Why the new playoff overtime rules are beyond stupid

[OmerV]

I just don't see any advantage for the team that gets the ball first.

The defense can essentially win the game with a quick takeaway. The defense can force a punt and then only need a FG to win.

So why can't the offense win the game with a 75-yard TD drive?

You're arguing against your own contentions. You have supported the regular season rules by saying receiving the ball first does, and should give the offense an advantage, and now you're arguing that the defense has the same advantage as the offense in creating a score.

Yes, under the regular season rules the defense can force a punt and only need a FG to win, but the point is they have to first force a punt with their defense to have a chance for their offense to get in position to win. The receiving team doesn't have to force a punt with their defense to have a chance to win. They have a chance to win with their defense never taking the field. That is not equal opportunity.

 

[OmerV]

You're confused.

I just laid out the "pros" to kicking off first. There used to be "cons" to that as well.

Says a lot that you couldn't muster up a response to my example about a defensive takeaway.

So the offense having success and driving 75 yards to score a TD is "based on a coin flip", but the defense getting a takeaway isn't? LOL! Sure bro.

If the pro is a 10% chance and the con is a 90% chance, there really aren't pros and cons. Nobody would take the 10% chance

 

[KJJ]

The only ones who are stupid are the fans that think they’re smarter than the league. Lol

 

[nalam]

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

Put the foot in football , LOL . Kicker will be hero or bust !

 

[kskboys]

The only ones who are stupid are the fans that think they’re smarter than the league. Lol

You mean like the ones who fall for the manipulating of games by denying it happens?

 

[Vtwin]

1) The extra down is a HUGE advantage.

2) The defense can essentially win the game with a quick takeaway in overtime. Why can't the offense do the same with a TD? How is that fair, on any level???

1. The extra down is only an advantage IF the other team scores, and extra down or not it's offense against defense. The advantage of winning the game without having the defense ever step on the field is just as HUGE.

2.The offense can essentially win the game with a single defensive mistake. How is that any more fair?

Look. OT stinks no matter which rules they play under. It will never be "fair" unless they play a set time and let things play out, which will never happen. The logic you're using to justify your position could just as easily be applied to the other side of the argument. Equal opportunities to posses the ball is by far the fairest, and most exciting way to determine the outcome. Regardless of the inherent advantages/disadvantages of the most fair system.

 

[TheHerd]

I didn’t think of it that way. Very good point @Nav22

Teams should defer just like they should always to start the game.

We will 100% take the ball if we win an OT toss. Book it.

 

[KJJ]

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

These players are coming off a 17 game season. You can’t have them playing for an extra 30 minutes if a game can be settled sooner. The winning team would be at a disadvantage the following week having just played in a 90 minute game. The longer the game goes the more susceptible to injury you are. This is why they reduced OT to 10 minutes during the regular season. I was fine with the OT rule they had. If you can’t keep a team out of the endzone on their first possession in OT you don’t deserve to win. Hold them to an FG and you’ll get an opportunity with the ball. That was a good rule.

 

[Nav22]

You're arguing against your own contentions. You have supported the regular season rules by saying receiving the ball first does, and should give the offense an advantage, and now you're arguing that the defense has the same advantage as the offense in creating a score.

Yes, under the regular season rules the defense can force a punt and only need a FG to win, but the point is they have to first force a punt with their defense to have a chance for their offense to get in position to win. The receiving team doesn't have to force a punt with their defense to have a chance to win. They have a chance to win with their defense never taking the field. That is not equal opportunity.

I didn't say that at all.

Ideally there wouldn't be any advantage to getting the ball first, or kicking off first.

While the regular season rules may not be perfect in THAT regard, they're much better than the new playoff rules.

And again, an early takeaway in OT essentially ends the game without the offense needing to do anything.

So that also is not "equal opportunity."

 

[Nav22]

If the pro is a 10% chance and the con is a 90% chance, there really aren't pros and cons. Nobody would take the 10% chance

Right, except an offensive TD isn't 10x more likely than a turnover.

Not even remotely close.

 

[Nav22]

1. The extra down is only an advantage IF the other team scores, and extra down or not it's offense against defense. The advantage of winning the game without having the defense ever step on the field is just as HUGE.

2.The offense can essentially win the game with a single defensive mistake. How is that any more fair?

Look. OT stinks no matter which rules they play under. It will never be "fair" unless they play a set time and let things play out, which will never happen. The logic you're using to justify your position could just as easily be applied to the other side of the argument. Equal opportunities to posses the ball is by far the fairest, and most exciting way to determine the outcome. Regardless of the inherent advantages/disadvantages of the most fair system.

1) Obviously this entire discussion is based on the offense scoring on their opening possession. If the offense doesn't do that, then this rule change doesn't even apply.

So you've finally acknowledged that it's an advantage for the team that kicks off first to get an extra down to work with. That's good.

2) Yes, under the regular season rules, the team that gets the ball first can win with a defensive mistake... just like the other team can win with a single OFFENSIVE mistake, like a turnover.

See how they BOTH have an opportunity to end the game with a huge play?

They've removed the offense's chance to end the game, but kept the defense's chance to do so.

That's silly. And that's why smart teams will generally kick off to start OT now. The new rules clearly favor the team that ends up kicking off.

 

[john van brocklin]

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!

They should just play an additional 12 minute quarter in my opinion.

 

[JayFord]

they should just use college overtime rules and if not then just play one 8 minute quarter

 

[Vtwin]

These players are coming off a 17 game season. You can’t have them playing for an extra 30 minutes if a game can be settled sooner. The winning team would be at a disadvantage the following week having just played in a 90 minute game. The longer the game goes the more susceptible to injury you are. This is why they reduced OT to 10 minutes during the regular season. I was fine with the OT rule they had. If you can’t keep a team out of the endzone on their first possession in OT you don’t deserve to win. Hold them to an FG and you’ll get an opportunity with the ball. That was a good rule.

Tell that to an NHL player. Not uncommon to play five periods then play the following night. Or get on a plane and play a road game in two nights. Coming off an 82 game season and potentially many playoff games prior.

 

[OmerV]

1) Obviously this entire discussion is based on the offense scoring on their opening possession. If the offense doesn't do that, then this rule change doesn't even apply.

So you've finally acknowledged that it's an advantage for the team that kicks off first to get an extra down to work with. That's good.

2) Yes, under the regular season rules, the team that gets the ball first can win with a defensive mistake... just like the other team can win with a single OFFENSIVE mistake.

See how they BOTH have an opportunity to end the game with a huge play?

They've removed the offense's chance to end the game, but kept the defense's chance to do so.

That's silly. And that's why smart teams will generally kick off to start OT now. The new rules clearly favor the team that ends up kicking off.

No, the entire discussion is based on giving one team an advantage and an opportunity to win the game without giving an equal opportunity to the other team.

Obviously it's not certain the offense will score, but if they do, and it's a TD, that team will have had the only fair opportunity to score.

Under regular season rules it may not even be accurate to call it an "opening possession" because it could turn out to be the only possession.


In baseball you don't just give the visiting team a turn at bat, and if they score the home team doesn't get a turn. Why? Because that's not fair. It's not equal opportunity. Same applies to football.

 

[OmerV]

they should just use college overtime rules and if not then just play one 8 minute quarter

I like the college rules. The 8 minute quarter wouldn't work in the playoffs though because it leaves open the possibility of a tie.

 

[KJJ]

Some of the OT suggestions are laughable. You simply can’t have these prolonged OT periods. Not only are teams coming off a 17 game regular season but let’s say you’re a wildcard team and have to play an extra 30 minutes to settle a playoff game. The following week you could be playing a team that’s coming off a bye. Let’s say they had one of these ridiculous OT rules that are being mentioned between the Cowboys and Bucs on Monday night. The Cowboys are forced to play a 90 minute game and if they pull out the win they’re playing a team 6 days later on the road that’s coming off a bye. We would be at a huge disadvantage.

 

[OmerV]

They should just play an additional 12 minute quarter in my opinion.

But what if it's the playoffs and it's still tied?

 

[Nav22]

No, the entire discussion is based on giving one team an advantage and an opportunity to win the game without giving an equal opportunity to the other team.

Obviously it's not certain the offense will score, but if they do, and it's a TD, that team will have had the only fair opportunity to score.

Under regular season rules it may not even be accurate to call it an "opening possession" because it could turn out to be the only possession.


In baseball you don't just give the visiting team a turn at bat, and if they score the home team doesn't get a turn. Why? Because that's not fair. It's not equal opportunity. Same applies to football.

The baseball analogy makes no sense.

If a pitcher strikes out the side, does that help the offense score when it's their chance to bat? Nope.

But in football, if a QB throws an INT early in OT, that makes it so the offense doesn't have to do anything. The defense won the game.

That's not "equal". The opposing defense didn't even get a chance.

If you allow a 75-yard TD drive, that's on you.

If you turn the ball over, that's on you.

Under the new rules, we're now giving teams a break for allowing a 75-yard TD drive. But we're still punishing teams that turn the ball over.

Coin toss matters more than it ever did before. BIG advantage to kick off first with zero risk of losing the game on the first possession.

 

[KJJ]

Eventually this new OT rule is going to come back and bite a team. They’ll be involved in a lengthy OT playoff game and the following week they’re going be stuck having a play a team on the road that’s coming off a bye. Now that they’re having a Monday night playoff game they may only get six days rest, while their opponent had two weeks off. You’ll have a tired team versus a well rested team. At some point the NFL may have to reassess this new OT rule. It’s going to lead to some unfair advantages as the playoffs progress.