Overtime should be slightly adjusted

[Biggems]

Both teams must have at least 1 offensive possession in OT

Team A wins the toss and drives down the field for a FG. Team B gets a chance to have the ball. They must score a TD on the drive.

Team A wins the toss and drives down the field for a TD. Team B must then drive down the field and score a TD, then go for 2.

Team A wins the toss, drive stalls and they punt. Team B takes the ball and scores FG or TD....Team B wins.

Team A wins the toss, drive stalls and they punt. Team B drive stalls and they punt. Team A takes the ball down for a FG or TD....Team A wins.

Exceptions to the Rule
Team A wins toss, but fumbles KO. Team B recovers and drives for a FG or TD. Team B wins.

Team A wins toss. Team A throws an INT or Fumbles and it is returned for a TD by Team B. Team B wins.

 

[Cochese]

NFL OT is bogus.

 

[CF74]

Sudden death..

 

[Jack Burton]

I like it the way it is. It's more urgent. If your team doesn't get the kick, they can still get an offensive possesion. They just have to D up. It's fair in my eyes.

 

[Skinsmaniac]

Defense is part of the game too. I like the rules as they are.

 

[Rampage]

I love the ot in the NFL. the college ot is terrible.

 

[Kevinicus]

Defense is part of the game too. I like the rules as they are.

So shouldn't both teams have to play defense too?

 

[dbair1967]

There's nothing wrong with it the way it is. In fact if you have a good defense, kicking off would potentially be seen as an advantage because of field position.

 

[klee34]

I despise the NFL overtime rule. Kickers are too good nowadays, so you don' t have to move the ball downfield very far. The college rule is more exciting. I think a good way to tinker the rule is to say the first team to score SIX points wins the game.

 

[jimmy40]

There's nothing wrong with it the way it is. In fact if you have a good defense, kicking off would potentially be seen as an advantage because of field position.

How many times have teams kicked off to start overtime?

 

[Rogah]

I have no problem with the way it is right now. If Indy converted 3rd and 2 then they wouldn't have had to worry about a coin flip. They have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I don't understand why it has to be so complicated. Just play another quarter. A full quarter. What's the problem with that?

 

[Rogah]

I don't understand why it has to be so complicated. Just play another quarter. A full quarter. What's the problem with that?

Oh, I dunno... injuries, taking up too much TV time, upsetting sponsors, fans that really don't want to stay at a game for 4 1/2 hours, not to mention the possibility you play a full quarter and find yourself tied again...

 

[Hoofbite]

OT is just fine the way it is.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Sudden death..

I like it the way it is. It's more urgent. If your team doesn't get the kick, they can still get an offensive possesion. They just have to D up. It's fair in my eyes.

Defense is part of the game too. I like the rules as they are.

I love the ot in the NFL. the college ot is terrible.

There's nothing wrong with it the way it is. In fact if you have a good defense, kicking off would potentially be seen as an advantage because of field position.

I have no problem with the way it is right now. If Indy converted 3rd and 2 then they wouldn't have had to worry about a coin flip. They have no one to blame but themselves.

OT is just fine the way it is.

I hate the college OT rules. Sudden death is the way to go.

 

[dbair1967]

How many times have teams kicked off to start overtime?

I dont know that its ever happened. Probably about the same % a time a team used to win the toss and kickoff before the rul was changed to give the option to defer. Not very much.

Still, if you have a great defense and are confident in your special teams to cover the kick, if you force a 3 and out you are most likely getting the ball in excellent field position.

 

[dbair1967]

I despise the NFL overtime rule. Kickers are too good nowadays, so you don' t have to move the ball downfield very far. The college rule is more exciting. I think a good way to tinker the rule is to say the first team to score SIX points wins the game.

So you despise the NFL because of that, but like a system where you automatically get the ball on the other teams 25?

I cant stand the college system, its pathetic.

 

[sms4332]

My thought is that the winner of OT should be the first team to score six points. This eliminates the "first team to get the ball and kicks a field goal wins" scenario.

 

[Rogah]

I dont know that its ever happened. Probably about the same % a time a team used to win the toss and kickoff before the rul was changed to give the option to defer. Not very much.

I can think of 2 instances where it has happened. One was about 20 years ago on a very windy day in East Rutherford where all the points were being scored in one direction. The Giants won the toss and chose to go with the wind. Their strategy worked and they won.

Then it happened again within the past 10 years or so where some pathetic team (I want to say the Lions) decided they wanted to make a defensive stand and get the ball back in good offensive field position. But their plan backfired and they never got the ball.

 

[Yeagermeister]

I don't remember which game I was watching but the announcers debunked the first teams to get the ball wins theory. The stat they showed said it was almost dead even. It was like 1 win in favor of the team to get the ball first and a few ties thrown in.