Why the new playoff overtime rules are beyond stupid

[Nav22]

It's certainly harder to require both a defensive stop and an offensive success to win than to just have an offensive success to win. Again, kicking the ball requires the success of both your offense and defense, whereas receiving your team has a chance to win without ever requiring your defense to do anything.

It's probably not twice as hard, but it is harder, and therefore the coin flip has greater impact than if both teams are guaranteed a possession.

Let's say the advantage under the previous system was 70/30, meaning 70% of an "advantage" to the receiving team, 30% for the kicking team.

Okay, that's not great. But at least there are pros and cons for each side.

But the NEW system has made it 100/0 in the opposite direction. Because there is zero logical benefit to starting with the ball, since your opponent will have every opportunity on Earth to match (or beat!) whatever it is you do.

Smart teams will absolutely choose to kick off to start OT in the playoffs now. It's a bigger advantage than receiving first used to be.

 

[Nav22]

And there shouldn't be. It makes no sense to build in a "pro" that can determine the outcome of an entire season, on a lucky coin flip.

There should be pros AND cons for getting the ball first.

There should be pros AND cons for kicking off first.

That's how the coin flip loses importance.

There's no longer any "pro" to getting the ball first. That's the problem.

So now the coin flip matters more than it did before.

 

[KalEl]

Reminder: the NFL stupidly changed the playoff OT rules so that a TD on the 1st possession no longer ends the game.

It was a rash decision after the Bills-Chiefs thriller last year, in which the Bills never touched the ball in OT because KC scored on its opening possession.

WAAAAH, poor Buffalo!!!

The logic went as follows: "But this is more fair! Now both teams are guaranteed a possession!"

Actually, it's LESS fair.

In order for overtime to be as fair as possible, there needs to be pros and cons to 1) getting the ball first, and 2) kicking off first. The coin toss must matter as little as possible.

Let's examine that.

Getting the ball first in OT - Regular season rules:

PRO: A TD wins the game!

CON: If we don't even get a FG, we're in grave danger of losing. If we get a FG, we still might lose.

Kicking off first in OT - Regular season rules:

PRO: A stop puts us in a GREAT spot to win the game! Even if we allow a FG, we've still got a shot!

CON: If we allow a TD here, we lose.

Getting the ball first in OT - New playoff rules:

PRO: *crickets*

CON: If we don't even get a FG, we're in grave danger of losing. If we get a FG, we still might lose. Even if we get a TOUCHDOWN, we still might lose - the opponent would have a shot to match our TD, with the benefit of knowing they need a TD so they'll be in 4-down territory... AND they could/should go for 2 if they DO score a TD, since a 50/50 proposition to win the game right then and there would be better odds to win vs kicking off to us in a sudden death situation where even a FG beats them.

Kicking off first in OT - New playoff rules:

PRO: The sweet benefit of knowing exactly what we need to do once we get the ball, regardless of what the opponent does on their opening possession. We get a stop? GREAT! A FG wins the game! We allow a FG, or even a TD? We STILL get a shot to match that, or even top it to win the game!

CONS: *crickets*

BOTTOM LINE: There is no longer any benefit to getting the ball first in OT in the playoffs. In fact, it would make zero sense for the coin toss winner to want the ball first!

That's NOT a good thing - the goal should be for the coin toss to matter as little as possible, with pros and cons for kicking off AND receiving first. So without any benefit for receiving the ball first, the coin toss winner has a much bigger advantage, and therefore the coin toss matters more than ever - let's kick off and see how our defense does, and no matter what happens on the opening possession, we'll have a shot to win once we get the ball!

Thanks for reading, if you made it this far!

Actually the Chiefs filed for the claim the season they lost to NE at home in the AFCCG. So it would be poor Bills and poor Chiefs.

 

[DFWJC]

Reminder: the NFL stupidly changed the playoff OT rules so that a TD on the 1st possession no longer ends the game.

It was a rash decision after the Bills-Chiefs thriller last year, in which the Bills never touched the ball in OT because KC scored on its opening possession.

WAAAAH, poor Buffalo!!!

The logic went as follows: "But this is more fair! Now both teams are guaranteed a possession!"

Actually, it's LESS fair.

In order for overtime to be as fair as possible, there needs to be pros and cons to 1) getting the ball first, and 2) kicking off first. The coin toss must matter as little as possible.

Let's examine that.

Getting the ball first in OT - Regular season rules:

PRO: A TD wins the game!

CON: If we don't even get a FG, we're in grave danger of losing. If we get a FG, we still might lose.

Kicking off first in OT - Regular season rules:

PRO: A stop puts us in a GREAT spot to win the game! Even if we allow a FG, we've still got a shot!

CON: If we allow a TD here, we lose.

Getting the ball first in OT - New playoff rules:

PRO: *crickets*

CON: If we don't even get a FG, we're in grave danger of losing. If we get a FG, we still might lose. Even if we get a TOUCHDOWN, we still might lose - the opponent would have a shot to match our TD, with the benefit of knowing they need a TD so they'll be in 4-down territory... AND they could/should go for 2 if they DO score a TD, since a 50/50 proposition to win the game right then and there would be better odds to win vs kicking off to us in a sudden death situation where even a FG beats them.

Kicking off first in OT - New playoff rules:

PRO: The sweet benefit of knowing exactly what we need to do once we get the ball, regardless of what the opponent does on their opening possession. We get a stop? GREAT! A FG wins the game! We allow a FG, or even a TD? We STILL get a shot to match that, or even top it to win the game!

CONS: *crickets*

BOTTOM LINE: There is no longer any benefit to getting the ball first in OT in the playoffs. In fact, it would make zero sense for the coin toss winner to want the ball first!

That's NOT a good thing - the goal should be for the coin toss to matter as little as possible, with pros and cons for kicking off AND receiving first. So without any benefit for receiving the ball first, the coin toss winner has a much bigger advantage, and therefore the coin toss matters more than ever - let's kick off and see how our defense does, and no matter what happens on the opening possession, we'll have a shot to win once we get the ball!

Thanks for reading, if you made it this far!

Could not disagree with you more.

Talk about cheapening the game last year in a game when neither team's defense could come close to stopping the other's, the Bills basically lost because they lost a coin flip

They win if they win the flip
KC won because they won the flip, and the Buffalo offense that was dominating KC did not even get one chance in OT

And yes, KC had something similar (but not as extreme because at least those teams were having to punt during the game) happen to them a year or two earlier

 

[Nav22]

Could not disagree with you more.

Talk about cheapening the game last year in a game when neither team's defense could come close to stopping the other's, the Bills basically lost because they lost a coin flip

They win if they win the flip
KC won because they won the flip, and the Buffalo offesne that was dominating KC did not even get one chance in OT

Oh, so they couldn't hold the Chiefs out of the endzone when it mattered most?

Good. Then they deserved to lose.

And if the Bills got a possession AFTER the Chiefs TD in OT, they'd have the unfair advantage of being in 4-down territory. Is that fair? LOL.

 

[Doomsday101]

Don't care for the change nor did I care to hear care to hear the Bills whining about it afterwards. You have this unit called defense if they do their job guess what you get a chance with the ball. Hell they already changed the rule from sudden death to you can't win with a FG on the opening possession so then defense has to keep the opposing offense from getting a TD. If you can't do that then blame your defense not the league or the rule.

 

[DFWJC]

It is because as a country, we have become soft. The NFL is no different....

The soft part is letting one team win because they won a coin flip vs actually having both offenses and defenses actually have to play the game.
It's cheap and lazy

 

[DFWJC]

Oh, so they couldn't hold the Chiefs out of the endzone when it mattered most?

Good. Then they deserved to lose.

And if the Bills got a possession AFTER the Chiefs TD in OT, they'd have the unfair advantage of being in 4-down territory. Is that fair? LOL.

The point is, the Chiefs could not hold them out of the endzone either.
Flip a coin...and whoever won the toss wins the game.
Seems to totally devalue an entire season of work on a coin flip

I get that it has to end at some point, but at least give both teams a chance to play both offense and defense.
It's preposterous

I guess what magnified it so much was how dominant both offenses were. If it was a balanced game, like many playoff games, then it wouldn't be so clearly wrong.
I mean, neither defense had ANY answer for the offense in that game. I'm not sure anyone even punted but maybe once.

 

[Nav22]

The soft part is letting one team win because they won a coin flip vs actually having both offenses and defenses actually have to play the game.
It's cheap and lazy

The coin flip matters MUCH more now than it did before.

What's the benefit to getting the ball first under these new rules? There is none.

The team that kicks off first has a HUGE built-in advantage now.

 

[thunderpimp91]

The new rules are not the ones I would like to see, but I think they are better than the old. The only piece I really don't love is that the 2nd team to touch the football gets all 4 downs to use, whereas the 1st team to be on offense has to play a little more traditionally.

The only true fair way of doing it is to put 15 minutes on the clock and basically play a 5th quarter of football. I see why the league didnt do this in the past, but if you are giving each team a guaranteed possession why not? Unless we see stalled out drives those are going to take up the majority of that time anyways.

 

[OmerV]

Let's say the advantage under the previous system was 70/30, meaning 70% of an "advantage" to the receiving team, 30% for the kicking team.

Okay, that's not great. But at least there are pros and cons for each side.

But the NEW system has made it 100/0 in the opposite direction. Because there is zero logical benefit to starting with the ball, since your opponent will have every opportunity on Earth to match (or beat!) whatever it is you do.

Smart teams will absolutely choose to kick off to start OT in the playoffs now. It's a bigger advantage than receiving first used to be.

Again, this isn't logical at all. The new system does not give the kicking team a 100% advantage. For that to be the case it would have to be guaranteed that the receiving team didn't score, or at least didn't score more than a FG, and guaranteed that the kicking team would make the winning score when it got the ball.

It makes no sense to argue the kicking team can stop the opponents offense, then to say the receiving team has no chance to stop the opponents offense when it becomes their turn to play defense.

Each team both getting a chance to score, and being required to stop the other team, is the way the coin flip is minimized. That way neither team gets an opportunity the other doesn't, and neither team is faced with a burden the other isn't

 

[BrassCowboy]

Imagine working your butt off all year, your club has invested millions, fans invested...

Your team makes the playoffs...

In which both teams resulted in the same amount of points after regulation time.... only for to lose in overtime because you were not allowed to touch the ball.

Call it whining. I call it a blatant psychology trap.

The coin flip had a huge factor in deciding the game. Not the coaches or players.

so your saying value of offense should be more important than the value of defense? really? I get giving other team an opportunity after first team with possession on offense kicks a FG because alot of real estate to score factors on one guy and how far he can kick, but if your defense cannot stop an opposing offense from trampling all the way down the field and scoring a TD, then you lose - fair and square.

If you say that its not fair your qb didn't have an opportunity to stea... err I mean score a TD as well, then too bad - maybe your GM should of focused on the entire team and not just the unicorns of the bunch (QBs, WRs, offense... etc)

This game and some of its fans have become so enamored with the steak sauce (which a good steak would and should never need) that they forget (or maybe never known) what a good steak tastes like. The NFL wants to take away the raw talent, and water down games using fancy rules and regulations all for the value of entertainment. Well, I am much less entertained with todays NFL than when they played real football in days past.

 

[Doomsday101]

The soft part is letting one team win because they won a coin flip vs actually having both offenses and defenses actually have to play the game.
It's cheap and lazy

I don't think so. Bills defense failed to do their job that is on them. League should not have to change the rules because you have a lousy defense. If Bills hold KC to a FG they get the ball back. Had Bills stopped KC then all they needed would have been a FG

 

[Nav22]

The point is, the Cheifs could not hold them out of the endzone either.
Flip a coin...and whoever won the toss wins the game

It's not about one particular game. That's why we had this knee-jerk silly rule change to begin with.

Let's say it was a 10-10 defensive battle. And the Chiefs won the toss and went down the field and scored. Would you still be complaining about those rules?

And how is it fair that under these new rules, the offense can't win the game with a TD? The defense can practically win the game with a takeaway. The defense can get a stop and put their offense in a GREAT position to win with a FG.

The offense, AT BEST NOW, can only score a TD to force the opponent to match... but then the offense gets the benefit of 4 downs to march down the field.

 

[Vtwin]

I don't get how you don't see this.

If the team that receives the kickoff has an advantage, as you say yourself it does under the regular season rules, that means it's important to win the coin flip to get that advantage. Obviously that gives the coin flip meaning.

If the the team that wins the coin flip doesn't get an advantage by winning the coin flip, as you say yourself is the case under the new playoff rules, then the coin flip loses meaning. After all, how would it be meaningful to the game if it doesn't impact odds of one team winning the game?

In other words, the meaning of the coin flip is only in the impact it could have in influencing the outcome of the game. If it puts the odds in the favor of one team over the other, it has meaning. If it doesn't impact odds of one team winning over the other, it has no meaning other than as a way to decide which team lines up on which side of the field.

I wasn't clear. I do see, and agree with, exactly what you're saying.

What I don't see is Nav's logic regarding the coin toss. I'm giving him the chance to explain it to me, but I cant see a reasonable explanation.

 

[DFWJC]

Best QB play in total I have ever seen in a playoff game

Mahomes....about 400 yards, 4 TDs, no turnovers
Allen....about 400 yards, 4 TDs, no turnovers

 

[OmerV]

I wasn't clear. I do see, and agree with, exactly what you're saying.

What I don't see is Nav's logic regarding the coin toss. I'm giving him the chance to explain it to me, but I cant see a reasonable explanation.

No, you're good. You were perfectly clear. I mistakenly thought it was Nav 22 that posted what you did, so I mistook the meaning.

 

[Nav22]

Again, this isn't logical at all. The new system does not give the kicking team a 100% advantage. For that to be the case it would have to be guaranteed that the receiving team didn't score, or at least didn't score more than a FG, and guaranteed that the kicking team would make the winning score when it got the ball.

It makes no sense to argue the kicking team can stop the opponents offense, then to say the receiving team has no chance to stop the opponents offense when it becomes their turn to play defense.

Each team both getting a chance to score, and being required to stop the other team, is the way the coin flip is minimized. That way neither team gets an opportunity the other doesn't, and neither team is faced with a burden the other isn't

And if the defense gets a quick takeaway to start OT? They practically won the game, needing only a FG to win and with the ball deep in opponent's territory.

But the offense has ZERO opportunity to win, even if they score a 75-yard TD to start OT?

That's absurd. And yet another advantage for the defense, that I hadn't even brought up before.

 

[thunderpimp91]

I don't think so. Bills defense failed to do their job that is on them. League should not have to change the rules because you have a lousy defense. If Bills hold KC to a FG they get the ball back. Had Bills stopped KC then all they needed would have been a FG

I used to agree with that, however, the league has pushed rules that favor the offense so much that it's nearly impossible to stop an elite offense with the game on the line. I truly believe the coin toss determined the outcome of that game as Buffalo would have done the exact same had they gotten the football.

 

[KJJ]

What would be the chances of this team having an overtime game, winning the toss, and choosing to receive?

The chances are 100% that any team that wins the toss in OT will choose to receive. You want to score and put the pressure on your opponent to have to score. If you put three on the board they have to put up at least three or game over.