Jump to content

OT Rule needs to change!


BuffaloButt

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

So what happens when clock strikes 0:00 and   the game is still tied.  Excellent idea.  

You play another one.

 

NFL championship is easily the easiest to win in N. American sports.

 

Let them work a bit harder for that ring.  

 

News flash: you won't be seeing a lot of NFL playoff games going into their 2nd OT.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mattynh said:

That is also what I remember.    But the issue comes up when a team never gets the ball which does happen.  I see it from both sides, even if statistically it does not show much, it seems fair that both teams should get the ball.    In that game yesterday no one could stop anyone once the fourth quarter started so it seemed like whoever won the coin toss got an advantage.

 

excellent point

 

it's like when my friends remember all their gambling wins and never bring up a loss

 

funny how the mind works

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

So what happens when clock strikes 0:00 and   the game is still tied.  Excellent idea.  

Simple answer. Go for an extra 15, opposite team receiving the ball for the start of that quarter. If still tied after that quarter, you coin flip again and go for another 15. However, I think the simplest idea that makes the most sense is college overtime rules. Each team gets a possession. If tied each team gets another possession until not tied. The only problem would be where to start the ball. I feel it would have to be around the 40 yard line with his good NFL kickers are. You need the FG to not be an easy one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bills2ref said:

Simple answer. Go for an extra 15, opposite team receiving the ball for the start of that quarter. If still tied after that quarter, you coin flip again and go for another 15. However, I think the simplest idea that makes the most sense is college overtime rules. Each team gets a possession. If tied each team gets another possession until not tied. The only problem would be where to start the ball. I feel it would have to be around the 40 yard line with his good NFL kickers are. You need the FG to not be an easy one. 

I wouldn't mind this type of approach either.

 

In fact, you could dispense with the kickoffs and flip a coin to see who gets the ball first, on their 25 yard line, as they would with a touchback.  See what they do with the ball.  If they score, they score.  Then the other team gets 1 possession starting from their 25 yard line.

 

First score wins with the caveat that both teams must get 1 possession before the game can end.

 

The entire idea here is that the rules are skewed to favor offense, and almost all scoring is done by the offensive unit (or special teams unit) but not the defensive unit!

 

So both teams should have a chance to get their offensive unit on the field, and a coin toss deciding who gets to play offense is inherently unfair.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BillsFan130 said:

Defence is part of the game. 

 

Chiefs don't deserve to go to the SB if they can't stop a 75 yard drive with home field advantage and the weather elements on their side.

 

Saints got the ball first in OT but lost because DEFENCE is still part of the game. No one mentions that though...

Wade Philips gives the Rams an edge, I get that, and voiced it during the game. As mentioned earlier in the thread though by a fellow patron, shouldn't both Defenses be tested in OT?    The outcome of the NFC Championship was also tainted by the officials from critical non calls in what I feel is another very easy fix. The ability to red flag a missed call, an idea I started a thread on a couple seasons ago on BBMB/ Billszone. Disrupting flow of the game was the fan bases biggest concern on the idea which myself personally, would not happen.  

 

Run extra quarters in OT,( Playoffs)  Red flag/ the ability to catch critical missed calls by the officials, two easy fixes in my humble opinion. 

Edited by Figster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

That would be fine, but would then give a new advantage to the team that goes second.  It is why in college OT the team on defense first wins a higher percentage by a similar margin as the NFL coin toss winners.

 

I could live with both teams getting a chance, but it does not bother me at all that they don’t.  I actually like the rules now that give a TD a win and a FG the ball back to the other team.

 

At some point someone has and advantage and someone needs to make a stop whether it is the first drive in OT or the third.  I just do not get to caught up in an advantage that over the years has been shown to be consistently under 5% different between the two outcomes.

 

Whats advantage for second team?  I don’t get it.  Both teams have equal shot to score, so how does 2nd team get an advantage in this case if both get chance tonhave the ball?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Whats advantage for second team?  I don’t get it.  Both teams have equal shot to score, so how does 2nd team get an advantage in this case if both get chance tonhave the ball?

The second team has an advantage because they know what the goal is. First team scores a TD? Then the second team knows they need a TD. The strategic advantage results in the second team winning a disproportionate number of times, although (as with the NFL) it isn't a gigantic advantage. Nevertheless, the coin flip seems to have a larger effect than most fans are comfortable with.

34 minutes ago, Bills2ref said:

Simple answer. Go for an extra 15, opposite team receiving the ball for the start of that quarter. If still tied after that quarter, you coin flip again and go for another 15. However, I think the simplest idea that makes the most sense is college overtime rules. Each team gets a possession. If tied each team gets another possession until not tied. The only problem would be where to start the ball. I feel it would have to be around the 40 yard line with his good NFL kickers are. You need the FG to not be an easy one. 

NFL kickers are so good (and right now, offenses so dominant) that I'd go all the way back to the 50. Start on the opponent's 40 and it's a 57 yard field goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Whats advantage for second team?  I don’t get it.  Both teams have equal shot to score, so how does 2nd team get an advantage in this case if both get chance tonhave the ball?

 

 

The second team knows what is needed to win.  The first team kicks a FG - the second team gets to 4th down and has choices available- go for the win or tie.

 

The first team scores a TD - the second team knows it needs a TD so every possession is 4 downs.  

 

Getting the ball second can be a huge help.  That is why since the college OT rules started - the team getting the ball second wins at a higher rate that the teams that win the coin toss in the NFL.

 

It seems fair, but still provides advantages to one team that is actually greater than what we have seen in the NFL since they changed their OT rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

That just shows the the coin toss means very little.  The team winning the coin toss won 54.8 % when you excluded ties - why exclude ties.  With the ties included the team winning the coin toss won just over 51%. Yes they have a slight advantage, but it is minor.

 

Looking at this year and more offense - including playoffs the team that won the toss won exactly 50% of the time.  Even in the playoffs - one team one the coin toss and won and the other winner lost the coin toss and forced a turnover.

 

The article nicely shows that the college rules are no better just favor the team that goes second by a similar margin.  The team going second with the advantage Wins 54.9% of the time.  Slightly higher percentage the other way because it gives the second team a major advantage.

 

So what is your alternative that gives an exactly equal 50/50 chance to win because there is not one - either way one team will have an advantage of about 5% to win.

 

 

No. My solution - in the playoffs! - is to simply play football for an additional 15 minutes. After that point, maybe it's time to start thinking about player fatigue and all that and to go to a more arbitrary mechanism of deciding a winner. In other words, soccer or NHL style. Because let's face facts: anything other than an extension of the normal game under the normal rules is an attempt to "force" a result that has a winner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

The second team has an advantage because they know what the goal is. First team scores a TD? Then the second team knows they need a TD. The strategic advantage results in the second team winning a disproportionate number of times, although (as with the NFL) it isn't a gigantic advantage. Nevertheless, the coin flip seems to have a larger effect than most fans are comfortable with.

NFL kickers are so good (and right now, offenses so dominant) that I'd go all the way back to the 50. Start on the opponent's 40 and it's a 57 yard field goal.

 

Thats not an advantage IMO, goal is always a TD because you know the other team can score the TD and win.  If first team scores a FG, second team still has a goal of a TD.  If first team doesn’t score, then that’s on them.  They had a shot.

 

So I will respectfully disagree that there is any real advantage to the second team if both teams have a shot at having the ball.  You could say the opposite too and say second team has more pressure on them if first team scores.  

 

I think they should just guarantee one possession to both teams in OT.  Giving the ball first to a Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, or a young explosive team like Rams and Chiefs is a massive advantage in OT.  Just balance it and say both teams get the ball once, at least in the playoffs.  Now both teams have to field both an offensive and defensive unit in OT to decide a winner.  

 

Makes no no sense to me to do it the way they are, just my 2 cents.  And I have said this for over 20 years, has nothing to do with yesterday.  

2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

No. My solution - in the playoffs! - is to simply play football for an additional 15 minutes. After that point, maybe it's time to start thinking about player fatigue and all that and to go to a more arbitrary mechanism of deciding a winner. In other words, soccer or NHL style. Because let's face facts: anything other than an extension of the normal game under the normal rules is an attempt to "force" a result that has a winner.

 

I would support this too.  Or play a shorter full period like 8 minutes so you could essentially do two if necessary before going to another arbitrary mechanism.

Edited by Alphadawg7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

The second team has an advantage because they know what the goal is. First team scores a TD? Then the second team knows they need a TD. The strategic advantage results in the second team winning a disproportionate number of times, although (as with the NFL) it isn't a gigantic advantage. Nevertheless, the coin flip seems to have a larger effect than most fans are comfortable with.

NFL kickers are so good (and right now, offenses so dominant) that I'd go all the way back to the 50. Start on the opponent's 40 and it's a 57 yard field goal.

 

 

I just read somewhere it's like 62%...that's almost a 2:1 advantage in 2 possession OT's to the second team possessing.

 

Anyway, the problem with all of theses complaints about overtime is that they completely ignore Defense as part of the game.  That obviously makes no sense and is the fatal flaw in all of these arguments for change.

 

If each team "deserves a possession", then just settle it like soccer:  just have the kickers trade FGs.  until someone misses.

 

Sounds silly right?  So does all this whining about a team not being able to get it's Offense on the field, when the problem is actually that they can't get their Defense off the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

The second team knows what is needed to win.  The first team kicks a FG - the second team gets to 4th down and has choices available- go for the win or tie.

 

The first team scores a TD - the second team knows it needs a TD so every possession is 4 downs.  

 

Getting the ball second can be a huge help.  That is why since the college OT rules started - the team getting the ball second wins at a higher rate that the teams that win the coin toss in the NFL.

 

It seems fair, but still provides advantages to one team that is actually greater than what we have seen in the NFL since they changed their OT rules.

 

Thats not an adavantage though.  That’s the first team failing to score, in other words blowing their chance.  And college is different, ball starts in scoring range, NFL ball I kicked off.  First team doesn’t capitalize on their chance, then they should lose more often.  

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I just read somewhere it's like 62%...that's almost a 2:1 advantage in 2 possession OT's to the second team possessing.

 

Anyway, the problem with all of theses complaints about overtime is that they completely ignore Defense as part of the game.  That obviously makes no sense and is the fatal flaw in all of these arguments for change.

 

If each team "deserves a possession", then just settle it like soccer:  just have the kickers trade FGs.  until someone misses.

 

Sounds silly right?  So does all this whining about a team not being able to get it's Offense on the field, when the problem is actually that they can't get their Defense off the field.

 

No that’s not true.  Defense is part of every possession.  So saying both teams deserve a possession directly includes the defense.  No one is ignoring it, it’s built into the statement already.  

 

Both teams should be on the field.  One possession in OT means only half of both teams contributed to OT, one offense and one defense.  Football is a team game, they got to OT as a team. Seems silly to have only half that team and a coin determine a winner without the other half of both teams also being put on the field as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bulldog has picked up right where Howard Simon left off. 

 

Crying about rules changes. 

 

It’s psychotic, we spend 45 minutes a game in the booth watching reviews as it is right now. Let’s add 15 more minutes arguing whether holding occurred, and institute an OT system where you score a Touchdown and you still don’t win.

 

Bills fans should stop crying because their team has been irrelevant for 27 years. 

 

Edited by Straight Hucklebuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Bulldog has picked up right where Howard Simon left off. 

 

Crying about rules changes. 

 

It’s psychotic, we spend 45 minutes a game in the booth watching reviews as it is right now. Let’s add 15 more minutes arguing whether holding occurred, and institute an OT system where you score a Touchdown and you still don’t win.

 

Bills fans should stop crying because their team has been irrelevant for 27 years. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mean but true

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...