Why the new playoff overtime rules are beyond stupid

[eromeopolk]

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!

No worse than soccer's overtime rules. Baseball does it right with extra innings until the team and fans win or die.

 

[DFWJC]

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

So same would be said for Kansas City if the Bills won the toss.
So whoever won the toss, won the game.
Nothing to do with which team was better, but instead who won the toss.

 

[OmerV]

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.

That's situation created by the play on the field, not by a purely random flip of the coin.

 

[kskboys]

I think they should play the OT w/ no starters allowed!!!!!!

 

[Doomsday101]

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.

in over 168 games that have gone to OT 52.8 of the winner won the coin toss but not every one of those games did the opening drive result in a TD. The game is played offense and defense each has a job to do. I think it idiotic to say if you get a TD the other team gets the ball and as someone pointed out you get the ball knowing you have 4 downs to pick up the 1st while the winner of the toss can't be going for it on 4th down. In my view Bills lost and cried about it and league then steps in. I think it is utter BS

 

[thunderpimp91]

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.

IDK about that. If I win the toss I absolutely want the ball second. I want to know what I need to get when I go on offense. Last thing I want is to settle for a FG only to be beaten by a TD.

 

[Nav22]

Why should there be a benefit to getting the ball first in OT?

Bonus question.
How is it "fair" to create a situation in which a coin toss can play such a significant factor in the outcome of an entire season?

There should be pros and cons for BOTH getting the ball first AND kicking off first.

That's how you make the coin toss lose importance.

When you remove ANY advantage to getting the ball first, the coin toss becomes MORE important - now everyone will want to kick off first.

Your offense can't win the game for you in OT now.

BUT... your defense CAN win the game for you, if you kick off first. A pick-6, scoop and score, or even just a regular takeaway early in OT in which your offense gets to start with the ball in FG range.

Zero benefit to starting with the ball. It's now MUCH more advantageous to kick off first.

 

[Doomsday101]

So same would be said for Kansas City if the Bills won the toss.
So whoever won the toss, won the game.
Nothing to do with which team was better, but instead who won the toss.

No you have the chance to make a stop on defense, I'm sorry their defense could not stop the other team or even hold them to a FG. 52.8 is the percentage of teams winning the toss and winning the game and as I said even in many of those games it was not an opening TD that ended the game. Hell if you have a turnover the kicking team get the ball kicks the FG game over. I don't buy into the winner of the coin toss is the automatic winner

 

[Nav22]

That's a situation created by the play on the field, not by a purely random flip of the coin.

Same with a long offensive TD to start OT.

The offense isn't allowed to win the game with a huge play, but the defense still can?

That's absurd. Huge advantage to kick off first.

I'm interested to see how you'll spin that.

"Offensive TD is based on a coin flip, defensive takeaway is based on the play on the field."

Um, sure.

 

[DFWJC]

Football is unique in that there are entirely separate offenses and defenses.
You have to let both units play at least one possession
It's not much to ask at all

 

[thunderpimp91]

in over 168 games that have gone to OT 52.8 of the winner won the coin toss but not every one of those games did the opening drive result in a TD. The game is played offense and defense each has a job to do. I think it idiotic to say if you get a TD the other team gets the ball and as someone pointed out you get the ball knowing you have 4 downs to pick up the 1st while the winner of the toss can't be going for it on 4th down. In my view Bills lost and cried about it and league then steps in. I think it is utter BS

Overall you're absolutely right, but we are only talking about playoff games. The winning percentage jumps from 52% to 80% when we account for just playoffs under the most recent rules. Now some of that is going to be due to a smaller sample size, but come playoff time we typically see high-powered offenses.

If it's the regular season and i'm playing Houston, I could care less who wins the coin toss. Have me playing KC in the playoffs and yeah they probably win that 90% of the time if they get the ball first.

 

[OmerV]

Same with a long offensive TD to start OT.

The offense isn't allowed to win the game with a huge play, but the defense still can.

That's absurd.

The difference is that with a turnover the receiving team got their opportunity to possess the ball and score, and it was their mistake that gave an advantage to the kicking team, not a random flip of a coin.

 

[DFWJC]

No you have the chance to make a stop on defense, I'm sorry their defense could not stop the other team or even hold them to a FG. 52.8 is the percentage of teams winning the toss and winning the game and as I said even in many of those games it was not an opening TD that ended the game. Hell if you have a turnover the kicking team get the ball kicks the FG game over. I don't buy into the winner of the coin toss is the automatic winner

Once again.... neither could Kansas City's all day. The outcome was determined by a coin toss.

 

[kskboys]

They should let the cheerleaders mud wrestle for the OT. Jello be good too!!!!

 

[CowboyFanInLexKy]

They should play for 30 extra minutes and have field goal kicks like in soccer if need be

Or even 15 minutes. Not for the minutes to play out but more of, if one team scores on a drive, the other team has a chance to score. If they don't score on their drive, then the one that did score wins. What are the chances the games ends up a tie at the end of the OT play? It can happen but highly doubtful....

 

[TX_Yid]

The cowboys will probably still choose to receive in overtime.

Damn straight, recieve the ball. Run on first down right into a pile of bodies, 2nd and 11, let's go from there... it's the Cowboys way.

 

[Doomsday101]

Overall you're absolutely right, but we are only talking about playoff games. The winning percentage jumps from 52% to 80% when we account for just playoffs under the most recent rules. Now some of that is going to be due to a smaller sample size, but come playoff time we typically see high-powered offenses.

If it's the regular season and i'm playing Houston, I could care less who wins the coin toss. Have me playing KC in the playoffs and yeah they probably win that 90% of the time if they get the ball first.

Yet if defense has pick 6 game is over? Hell I would clearly kickoff under these rules. If my defense does their job all I need is a FG, if my defense fails to do their job and we give up a TD then I know I have 4 downs to keep the chains moving while the other team does not have that advantage

 

[KJJ]

IDK about that. If I win the toss I absolutely want the ball second. I want to know what I need to get when I go on offense. Last thing I want is to settle for a FG only to be beaten by a TD.

Glad you’re not a coach because I can’t see any team not taking the ball first if they win the toss. You want to draw first blood and put the pressure on the other team. If you receive the ball first it’s not a do or die drive. You still have a chance if you don’t put up any points. If you can put up at least three points, the other team has to at least match it or game over. If you can put up a TD that puts a lot of pressure on the other team.

 

[Vtwin]

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.

I disagree with all of this.

Ideally, you put 15 minutes on the clock and play football.

Alternately you give each team an equal # of opportunities to play both offense and defense and let the players decide the game with chance having as little impact as possible.

The only time there is an advantage one way or the other on a coin toss is before the clock starts ticking and the score is zero-zero. The only advantage a team gets is to choose to kick or receive or to choose the wind at your back in the 4th quarter before a down has been played. There is still 60 minutes of offense and defense to be played which will determine the outcome.

OT coin flips are/were far more influential. Now smart teams will look at everything before choosing.

 

[Nav22]

The difference is that with a turnover the receiving team got their opportunity to possess the ball and score, and it was their mistake that gave an advantage to the kicking team, not a random flip of a coin.

And when your defense goes out there first, they have an opportunity to get a stop and force a game-winning takeaway.

Right?

Let's say you have the '85 Bears defense. The Bears offense gets the ball first. Jim McMahon throws a pick immediately. The other team kicks a FG to win.

Is it fair that the '85 Bears defense didn't get an opportunity?