% of the time. 5% of games ended in a tie, so if you win the toss you only lose 43% of the time.

That's 52% vs. 43% with 5% sister kissers. That puts far too much on the toss.

and thats slightly more than 50%...which is barely above half

50/50 is the coin toss odds

David
 

THUMPER

Papa
Messages
9,522
Reaction score
61
49ers coach Mike Nolan proposed a change in the interference rule. He thought pass interference penalties were too severe. A long pass in which interference is called could net a 35- to 40-yard gain for an offensive team. Nolan suggested making interference penalties a 15-yard maximum penalty.
The NFL Competition Committee voted 8-0 against such a rule change. That makes sense. Limiting the interference rule to 15 yards would allow for more cornerbacks to try more interferences when pass plays go longer than 15 yards. For instance, let's say Randy Moss was going for a 50-yard touchdown. The cornerback would be wise to tackle him and draw a penalty knowing he can shorten a 50-yard gain to 15 yards.

I agree with not making all PI penalties 15 yards due to CBs taking advantage of the longer plays but I would like to see a "flagrant" PI penalty, enforced like it is now, at the spot of the foul (or the 1), for those situations.

I hate seeing a 50-yard penalty on "incidental" contact that is just as often initiated by the WR but called against the DB. Having those calls reduced to 15 yards (and called against the player who actually initiated contact) would be more fair. In that case of a truly flagrant foul it should be penalized at the spot of the foul or at the 1 in the case of an endzone infraction.


As for OT, I don't see any reason to change it. Win it in regulation or take your chances in Sudden Death. I think it adds to the drama and excitement of the game. If they want to move the kickoff 5 yards I don't have a problem with it.
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,041
Reaction score
6,920
The sample of 350 over time games over a 30 year period. That is 12 games each season that go into over time. That is a pretty low number of games each year. They played 256 regular season games lsat season. That means they are concerned with rules that govern less than 5% of the games played in a season. Of those 5% or roughly 12 games, currently about 4 will be won by the team winning the coin toss. That number used to be 3 prior to the kick off being moved 5 yards back.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
theogt;1429078 said:
Statistical significance states whether results are due to chance. Relatively smaller data sets, will have lower statistical significance. Existing games are not a "total" data set, so we don't know whether this number is accurate or just due to chance. It's impossible to conclude anything from it.

Statistical significance states whether observed differences in a SAMPLE are likely due to sampling error. Significance asks "would my SAMPLE likely differ by this much if there was no difference in the population." I presented population data -- every game from a certain period. There is no sampling error because the data reflect the entire population of games from that period.

You can apply a signficance test here but it would be incorrect in this situation because we aren't talking about samples.
 
Top