NCAA Changes OT rules. Must go for 2 after 2nd OT

[NolePride]

Panel approves changes to overtime rules in football | NCAA.com

I'm ok with that. I do think it would have been better just to have teams go for 2 after every OT period. Why wait for the 2nd OT?

I do believe that an underdog, if they score a TD late in the game, will go for the win right then and there.

 

[belcherboy]

Panel approves changes to overtime rules in football | NCAA.com

I'm ok with that. I do think it would have been better just to have teams go for 2 after every OT period. Why wait for the 2nd OT?

I do believe that an underdog, if they score a TD late in the game, will go for the win right then and there.

I think I like still having the first OT keep the XP kick. It can give the special teams a chance to be the hero. Obviously it gets redundant, so I'm glad they've changed it in the 2nd OT.

 

[963BUSC]

Its in the second period right, not after the second?

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

I’m not seeing how this makes anything better. 2-point plays are low percentage. Why is a 6-6 OT preferable to a 7-7 one?

 

[belcherboy]

I’m not seeing how this makes anything better. 2-point plays are low percentage. Why is a 6-6 OT preferable to a 7-7 one?

2 point plays don't seem to be that low to me. I've actually heard good arguments for why teams should consider going for 2 points every time.

Playing with the Percentages When Trailing by Two Touchdowns

Submitted by: J. Denbigh Starkey Abstract It is relatively common for football teams to find themselves down by two touchdowns late in the game. If they score a first touchdown then coaching folklore says that the team should go for the extra point at that time. In this paper I will show that...

thesportjournal.org

 

[Ron G]

2 point plays don't seem to be that low to me. I've actually heard good arguments for why teams should consider going for 2 points every time.

Playing with the Percentages When Trailing by Two Touchdowns

Submitted by: J. Denbigh Starkey Abstract It is relatively common for football teams to find themselves down by two touchdowns late in the game. If they score a first touchdown then coaching folklore says that the team should go for the extra point at that time. In this paper I will show that...

thesportjournal.org

View attachment 270742

This was a very interesting article. Especially, the very last paragraph about high schools. In 1961 my high school was undefeated and won the Chicago City Championship along with the "mythical" state championship. We never attempted a one point extra point. Truth be told, we did not have anybody who could kick an extra point.

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

2 point plays don't seem to be that low to me. I've actually heard good arguments for why teams should consider going for 2 points every time.

Playing with the Percentages When Trailing by Two Touchdowns

Submitted by: J. Denbigh Starkey Abstract It is relatively common for football teams to find themselves down by two touchdowns late in the game. If they score a first touchdown then coaching folklore says that the team should go for the extra point at that time. In this paper I will show that...

thesportjournal.org

View attachment 270742

That paper does not support going for 2 every time, only going for 2 after the first TD when you are down by 14. It does depend on the efficacy of your kicker. We went for 2 a lot my junior year, largely because our place kicking was just plain bad.

 

[belcherboy]

That paper does not support going for 2 every time, only going for 2 after the first TD when you are down by 14. It does depend on the efficacy of your kicker. We went for 2 a lot my junior year, largely because our place kicking was just plain bad.

I view it like when you shoot for teams in basketball. You don't shoot layups to determine teams because of the high probability of hitting that shot over and over again. When XP's are in the 90's, it doesn't do anything but make it much more likely to extend the game longer (that is if teams are scoring TD's). With a 2 pt conversion being forced, the probability goes way down that both teams will hit it. 40%+ conversion rate is perfect, IMO, for keeping these games from going long. I like the change, and I'd rather see a team lose due to the offense/defense, as opposed to special teams. Just a personal preference.

 

[Inquisitor95]

I'm ok with that. I do think it would have been better just to have teams go for 2 after every OT period. Why wait for the 2nd OT?

Agreed. The point of overtime, after giving both teams a chance on offense, should be to get the game over with as quickly as possible.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Where is @UCFhonors and @fredsdeadfriend?

I am calling on you!!!!

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

I view it like when you shoot for teams in basketball. You don't shoot layups to determine teams because of the high probability of hitting that shot over and over again. When XP's are in the 90's, it doesn't do anything but make it much more likely to extend the game longer (that is if teams are scoring TD's). With a 2 pt conversion being forced, the probability goes way down that both teams will hit it. 40%+ conversion rate is perfect, IMO, for keeping these games from going long. I like the change, and I'd rather see a team lose due to the offense/defense, as opposed to special teams. Just a personal preference.

I agree with the last statement.

My team has lost multiple OT games by missed PATs. In fact, if placekicking didn’t exist we’d have a better record in general over the past decade plus. (At a minimum, there would’ve been no kick 6. Ugh!!!!!!)

 

[Diego Roll Tide]

Where is @UCFhonors and @fredsdeadfriend?

I am calling on you!!!!

They’re having a naked wrestling match to determine whether UCF or Minnesota is the most under-appreciated program in the history of programs.

 

[wazzu31]

Agreed. The point of overtime, after giving both teams a chance on offense, should be to get the game over with as quickly as possible.

Disagree with your last sentence. The goal shouldn’t be to get the game over, it is for the best team to win. Generally the better team has the better kicker/special teams.

 

[NolePride]

Disagree with your last sentence. The goal shouldn’t be to get the game over, it is for the best team to win. Generally the better team has the better kicker/special teams.

You know, it could be said that if you are looking for the best team in a game, there shouldn't be any overtime at all. End the game in a tie.

The "best team" is determined over the course of an entire game, which includes, field position, turnovers, punts, kickoffs, everything
that makes up a game. There is very little of that in OT. Field position is identical. No punts. No kickoffs.

If teams play 60 minutes of football and are tied at the end...it should end like that.

 

[PhilSimms11]

They should just adopt the NFL regular season format. College OT has been dumb as hell from the start.

 

[navamind]

They should Rochambeau each other until one stands.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

They should just adopt the NFL regular season format. College OT has been dumb as hell from the start.

That might be one of the dumbest things I have ever seen. NFL OT is awful.

 

[PhilSimms11]

That might be one of the dumbest things I have ever seen. NFL OT is awful.

Really? You'd be in favor of the NFL adopting the college format?

 

[LoftonPack80]

Really? You'd be in favor of the NFL adopting the college format?

Why does one have to adopt the other?

 

[PhilSimms11]

Why does one have to adopt the other?

Because one format sucks and the other doesn't.