The moment A Super Bowl ends in Overtime

[Matt-05]

There should be no overtime quarter.........If a game is tied when the 4th quarter ends, they just continue to play until one team scores. No coin toss no extra quarter.....

 

Oh dear god...this is worst idea of them all

[Peevo]

I like the simple solution to OT rule reform. I'm sure the NFL will roll out town meetings this year across the country,, to get the word out of course, and droves of angry white folks will then revolt against the upcoming rule changes, crying "OT rule changes is SOCIALISM." "IT'S NOT AMUURRICAN"

 

But I digress:

 

While the above idea of simply, no OT and if there's a tie game at the end of the 4th quarter, its tied, really intrigues me, I can't go for such a radical, far-leftist idea.

 

Just do what a bunch of other people have said. Make it at least 2 possession OT, with TD incentives. If the opening drive results in a TD, game over. If the team kicks a field goal, the other team gets the ball with a chance to match or score a TD. If both teams score FG's on their opening possessions, its sudden death from there on, FG, TD or otherwise.

 

Simple enough?

[bladiebla]

Q: Should OT be fair?

A: Yes, no sporting event makes sense if you are not giving teams equal chances to start with.

 

Q: Is the OT system fair?

A: No, for the cointoss decides which team has the largest chance of winning.

 

Q: Why is there an OT system in the first place?

A: American Football is designed as a spectators sport, allowing ties would stimulate 2 teams to simply stop trying to win if they both would equally gain from a tie (soccer syndrome).

 

Q: What is the reluctance in changing the OT rule?

A: Television due to unpredictability estimated time the game would take.

 

Q: What would be fair?

A: Plenty of other solutions have been thought up, that could work. NFL experimented with a different model in NFL Europe.

 

Q: What was the NFL Europe model?

A: NFL Europe had a system which was fair and made OT extremely exiting for the fans. The system was; game extended for 10 minutes, first team to be ahead after both teams have had possesion of the ball at least once, wins, after that both teams get an additional attempt untill time runs out, team to be ahead after equal attempts win, game is a tie if time runs out. In the entire history of NFL Europe (13 seasons) only 2 games ended in a tie.

 

Q: Why was it not implemented in the NFL?

A: The system was voted down because of the television issues, as a result they tested an equal posession once suddendeath thereafter model without cointoss (ball goes to original toss winner), that system was voted down because of television issues as well.

[billsfan89]

How did the coin toss determine the outcome of the game? Pittsburgh scored 10 points in regulation. How is it a foregone conclusion that they were going to score on the first drive of overtime when they only scored on 2 drives in 60 minutes.

 

Defense is a pretty big part of football. Perhaps Tennessee should have played some in overtime.

 

If Defense is a pretty big part of football why didn't the Steelers D have to step out on the field and defend. Why let only one dimension of each team play in OT? I think that the winner of the coin toss winning 60% of the time is a high enough percentage to think that it greatly effects the outcome of the game. Why not just let each team get a offensive possession what would be so bad about that?

[BuffaloBill]

The NFL Over time rule is stupid (The part where you could score on a field goal and the other teams O and D don't ever go on the field). Yet as much as people hate it (The fans at least) they never seem to want to change it at all. I think the day they change the rule is when a Super Bowl goes into OT and a team goes down and hits a 45 yard field goal for the win without the other teams O touching the ball.

 

He is a simple solution to the NFL's stupid overtime system. Just let each team have one touch of the football. If you go down and score a field goal the other team gets a chance to tie it or win it with a TD. It not only solves the problem of punishing a field goal but lets the other teams offense have a say in the out come of the game.

 

Once both teams have had a offensive possession than it becomes sudden death first to score wins. Its not perfect but its a lot better than the system we have right now.

 

 

Just do not get to the college game OT process ... that is worse than sudden death.

[billsfan89]

17.

 

The number of times Billsfan89 posted in his own retarded thread.

 

And for the record, NFL overtime is awesome. You're just a pansy who thinks life is all about fairness and equality. It's a game. You play 60 minutes. If you're still tied there is a nice method for rewarding the best team.

 

THIS IS THE PART YOU SHOULD READ:

Had the Bills been in that game, they would have deserved to lose...but lets say they faced the Titans, and miraculously got it to overtime (off of bizarre plays, or lucky/fortunate turnovers). If we won the toss, elected to recieve, odds are that we wouldn't have gotten in field goal range, and the better team, the Titans, would have won. I don't want you to respond Billsfan89, because I know your opinion. But I just want you to read this, and realize it isn't "ass backwards logic," and that yes, there are two sides to everything in life, and you're not always right.

 

Why is wanting NFL overtime to be more reflective of actual football instead of a stupid sudden death field goal fest a bad thing. In the current system you get rewarded for playing for a field goal is that reflective of the actual game no. Wanting things to be fair isn't being a pansy its wanting a true form of competition. Why let a coin toss decide the outcome of a game. Its a fine line in the NFL and you played 60 minutes and its tied why should you have to resort to a stupid sudden death format where one team might not even get a chance to score because the defense gave up a field goal not even a TD.

 

Isn't having a level playing field a good thing. I mean do you honestly think that the current system is good and fair. The whole purpose of competition is to have a level playing field. Your argument is that life isn't fair so why should the NFL OT be? Would you be so in defense of the system if the Bills lost the Super Bowl because of this stupid and unfair system? Defending something just because its the way it is isn't very logical.

[Kgun5]

Oh dear god...this is worst idea of them all

 

Actually, it's the best idea of them all, and the most "fair." You eliminate the cause if this stupid thread, and that's the coin toss.

[Just Jack]

It's funny this topic came up because I was just thinking about it last weekend, remembering Donovan McNabbs comment last season about not knowing the NFL could end a game with a tie. Got me wondering what they would do if a SB went into OT and no one scored. Would they have an emergency meeting in whichever suite Goodell is using to determine how to finish with a winner, or would both teams "share" the trophy?

[Kgun5]

It's funny this topic came up because I was just thinking about it last weekend, remembering Donovan McNabbs comment last season about not knowing the NFL could end a game with a tie. Got me wondering what they would do if a SB went into OT and no one scored. Would they have an emergency meeting in whichever suite Goodell is using to determine how to finish with a winner, or would both teams "share" the trophy?

 

 

Playoff overtime continues until someone scores, regardless of how many overtime "quarters" it takes to finish the game. Your scenario is impossible because of this.

[Just Jack]

Playoff overtime continues until someone scores, regardless of how many overtime "quarters" it takes to finish the game.

So that's it, thanks.

[Kgun5]

So that's it, thanks.

 

Just in case you were interested (from http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/2004nflplayoffgames.html):

 

6. Merry Christmas, Miami! Dolphins 27, Chiefs 24, OT (AFC semis, Dec. 25, 1971)

At halftime, the game was tied, 10-10. Back and forth it went in the second half: Chiefs up 17-10, Dolphins tie it; Chiefs up 24-17, Dolphins tie it.

 

But it looked like the Chiefs had it won when Ed Podolak, having one of the greatest individual games in NFL history, returned a kickoff 78 yards to the Miami 22, putting Kansas City in field goal position with little time left. But Hall of Famer kicker Jan Stenerud missed wide right from 31 yards.

 

The first OT period passed with only two real scoring opportunities, a blocked Stenerud attempt from 42 yards out, and a Gary Yepremian miss from 52 yards. Finally, midway through the second OT, Yepremian hit a 37-yarder for the win. The longest game in NFL history -- 82 minutes, 40 seconds -- was over.

 

"It was a horrifying experience, because one break is going to be the game" said Chiefs QB Len Dawson of the overtimes.

 

Podolak's great performance is often forgotten because the Chiefs lost (their only home loss of the 1971 season). He scored two TDs, caught eight passes for 110 yards, rushed 17 times for 85 yards, and returned three kicks for 154 yards.