Cowboys for amended OT rule

[cowboyjoe]

March 22, 2010

http://startelegramsports.typepad.com/cowboys/2010/03/cowboys-for-amended-ot-rule.html

Cowboys for amended OT rule
Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones is on the competition committee and voted to present the proposed postseason overtime rule to membership. He said the Cowboys are for the rule that, If approved by ownership, would allow the team winning the coin toss in overtime of a postseason game to win the game on its opening possession only by scoring a touchdown. A field goal would guarantee the other team a possession to tie the game with a field goal or to win with a touchdown.

"We really put a lot of thought into it," Jones said. "I think we've got something as a committee that ought to be looked at very carefully by membership. The big thing the Cowboys are behind is if you look at statistics how things have changed, whether it's the accuracy of these field-goal kickers -- they're obviously longer and more accurate -- and you look at the fact that we put the kickoff back [to the 30-yard line], which the people before us put a lot of time into the overtime rule didn't envision that the kickoff would keep moving back, and it's obviously moved the starting position up. The thing has changed a lot. ...That's our only point. It just seems like you've got to do some correction, and we think we've come up with one that we definitely think will give membership a thought process and hopefully put something in that would improve our game."

It will take 24 of the 32 owners to approve the measure, which is expected to be to a vote Wednesday.

-- Charean Williams




Read more: http://startelegramsports.typepad.com/cowboys/2010/03/cowboys-for-amended-ot-rule.html#ixzz0iweGj55E

 

[Hoofbite]

March 22, 2010

http://startelegramsports.typepad.com/cowboys/2010/03/cowboys-for-amended-ot-rule.html

Cowboys for amended OT rule
Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones is on the competition committee and voted to present the proposed postseason overtime rule to membership. He said the Cowboys are for the rule that, If approved by ownership, would allow the team winning the coin toss in overtime of a postseason game to win the game on its opening possession only by scoring a touchdown. A field goal would guarantee the other team a possession to tie the game with a field goal or to win with a touchdown.

"We really put a lot of thought into it," Jones said. "I think we've got something as a committee that ought to be looked at very carefully by membership. The big thing the Cowboys are behind is if you look at statistics how things have changed, whether it's the accuracy of these field-goal kickers -- they're obviously longer and more accurate -- and you look at the fact that we put the kickoff back [to the 30-yard line], which the people before us put a lot of time into the overtime rule didn't envision that the kickoff would keep moving back, and it's obviously moved the starting position up. The thing has changed a lot. ...That's our only point. It just seems like you've got to do some correction, and we think we've come up with one that we definitely think will give membership a thought process and hopefully put something in that would improve our game."

It will take 24 of the 32 owners to approve the measure, which is expected to be to a vote Wednesday.

-- Charean Williams


Read more: http://startelegramsports.typepad.com/cowboys/2010/03/cowboys-for-amended-ot-rule.html#ixzz0iweGj55E

Screw you Roger Goodell. Screw you long and hard.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

SMH...

Very disappointed, Stephen.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Its too confusing. Get ready for the chick on the couch to ask wth is going on if theres OT

 

[sonnyboy]

What I find interesting is that while explaining the rational for this terrible rule change, Jerry touched on the root of the problem and a simple solution if one feels a change is needed.

"you look at the fact that we put the kickoff back [to the 30-yard line], which the people before us put a lot of time into the overtime rule didn't envision that the kickoff would keep moving back, and it's obviously moved the starting position up".

I agree with this. Someone posted some stats a few days ago that clearly demonstrated a significant shift in winning percentage for the coin flip winner in OT after the KO was moved back in 1994.

Anyone guessed the simple solution yet?

 

[Gzus]

Its too confusing. Get ready for the chick on the couch to ask wth is going on if theres OT

That's going to happen regardless of what the rules are.....

I like the proposed new OT rule, makes sense cause I always felt a kick to win in OT was always a cop out anyways.

 

[Muhast]

That's going to happen regardless of what the rules are.....

I like the proposed new OT rule, makes sense cause I always felt a kick to win in OT was always a cop out anyways.

If a FG can win a game in a normal game, it should be enough to win in Overtime as well.

If you can't stop them from marching down field and kicking it with the game on the line, you don't deserve to win. Period. Sorry.

Especially with the way kickers kicked all year long last year. It's not like FG's are give me's anyways.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Just put the ball on the 20. They then have to go 40+ yards for a FG. Elimantes the cheapies

 

[jswalker1981]

If we are in the first quarter, and the score is 0-0. We just ran a dive play on 2nd down. Now we are at the opponents 30yd line. It's third down, and out marches Buehler to try a FG. You'd be freaking out wondering what the heck they are doing. If in the game you are trying to score TDs, then in OT you should be trying to score TDs. But I think to not be so confusing about it, just add another period to the game, like 5-10 minutes. If the game is still tied. It either ends that way, or go crazy, and have a shootout like they do in hockey, but instead use kickers.

 

[links18]

This debate is getting more boring than health care. Its a clash of absolutes. The two sides aren't going to agree on anything and neither will budge. In the end it comes down to numbers. Can we just retire this debate after Wed's vote? Please?

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

I think if one team scores a FG, then the other team should get the ball and if they score a TD, they win, if they to get a FG, game goes on, if they don't get a FG, they lose. And the process continues.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

I'm NOT for this rule change.... STUPID!!!!!!

 

[Muhast]

If we are in the first quarter, and the score is 0-0. We just ran a dive play on 2nd down. Now we are at the opponents 30yd line. It's third down, and out marches Buehler to try a FG. You'd be freaking out wondering what the heck they are doing. If in the game you are trying to score TDs, then in OT you should be trying to score TDs. But I think to not be so confusing about it, just add another period to the game, like 5-10 minutes. If the game is still tied. It either ends that way, or go crazy, and have a shootout like they do in hockey, but instead use kickers.

You are trying to score points. Points come from both td's and fgs. The team with the most td's doesn't always win the game. Come on.

I agree about a 5th quarter, then go sudden death if it continues

 

[Gzus]

As long as each team gets a chance to run an offensive series in OT I'm happy. In a regular game each team had a chance to run multiple offensive series and so in OT they should be able to at least run one each. If not it'd be like you started the game and the first team to score won.... even w/o the other team got to run an offensive series.

 

[Four]

If you can't stop them from marching down field and kicking it with the game on the line, you don't deserve to win. Period. Sorry.

sorry but this is an antiquated view with today's game and more specifically the offenses and the rules intended to favor the offense.

 

[Muhast]

sorry but this is an antiquated view with today's game and more specifically the offenses and the rules intended to favor the offense.

I disagree. How many games are actually won by the first team getting ball and winning by a FG? This same argument is used over and over again and it's still wrongly perceived by fans.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total no. of overtime games (1974–2003)[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]365[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Both teams had at least one possession[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]261 (72 %)[/FONT]​

Since 1994 only 34.4 percent of games were ended on first possession, and only 26.8% of games were ended by a FG on a first possession. (1994 is when the KO was moved from 35 to 30)

So clearly the overwhelming majority of games do not end in the way that fans love to exaggerate.

Facts, gotta love them.

 

[Four]

that's great and all but the stats prior to the rule changes are absolutely meaningless.

Facts, you can twist em how you wanna.

 

[bayeslife]

sorry but this is an antiquated view with today's game and more specifically the offenses and the rules intended to favor the offense.

So then why aren't all games high scoring with a final score of 59-56?

 

[CF74]

Leave it alone. The seasons are getting to long and now they wanna extend OT? Not a good idea. To many injuries knock teams out..

 

[Muhast]

that's great and all but the stats prior to the rule changes are absolutely meaningless.

Facts, you can twist em how you wanna.

I didn't twist anything, in fact I even added SPECIFICALLY the stats you were referring to, from 94 and on.