What's the deal with these Overtime rules?

DUO_CORE

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,035
Reaction score
2,606
Let the opening coin toss decide OT possession as well. Whoever possesses the ball first to open the game, also possesses it first in OT. This will also make teams think twice about deferring so they can receive the 2nd half kickoff.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,412
Reaction score
12,148
The OT still gives the opposing team a chance to get their offense on the field - it's just up to the defense to make that happen. You keep them from scoring or kicking a FG and your offense gets a chance to tie it or win/lose it.

I'm not sure where it's "unfair" here. This isn't the first quarter of football, it's OT - you had 4 quarters to not allow a tie, once OT starts, it's all about getting the game over with at that point.

You don't hear this talk from winners.
It's unequal burden. The Patriots defense were not charged with stopping the Chiefs offense like the Chiefs defense was faced with stopping NE.

You can say, "well the Chiefs D just needs to make a stop," but if you don't also say that about NE, it's not consistent.

OT should still be a complete team sport. An OT that sees the Chiefs O and Patriots D sitting on their hands is not fully football.
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,474
Reaction score
20,154
It's unequal burden. The Patriots defense were not charged with stopping the Chiefs offense like the Chiefs defense was faced with stopping NE.

You can say, "well the Chiefs D just needs to make a stop," but if you don't also say that about NE, it's not consistent.

OT should still be a complete team sport. An OT that sees the Chiefs O and Patriots D sitting on their hands is not fully football.

No, it would be unequal if there was zero chance for the opposing offense to ever get on the field. The rules are clear - if your D can't keep the opposing offense out of the end zone, the game is over. Want your offense to see the field? Stop the opposing offense.

Again, this is not fair. Get a solid freakin' D and you won't have to worry about this. Chiefs all year lost to the best because their D wasn't the best. They were sent home packing because of their D.

Welcome to the big boy league. You have college football for their OT rules.
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
The problem with the College overtime rules is that they fundamentally changed the game

The team that goes second gets 4 downs to move the ball and score ..... that is a huge advantage and is why every team that wins the toss goes second

Starting at the 25 takes all the D out of the game

In the new NFL same thing applies if the first team gets a FG

Sudden Death is still the best......after 60 minutes everyone is tired .......first team scores win..... Offense, Defense and Special Teams all matter equally
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,412
Reaction score
12,148
No, it would be unequal if there was zero chance for the opposing offense to ever get on the field. The rules are clear - if your D can't keep the opposing offense out of the end zone, the game is over. Want your offense to see the field? Stop the opposing offense.

Again, this is not fair. Get a solid freakin' D and you won't have to worry about this. Chiefs all year lost to the best because their D wasn't the best. They were sent home packing because of their D.

Welcome to the big boy league. You have college football for their OT rules.

So hold the Patriots to that same standard. Make their D do that too.

At least you admit it is not fair...and therefore dumb.
 

AlienBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
530
Reaction score
594
After 2 extra quarters, if the game is still tied they should then do like soccer and go to field goals taken by 5 selected players then another 5 if still tied etc..........
An overtime game decided by kicking? Sounds kinda neat. How bout instead, have the kickers start kicking from the 30 and go back 10 yds after each kick? Who ever gets the longest kick wins!
 

Jake

Beyond tired of Jerry
Messages
36,067
Reaction score
84,350
Why doesn't the other team get a chance to possess the ball in OT? TD or not...

The college rules are better. They should adapt some pro variant of the same rules.

Start the pros @ mid field. Both teams get a chance to score. Keep going until the wheels fall off.

Good ol shootout. Why not???

I'm fine with the current OT rules in the regular season. They don't want marathon regular season games - personally, I wouldn't care if they even had OT in regular season (a tie never killed anyone).

But you don't want a coin toss to mean so much in a playoff game. I'd give both teams a possession, TD or not.
 

Hook'em#11

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,548
Reaction score
1,988
Win the game in 4 qtrs and don't worry about OT.. lol..

I like the way it is. Sudden death OT. Team who gets after it, gets it.
 

HungryLion

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,533
Reaction score
60,409
I prefer they do away with sudden death and just make it an extra 10 minute game period. Regular rules apply.

In the regular season, if it goes down as a tie game, then so be it.

In the playoffs if it’s still tied, then do another period but maybe make that period even shorter. And I don’t want to hear the “player safety” crap about extending the game. This is the same league that put useless Thursday night games into effect, despite player safety. And also has teams flying to England to play games, despite player safety. But an extra 10 minute period of play is too dangerous? Nonsense
 

Fontaine

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,607
Reaction score
3,601
It doesn’t have to be a dramatic change. The basics of the rule can be the same, both teams get a possession, if the first team scores a TD then the other team must score a TD, if they do next FG or TD wins it.
 
Top