Rich Eisen just asked about my scenario

[Idgit]

For the life of me, I don't understand why they have to stop play for an OT game. Just add another quarter and let the teams play through the way they do between the first and second or third and fourth quarters. Whoever has the most points after 5 quarters, or six quarters, or whatever, wins. No need for kickoffs, no need for evening out possessions. No need for extra time outs. Just let them play until someone wins.

 

[theogt]

Exactly. Most coaches won't give up 25 or 30 yards of field position.

If it's obvious that most coaches won't give up 25 or 30 yards of field position, then it will be a surprise when they do it. The reality is in such a situation you can't differentiate between what is a surprise and what isn't, so those statistics can be thrown out the window.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

For the life of me, I don't understand why they have to stop play for an OT game. Just add another quarter and let the teams play through the way they do between the first and second or third and fourth quarters. Whoever has the most points after 5 quarters, or six quarters, or whatever, wins. No need for kickoffs, no need for evening out possessions. No need for extra time outs. Just let them play until someone wins.

That would be a million times better than the goofy system they just passed. No doubt about it.

My guess is, they are envisioning how dramatic this will be... Or something.

I think the real story is that McKay and Goodell are a disaster.

 

[bbgun]

For the life of me, I don't understand why they have to stop play for an OT game. Just add another quarter and let the teams play through the way they do between the first and second or third and fourth quarters. Whoever has the most points after 5 quarters, or six quarters, or whatever, wins. No need for kickoffs, no need for evening out possessions. No need for extra time outs. Just let them play until someone wins.

Because the goal is to shorten games, or so I thought.

 

[dcfanatic]

That scenario would NEVER happen. LOL No way would a team who just kicked a FG in OT do an onside kick and risk giving their opponent a short field. That would be beyond stupid. You kick it deep and force them to travel a distance.

Really.

You are facing Peyton Manning.

He's torched your D all day long. You lost two key defenders to injuries during the game.

You won the coin toss. Got your FG.

You kick deep and he starts at the 20.

Ten plays later your defense was just sliced and diced once again and it's 1st and goal from the four yard line.

How tired is that defense who is now ready to lose the game because they are going to allow a TD.

Now think back.

You could have kept him on the sideline and never gave him a chance to score that winning TD.

And it's the AFC Championship game.

Even if you don't get the onside he still has to put the ball in the End Zone to beat you.

 

[percyhoward]

We'd see a lot of prevent defense on that first drive of OT, and it would all come down to whether we can score the TD from inside the 10.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

If it's obvious that most coaches won't give up 25 or 30 yards of field position, then it will be a surprise when they do it. The reality is in such a situation you can't differentiate between what is a surprise and what isn't, so those statistics can be thrown out the window.

You can differentiate the two. When they have their “hands” team on the line ...they are ready for an onside kick. I think what does make it interesting is if you have your hands team in ...that will effect the success of your return game. Or along with what DC is saying, if you don’t bring in your hands team ...you make yourself vulnerable to an onside kick.

 

[KJJ]

Really.

You are facing Peyton Manning.

He's torched your D all day long. You lost two key defenders to injuries during the game.

You won the coin toss. Got your FG.

You kick deep and he starts at the 20.

Ten plays later your defense was just sliced and diced once again and it's 1st and goal from the four yard line.

How tired is that defense who is now ready to lose the game because they are going to allow a TD.

Now think back.

You could have kept him on the sideline and never gave him a chance to score that winning TD.

And it's the AFC Championship game.

Even if you don't get the onside he still has to put the ball in the End Zone to beat you.

Problem is the odds on the KO team recovering an onside kick aren't very good. That's one of the riskiest plays in football and one of the most penalizing if it doesn't work in your favor especially if you're facing a Peyton Manning. You give him and his weapons a short field you're almost sure to lose if you don't recover the kick because the odds are he'll put it in the endzone. If you kick it deep your defense has the advantage because that puts Manning in a do or die situation and as we saw in the SB he's human. It's alot different when your opponent is 70-80 yards away and they have to score or it's over. One penalty or mistake can end their season in that situation.

 

[NextGenBoys]

I like the playoff OT situation, and they should change it like that for the entire season too.

Teams arent going to be kicking a lot of onside kicks in overtime. Who's going to risk giving up the ball in field goal territory in a do or die scenario just to keep the other team from getting seven points? Something they would have to march down the field for, rather than if they recover the onside kick, having a MUCH better shot at.

Onside kick percentages are already low. I just never, ever, see this scenario playing out.

I dont care how bad your defense is, I dont see this happening.

 

[tecolote]

All this strategy and the different decisions a coach has to make will only make OT a lot more interesting and the coin toss a lot less relevant than it is right now.

No more kneeling down on the center of the field on 3rd and 6 at the 20 yard line to kick a game winning field goal, teams will have to play for a td to win the game.

This is a pretty simple and fair system, and coaches will be forced to make some tough decisions.

What's wrong with that?

 

[KJJ]

All this strategy and the different decisions a coach has to make will only make OT a lot more interesting and the coin toss a lot less relevant than it is right now.

No more kneeling down on the center of the field on 3rd and 6 at the 20 yard line to kick a game winning field goal, teams will have to play for a td to win the game.

This is a pretty simple and fair system, and coaches will be forced to make some tough decisions.

What's wrong with that?

I'm fine with the new rule my gripe is the same rule should apply to the regular season. My guess is eventually it will.

 

[theogt]

You can differentiate the two. When they have their “hands” team on the line ...they are ready for an onside kick. I think what does make it interesting is if you have your hands team in ...that will effect the success of your return game. Or along with what DC is saying, if you don’t bring in your hands team ...you make yourself vulnerable to an onside kick.

The statistics cited measure surprise in a different manner, so you'd have to remeasure in this manner to obtain more useful statistics.

 

[Idgit]

Because the goal is to shorten games, or so I thought.

Personally, I like the idea of a knock-down, drag out dogfight, but you could do it with 5 minute quarters, if you really wanted to. If you're not adding extra timeouts, you'd also have less clock-stoppage than you do with the current situation.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Brain Kinney just said on his national show that since 1994, only 26% of the time has a team won the coin toss and kicked a FG on their first possession.

We're making all these changes for that?

Oh yeah. Brett Favre.

 

[KJJ]

Brain Kinney just said on his national show that since 1994, only 26% of the time has a team won the coin toss and kicked a FG on their first possession.

We're making all these changes for that?

Oh yeah. Brett Favre.

They're making changes because since KO's were moved back to the 30 yardline almost 60% of the teams who won the toss in OT ended up winning the game on their first possession. A better starting point is going to equal more success.

 

[Jay]

Brain Kinney just said on his national show that since 1994, only 26% of the time has a team won the coin toss and kicked a FG on their first possession.

We're making all these changes for that?

Oh yeah. Brett Favre.

Minnesota actually voted against the rule change.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

The statistics cited measure surprise in a different manner, so you'd have to remeasure in this manner to obtain more useful statistics.

Yea i tried to look at the charts, but after about ten minutes i still couldn’t figure it out. Regardless, logic says surprise attacks give you an advantage over the unexpected.

 

[casmith07]

How would one use statistics to measure surprise?

 

[big dog cowboy]

Because the goal is to shorten games, or so I thought.

There you go believing that league propaganda again.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Brain Kinney just said on his national show that since 1994, only 26% of the time has a team won the coin toss and kicked a FG on their first possession.

We're making all these changes for that?

On Total Access they said only 3 playoff games in history would have been effected.