RTW2012 Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 10 minute overtime, no sudden death. Team with most points after 10 is the winner, if it's tied then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 11, 2009 Author Share Posted September 11, 2009 The teams coached by passive coaches can still play for ties if they wish. The more aggressive types can strategize around knowing that they won't have any tie possibility to worry about. Â My point is that there would be more ties in the league if that were to happen and people hate ties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 11, 2009 Author Share Posted September 11, 2009 Why change somethign that isn't broke? they looked into changing it last year and they asked the players. The players didn't want it changed. If the players don't care why should we? Â Why be reactive instead of proactive. One day the Super Bowl or a big game will end that way and some fans are going to be pissed why not improve something. You don't think the Titans are pissed right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 My point is that there would be more ties in the league if that were to happen and people hate ties. Perhaps if you have enough passive types. If so, then I would also change the extra point rule to allow for 1 point kicks and 3 point conversions. I think you would get much many more coaches eschewing kicking for a single point and going for 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Well here is the thing. I like your idea of each team must get 1 touch. Â So let's say the steelers get the FG, the titans would get the ball back since they never touched the ball. If the titans don't score, then the steelers win since the titans had their chance. Â Or let's say the steelers got the ball first, and didn't score, and then the titans didn't score, and then steelers did, the steelers win since both teams already touched the ball. Â Here is the problem with your idea though. Let's say the steelers get a FG, and then the titans get the ball and get a FG. Then the steelers get a FG. Do the steelers win? Titans touched the ball already, do the titans get the ball again, because if they do, then why not just go with College Football rules. If the other team gets the ball back, then it takes away from the sudden death atmosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Why change somethign that isn't broke? they looked into changing it last year and they asked the players. The players didn't want it changed. If the players don't care why should we? How confident are you that the players actually understood the rule? (See: D. McNabb.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 11, 2009 Author Share Posted September 11, 2009 Well here is the thing. I like your idea of each team must get 1 touch. Â So let's say the steelers get the FG, the titans would get the ball back since they never touched the ball. If the titans don't score, then the steelers win since the titans had their chance. Â Or let's say the steelers got the ball first, and didn't score, and then the titans didn't score, and then steelers did, the steelers win since both teams already touched the ball. Â Here is the problem with your idea though. Let's say the steelers get a FG, and then the titans get the ball and get a FG. Then the steelers get a FG. Do the steelers win? Titans touched the ball already, do the titans get the ball again, because if they do, then why not just go with College Football rules. If the other team gets the ball back, then it takes away from the sudden death atmosphere. Â Yeah Steelers win the Titans offense had a chance to win the game by getting a TD. Like I said its not perfect but its better because it rewards TD's and punishes field goals and lets both the offense and defense of both teams have a say in the outcome of the game. The Titans had a chance to win but they kept it going with a Field Goal yet the Titans D had to give up 2 scoring drives while the Steelers had to go down and score twice. Â Also my system makes the decision for the coin toss much more interesting. Do you receive and risk getting a field goal and having the other team knowing that if they get a TD they win. Or do you kick but risk exchanging field goals and having the opponent having the ball needing only a field goal? Also if you receive and you get a TD you than risk having the opponent getting a TD than going for 2 and winning the game. It just adds a wrinkle to the game (Either way DJ makes the wrong move). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 17. Â The number of times Billsfan89 posted in his own retarded thread. Â 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. Â 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt-05 Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 NFL OT is fine. If you don't win the coin toss then your defense better be good enough to stop the offense and get the ball back. On the flip side, If you win the coin toss your offense better be good enough to overcome the opposing defense. Â I've seen plenty of overtimes when teams go back and forth on offense and defense...I've also seen my share of ties. The rule is only a bad one if your team loses...Stop whining and grow a pair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Play a full QTR. If still tied, then sudden death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 That's ass backwards logic. Having a coin toss determine the out comes of games is better than letting the players out on the field do that? Also the fact that it rewards teams for kicking field goals and gives no real incentive to score TD's isn't reflective of real football at all. 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. Â Defense is a pretty big part of football. Perhaps Tennessee should have played some in overtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 I have a better idea...just do Rock Paper Scissors to decide the Super Bowl...best of 3. PTR My problem with that is how can you justify that paper beats rock?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Both teams had 60 minutes to win the game. To say that Tenn should be pissed is stupid. How many field goals did they miss during regulation? How many opportunities did they have to score and failed? Â This is going to sound crazy, but if you don't want the result to be "determined by a coin toss," win the friggin' game in regulation. Simple concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judman Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 If the game is tied after 4 quarters, either team deserves to win. To me, the Titans showed up impressively last night. It was a fun game to watch. I hope Monday night's game is at least that close.  The overtime rule is not broken. Can anyone here really say Tennessee deserved to win, or with that bills-like prevent zone coverage that they would have stopped Pitt had they needed to do a second drive? The Steelers ate the Titans D alive through the fourth quarter, and they refused to make a change. That's why they lost, and would have lost no matter how many possessions each team had. It amazes me that the same people who have been pinning a majority of the Bills struggle on a lack of pass rush/defensive effectiveness immediately think that only an offense has the right to win or loose a football game. Games are won and lost on BOTH sides of the ball, even special teams. It happens every week in the NFL. That's why the overtime rule is fine the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt-05 Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Play a full QTR. If still tied, then sudden death. Â This is just dumb...they already played four quarters. Now you want them to play five plus a sudden death if necessary? Forgive me for not getting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 leave it the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 The moment A Super Bowl ends in Overtime, Is the day they change the NFL overtime rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 I would love it if the team had a chance to match. It would take away the huge power of the coin toss and I think we would see teams choose to kickoff  didnt indy lose a playoff game on a couple of real questionable PA calls in OT which led to a coin toss FG?    the bottom line is the NFLPA sees this as extra football with no extra pay. That is why they shoot it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeagentqb Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 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..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 This is just dumb...they already played four quarters. Now you want them to play five plus a sudden death if necessary? Forgive me for not getting it. You're forgiven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts