Jump to content

OT Rule needs to change!


BuffaloButt

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, DallasMac said:

Some of y'all are ridiculous.  The NFL continues year after year to make rules that favor the offense bc they like high scoring games.  Then they say in OT that if you don't want us to win then stop us.  You can't have it both ways.  Each offense should get an opportunity.

 

This is what I was thinking.  I really hated the old rule, where a coin flip, decent runback, and 20-30 yards wins you the game.............And, I thought this was a great idea.............But, now offenses are so supercharged, with the top 4 in the final four, that I think it needs that the other team gets a chance to tie, even if the first team scores a TD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, wppete said:

The NFL needs to adopt the NCAA Overtime rules. Way more entertaining and is fair for both teams. 

 

I'd say the college football OT structure with some tweaks. Starting at the opponents 25 is pretty easy. Unless a team totally screws up with losing yards thru plays or penalties, they're likely to get a makeable FG try.  NFL kickers are much better than the average college kicker so it's pretty much a makeable three points.  Of course, the opponent next starting at the 25 can quickly score a TD and win the game.

 

For the NFL, maybe they could start at midfield or their own 40.  So, they may have to gain 20 to 30 yards to get a legit FG try.  In today's NFL, with an above average QB, that may also seem easy but more difficult than starting at the opponent's 25.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, wppete said:

The NFL needs to adopt the NCAA Overtime rules. Way more entertaining and is fair for both teams. 

Please no. College rules for overtime are Pop Warner. Do it like hockey. Play set amounts of time until there is one left standing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

Seems too gimicky to me and it runs up the score making betting the over/under problematic.  Plus, the record books for scoring would be skewed.

 

I think the easy fix to this is for each team to get a posession and have the chance to tie each other (like the Chiefs could've answered the Pats TD with a TD of their own).  Sudden death after that.

 

 

 

Yes, as a bare minimum both teams need to have a possession.  

 

Do we think a defensive touchdown on the first possession still ends the game?  It kind of doesn't make sense that the team winning the coin toss and taking the ball first could screw up so badly and still get another chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't dislike the rule as it is now. My only issue with it is that it's inconsistent with what the league has been pushing for. They clearly want high scoring games with high octane offenses duking it out, rather than two dominant defenses stuffing the opposing offense for 60 minutes. That's fine, but if they're going to give offenses the edge, the OT rules should reflect that and give both offenses a chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cmdjr85 said:

Lol, Na. Play better defense. Make a stop.

Both the chiefs and falcons LOST BECAUAE THEY COUDNT MAKE A STOP.

BOTH THE CHIEFS AND FALCONS HAD OVER 90 PLAYS RAN ON THEM.

 

 

This is correct.  They already changed it from a field goal wins it...

 

This is what happens when you don't have a defense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I do agree both teams should get the ball once.  Teams win and lose games, not half of a team.  And when Pats won the coin toss, they got to put their best unit (offense) on the field against the Chiefs worst unit (defense).  And with a TD, Chiefs don’t get the same opportunity to put their best unit (offense) against Pats worst unit (defense).  

 

So is it really fair that a coin decides how much of an advantage or disadvantage each team has in a game this important?  

 

Shame Mahomes doesn’t get a chance to dual Brady in OT after such a great game.  

 

Life isn't fair. Perhaps if the chiefs played defense better than a girl scout troop, they could have won. Guess we'll never know.

Edited by Joe in Winslow
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:

The OT rule needs  to change giving the other team an opportunity to match a TD scored.  Falcons & Chiefs both lost due to a fricken coin toss!

????????????????????

                  I hate emojis.    Especially TOPHATS!!!!!!

Edited by Turk71
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, H2o said:

Exactly. How many 3rd and long conversions did the Chiefs give up on that drive? At least 3 I can recall. 

 

It was unbelievable. I couldnt understand wtf Sutton was thinking. Every third and long, the chiefs rushed 4, got nowhere near Brady, gave up the middle of the field and were gashed each time.

 

So frustrating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

Yes, as a bare minimum both teams need to have a possession.  

 

Do we think a defensive touchdown on the first possession still ends the game?  It kind of doesn't make sense that the team winning the coin toss and taking the ball first could screw up so badly and still get another chance.

Joe, you are hammered.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, wppete said:

The NFL needs to adopt the NCAA Overtime rules. Way more entertaining and is fair for both teams. 

 

Oh gods - please no.  I absolutely hate the college OT rules. 

 

I prefer the sudden death you get in the NFL - coin toss be damned. 

 

Get a stop - teams have been doing that consistently for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Chris66 said:

I would bet no one would be complaining if the chiefs won the toss and scored

 

But most people love to complain all the time

 

they enjoy complaining more than enjoying a great football game 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chris66 said:

I thought for the most part the refs were pretty fair. They missed stuff on both sides.

and if the call went KC's way on the RTP call you would have a much different opinion.  

 

What crybaby excuse will the Putz use now that they are the favorite?   The poor little underdog whining isn't there.   

 

Oh wait the Everybody hates us excuse is still available.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:

The OT rule needs  to change giving the other team an opportunity to match a TD scored.  Falcons & Chiefs both lost due to a fricken coin toss!

 

The rule that needs changing is what is reviewable.  Too many times critical plays are missed that change the game, ie: massive PI by NRC.  Probably one of the worst missed calls I've ever seen (even worse than "just give it to them").

 

OT is much fairer than it was before.  Problem was not the coin toss, but the defense not making a stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

and if the call went KC's way on the RTP call you would have a much different opinion.  

 

What crybaby excuse will the Putz use now that they are the favorite?   The poor little underdog whining isn't there.   

 

Oh wait the Everybody hates us excuse is still available.  

 

Its basically a pick at 1.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:

The OT rule needs  to change giving the other team an opportunity to match a TD scored.  Falcons & Chiefs both lost due to a fricken coin toss!

 

Every other sports league manages to have fair overtime rules, except the NFL. The world didn't end when college football adopted it's even-possession rules. But oh no, we can't have that in the NFL! It takes too long. Meanwhile they will stop the game for 5 minutes to do a video review on how much time is left on the clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:

The OT rule needs  to change giving the other team an opportunity to match a TD scored.  Falcons & Chiefs both lost due to a fricken coin toss!

Yeah, I was originally against it a few years back but I think it needs to be the same as the college OT which I was also against when they first started doing it. The college OT has grown on me alot and has become very exciting and fair for each team, so yeah, I think the NFL should adopt the college OT system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the old rules which is against what the OP stated.  Bottom line is I hate ties in the regular season, and play OT until someone scores.  I know that part was not part of the old rules.  The game would. Finish just as fast and we’d have no ties.

 

im still surprised both away teams won.  You’ll kind expect it with the Pats, but was surprised NO lost in the dome.

 

Time to root for the Rams as I’m sick of the Pats in the SB.  It’s getting boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i disagree.  you either stop them from scoring a TD or you lose.  if you allow the other team to have a chance to answer with a TD when does it end?  Does the team that scored 1st get a chance to answer with their own 2nd TD?  If they do, and they get the matching TD, does the other team get another chance to answer with another TD?  And on and on.

 

Bring back sudden death, I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

https://www.theringer.com/2017/2/6/16042116/nfl-overtime-rules-super-bowl-li-patriots-falcons-62316a6f8e3c

Now almost 2 years old, but this study showed that ever since the NFL's new OT system was introduced, the team winning the OT coin toss wins the game 54.8 percent of the time. That's not terrible, but it still probably gives more of an advantage to a random event than most of us would like to see. And I suspect it's getting worse - as offenses become more dominant, the percentage of drives resulting in a touchdown (and hence a sudden death) is going up. So it's time to revisit the rule. And while I'm not happy it benefited the Pats (again) today (as it did in the Super Bowl a couple years ago), this is not about sour grapes. It's about trying to ensure as even a playing field as possible.

 

 

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

I do agree both teams should get the ball once.  Teams win and lose games, not half of a team.  And when Pats won the coin toss, they got to put their best unit (offense) on the field against the Chiefs worst unit (defense).  And with a TD, Chiefs don’t get the same opportunity to put their best unit (offense) against Pats worst unit (defense).  

 

So is it really fair that a coin decides how much of an advantage or disadvantage each team has in a game this important?  

 

Shame Mahomes doesn’t get a chance to dual Brady in OT after such a great game.  

 

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Both teams had a chance.  The Pats had a chance to score, the Chiefs had a chance to stop them. 

this isn't against you in particular (unless it does ;) ) 

 

How this "argument" was similar / different with the Buffalo Miami OT game where TT had 300 yards passing and the Bills Lost.  

All they had to do was score and stop Miami on 2 (maybe 3) drives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think their could be some changes in overtime still. Is anyone really a fan of a coin toss still potentially deciding the outcome of the game, especially in the playoffs? 

 

The team that gets the ball first has a chance to seal the deal with a TD. I know, the D has to stop them etc... but just think, a bad DPI call and that team is on the doorstep of victory.

 

Now to be brutally fair, the Chiefs D was grose last night. They gave up over 500 yards of total offense- a buck 75 on the ground!

 

I for one would like to see a normal, full quater of football played in overtime (at least in the playoffs). What would you all propose or would you rather keep things as is? 

Mods- noticed this was being discussed already- please merge. My apologies.

Edited by billsfan_34
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...