NFL must change OT rules

[handicappers]

I liked football more when it wasn't as "in your face" corrupt.

 

[TheRangerDude]

Yeah, in the playoffs, I say 10 minute OT. Shouldn't be a coin flip either. At that point since teams have played, they should be able to earn the ball in OT. Maybe you could use total yards or turnover differential or something. If you still had a tie after that, you might try sudden death but both teams get a shot. No kickoffs and you go to a rounds systen where both teams get 4 downs to score a TD from their opponents 20. A team wins when both their defense holds the opposition and their offense scores a TD in a given round. In the case of a turnover, it the defense scores, that team wins. If the turnover is returned outside the oppositions 10, that team gets the ball at the 10. If inside the 10, they get the ball at the spot of the return. Sort of a football shootout if you will. Could use some tweaking but might be fun to watch.

 

[Camfantasy]

The college system IS more exciting. But it's also a God awful way to determine who the better team is. College OT becomes Arena football. You don't play 60 minutes of one game and then just start playing something that is vastly different. It would be like MLB moving the fences in 100 feet during extra innings. More home runs for sure, but it's not the same game.

You don't have to do it exactly like the college system though. I think most people that have a problem with the rules' main problem is just not getting both sides of the ball involved for both teams sometimes and there are a thousand different ways of making that happen without sticking both teams 25 yds away from the goal line and having a shoot out.

 

[DutchBird]

I'm actually fine with NFL OT the way it is other than 10 minutes in the regular season is too short.

Defense matters too. I'd like to see some stats on how often a coin toss "decides the game" as it supposedly did today. I'd wager it's not as often as people think.

Impact of coin toss on outcome.

Since the NFL instituted its new overtime rules, there have been 87 overtime games. Five have been ties, and the team to get the ball first has won 45 of the remaining 82. That’s 54.8 percent, meaning simply winning the coin toss makes a team 9.6 percent more likely to win.

Source: the Ringer

 

[wings-pens2166]

I'd say no. Defense is part of the game too. Just because one team decided to neglect that and put all it's eggs in the Offensive basket and it bit them in the ass in the end is not a reason to change things.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

You don't have to do it exactly like the college system though. I think most people that have a problem with the rules' main problem is just not getting both sides of the ball involved for both teams sometimes and there are a thousand different ways of making that happen without sticking both teams 25 yds away from the goal line and having a shoot out.

You're right. It doesn't have to be just like college. But if you want overtime to be the same game as regulation you can't just change the starting position to the 50. Special teams need to be involved too. Thus the only solution to make sure both teams get the ball is to do what the OP is suggesting: Same rules but a TD on first posession doesn't automatically win. But in that case the team who wins the coin toss still has an advantage. If both teams score on the opening possesion the team who had the ball first gets first crack during the sudden death portion of OT. And because OT is only one quarter long that team likely gets LAST crack at scoring. It still ends up being "unfair".

It just seems to me like the current rules are a streamlined version of the OP's suggestion. That's why I think they should stay.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

Impact of coin toss on outcome.



Source: the Ringer

So the question becomes how much more "fair" can we reasonably expect OT to be? A 10% difference between winning and losing/tying/extending OT based on a coin flip seems acceptable to me.

 

[Camfantasy]

You're right. It doesn't have to be just like college. But if you want overtime to be the same game as regulation you can't just change the starting position to the 50. Special teams need to be involved too. Thus the only solution to make sure both teams get the ball is to do what the OP is suggesting: Same rules but a TD on first posession doesn't automatically win. But in that case the team who wins the coin toss still has an advantage. If both teams score on the opening possesion the team who had the ball first gets first crack during the sudden death portion of OT. And because OT is only one quarter long that team likely gets LAST crack at scoring. It still ends up being "unfair".

It just seems to me like the current rules are a streamlined version of the OP's suggestion. That's why I think they should stay.

what if it were the same rules minus the punting and game clock? each team gets an offensive possession starting with a kickoff to drive the field and score. If they score then the next team must score an equal amount on their drive or lose. If there is a tie then do the same thing again. If still a tie....implement something in there to get the game over with at that point (a la the 2-point conversion rule in college).


Is the problem with that that they are too unlikely to score and the game last too long because of length of field/lack of time clock? Do people care about the punting aspect of special teams enough for that to ruin it?

 

[Cave_Johnson]

what if it were the same rules minus the punting and game clock? each team gets an offensive possession starting with a kickoff to drive the field and score. If they score then the next team must score an equal amount on their drive or lose. If there is a tie then do the same thing again. If still a tie....implement something in there to get the game over with at that point (a la the 2-point conversion rule in college).


Is the problem with that that they are too unlikely to score and the game last too long because of length of field/lack of time clock? Do people care about the punting aspect of special teams enough for that to ruin it?

Well if you're not punting teams are just going up and down the field going for it on fourth down until they're in field goal range. That's not really NFL football either. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean.

 

[broncosmitty]

Outscoring your opponent isn't much of a longterm solution. Being able to stop your opponent is.


No playoff team gave up more points than KC this year.

Their defense is not good. Their season is over. And I'm okay with that.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

It was so disappointing to not see Mahomes get a chance to match Brady with a TD of his own.

IMO no matter what the team does in the opening possession, the other team should be get the ball back to try and match it.

After that then you can go to sudden death.

I'm perfectly fine if they would only use this formula in the playoffs.

IDK BK, kinda knee jerkish don't you think?

IIRC, KC had 3 chances to get their OFC back on the field...all 3 were 3rd and full 10.

 

[Wishbone]

No thanks I can watch Big 12 football
on saturdays. Sunday I like to watch teams that can get stops

I don't know if you've noticed dunce but teams like the Rams, Chiefs, and Saints are playing Big 12 football. Offense is the future.

 

[NEhomer]

The first team to possess the ball in OT will only use 3 downs to drive the field as they'd have to punt on 4th & long. The team already trailing would use 4 downs the entire way down the field with nothing to lose.

That's why the current rule is as close to proper as can be.

I'd be ok with Mahomes getting the ball back if KC was only allowed three downs.

 

[LetsGoPats]

It was so disappointing to not see Mahomes get a chance to match Brady with a TD of his own.

IMO no matter what the team does in the opening possession, the other team should be get the ball back to try and match it.

After that then you can go to sudden death.

I'm perfectly fine if they would only use this formula in the playoffs.

It's too bad there aren't players on a team that try to stop the other from scoring.

Oh, wait……there is. DEFENSE IS PART OF THE GAME.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

It was so disappointing to not see Mahomes get a chance to match Brady with a TD of his own.

IMO no matter what the team does in the opening possession, the other team should be get the ball back to try and match it.

After that then you can go to sudden death.

I'm perfectly fine if they would only use this formula in the playoffs.

They already have a rule in place for that. It's called Free Agency



.

 

[NEhomer]

It's too bad there aren't players on a team that try to stop the other from scoring.

Oh, wait……there is. DEFENSE IS PART OF THE GAME.

Sorry but all of these posts are stupid. There's a reason why the team that wins the toss in OT overwhelmingly elects to take possession. The team with the ball is more likely to score.

 

[SJ76]

I don't know if you've noticed dunce but teams like the Rams, Chiefs, and Saints are playing Big 12 football. Offense is the future.

We just held the Saints under 25 points in their dome.

 

[Across The Field]

How difficult is it to just let both teams have 1 possession? It's like playing the bottom of the 10th and skipping the top.

 

[LetsGoPats]

Sorry but all of these posts are stupid. There's a reason why the team that wins the toss in OT overwhelmingly elects to take possession. The team with the ball is more likely to score.

I know.

 

[LetsGoPats]

How difficult is it to just let both teams have 1 possession? It's like playing the bottom of the 10th and skipping the top.

Nah, DEFENSE is just as much a part of the game. If the Chiefs had won the toss, and Pats couldn't stop 'em, too bad. Time to go home.