NFL could change overtime format for playoffs

• IggyPride00

  

  If this were to be implemented I like the idea alot. NFL kickers have such strong legs now that a team winning the toss doesn't have to go all that far to kick a field goal, and I hate seeing playoff games end with the other side not even getting a chance to score because of something outside the field of play like a coin toss. I don't think the college rule would be appropriate for the pros, but this set-up would work great as it is very fair. If a team scores a touchdown, you deserve to lose, field goal to me takes a lot less work and the other team should at least get a shot.
  

  NDIANAPOLIS (AP)—An NFL spokesman said Saturday the league could change its overtime format for playoff games at a meeting next month.
  
  Under the new format, both teams would get the ball at least once unless the first team to get the ball scores a touchdown, Greg Aiello said. If the first team to get the ball makes a field goal and the other team ties the game, action would continue until a team scores again.
  
  Under the current rules, the first team to score wins.
  
  “There have been various concepts that have been discussed in recent years, but this one has never been proposed,” Aiello said.
  
  The competition committee will discuss the new concept with teams and players at league meetings March 21-24 in Orlando, Fla., when it could come to a vote. At least two thirds of the teams would need to agree to the changes for new rules to be adopted.
  
  The debate about the rules gained steam after the NFC championship game, when New Orleans beat Minnesota 31-28 in overtime and Brett Favre’s(notes) Vikings never got the ball in the extra period. Under the proposed rule, Minnesota would have gotten another possession because the Vikings didn’t allow a touchdown.

  http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ah7ykCJz67E31jQt9lXbcexDubYF?slug=ap-overtimerules&prov=ap&type=lgns
• Footwedge

  Just my two cents on a rule change for OT. I don't like what the NFL is proposing. Just don't. I would eliminate the coin toss, and I would designate a certain team to have the option of
  
  A. Playing offense starting on your own 10 yard line (No kickoff) or
  B. Playing defense and give the opponent the ball at their 10 yard line.
  
  There would be no coin toss at all. Either the team that tied the game late, or the team that relinquished the tying score, would be officially delegated the responsibility of taking the ball at their own 10 yard line or not.
• sportswizuhrd

  Footwedge wrote: Just my two cents on a rule change for OT. I don't like what the NFL is proposing. Just don't. I would eliminate the coin toss, and I would designate a certain team to have the option of
  
  A. Playing offense starting on your own 10 yard line (No kickoff) or
  B. Playing defense and give the opponent the ball at their 10 yard line.
  
  There would be no coin toss at all. Either the team that tied the game late, or the team that relinquished the tying score, would be officially delegated the responsibility of taking the ball at their own 10 yard line or not.

  You would have to do this by coin toss. You cant designate a team to get the ball. That would reek of showing favorites. Team A is down 24-10 and comes back to tie the game but in OT Team B gets the ball first just because. Why? Same thing with Team A getting the ball first. Are they rewarded for coming back? Why isnt Team B rewarded for building a lead?
• Scarlet_Fever

  

  This is better than what they have but still not good. If they are going to change it why not just say both teams get the ball even if the first team scores a TD. So say the first team scores any way (except saftey which would end a game) then they kick off to the second team. Then that team would have one drive to tie or win. If the game is still tied after both teams have had one possession then the game continues until the end of overtime or one team scores. (essentially making just like the rules they have now except allowing both teams to get a possesion.)
• WebFire

  Why just the playoffs. The rules shouldn't change just for the playoffs. Change the OT format and make it for the whole season.
• Al Bundy

  Just play for a fixed amount of time (maybe 10 minutes). If one team can hold the ball for 10 minutes and kick a FG at the end of the drive, they deserve to win. Most likely each would have the ball at least once (in most cases twice). I also wouldn't mind seeing them doing away with OT in the regular season. It would be very interesting to see if a team is down by 7 and scores late which teams play for the tie and which teams play to win.
• HitsRus

  

  I know I'm in the miniority, but I think the whole concept of any overtime bastardizes the game. To play a full 4 quarters, and then resort to some arbitrary system to determine a winner never has made any sense. Ties are legitimate outcomes, and if a tie disappoints some teams or fans, then too bad. Just the fact that overtime exists changes a way a team plays in the 4 th quarter, and changes the strategy especially in the last drive or two as well as the game plan. Prior to overtime, there were only a handful of games that ended in ties anyway, as teams that needed a win played for the win in regulation.
  I know that hardly anybody will agree with me, as I've been thru this before....JMHO.
  
  As far as my opinion regarding a change....What's the difference? I suppose playing a full overtime period...a 5th quarter... would be the best. This way it doesn't change the dynamics of the game or the teams involved. E.G., A ball control/field position team is not disadvantaged versus a quick strike offense.
• queencitybuckeye

  For the playoffs, the best overtime scenario I've heard is that you play by regular rules until one team has the lead and possession.
  
  I agree with Hits on the regular season. Looking over some random pre-overtime era standings, it appears that the typical team played to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Regular season overtime appears to be a solution in search of a problem.
• Thunder70

  

  First team to score 6 wins...it's pretty simple...
• Gobuckeyes1

  Turn off the clock and play normal rules until one team has the lead and possession. Each team gets one timeout.
  
  Simple...and I can't think of any downside.
• Al Capone

  Thunder70 wrote: First team to score 6 wins...it's pretty simple...

  +1
• tk421

  

  Al Bundy wrote: Just play for a fixed amount of time (maybe 10 minutes). If one team can hold the ball for 10 minutes and kick a FG at the end of the drive, they deserve to win. Most likely each would have the ball at least once (in most cases twice). I also wouldn't mind seeing them doing away with OT in the regular season. It would be very interesting to see if a team is down by 7 and scores late which teams play for the tie and which teams play to win.

  I agree, play a certain amount of time. This sudden death OT sucks. Make it 8-10 minutes and that's it. Regular season should have no OT, anyways. If you can't win the game in 60 minutes, tough.
• Footwedge

  sportswizuhrd wrote:

  Footwedge wrote: Just my two cents on a rule change for OT. I don't like what the NFL is proposing. Just don't. I would eliminate the coin toss, and I would designate a certain team to have the option of
  
  A. Playing offense starting on your own 10 yard line (No kickoff) or
  B. Playing defense and give the opponent the ball at their 10 yard line.
  
  There would be no coin toss at all. Either the team that tied the game late, or the team that relinquished the tying score, would be officially delegated the responsibility of taking the ball at their own 10 yard line or not.

  You would have to do this by coin toss. You cant designate a team to get the ball. That would reek of showing favorites. Team A is down 24-10 and comes back to tie the game but in OT Team B gets the ball first just because. Why? Same thing with Team A getting the ball first. Are they rewarded for coming back? Why isnt Team B rewarded for building a lead?

  Serious question. Would you rather start OT with the ball at your own 10 yard line, or play defense with the other team starting at their own 10?
  
  I would venture to say that this scenario would provide a better fairmess equation versus winning a coin flip and on average return it to the 30 yard line.
  
  A 3 and out from the ten sets up the defensive team in great field position to win.
• Non

  

  I think it sounds like a good plan.
  
  I'd rather they do it for the regular season, too, but they probably can't because of the time.
• bases_loaded

  

  Why not just play another 15 minutes
• Non

  

  I don't like that because it takes away some of the drama.
• thavoice

  Id like to see just one TWEAK to the OT rules in the NFL......each team gets at least one possession. First team kicks FG then next team must do the same or score TD to win it. If the second teams ties with a FG then it is suddend death.
  
  College and HS...yeah..they make for high scoring but it is really a joke. Seriously. Why take out sooo much of the game? No KO's, no possible punts. No possible decisions to go for it...or kick FG, or punt.......
  
  and also..whatever the NFL decides......id like to see it in season as well.
• RiverRat13

  bases_loaded wrote: Why not just play another 15 minutes

  I agree with this. Just make it another quarter. If a team has the ball 2nd and 12 at its own 30 when regulation expires, just start the "5th quarter" with that situation. That's the only "fair" way to ensure equal opportunity for possessions in the game.
• thavoice

  The only issue with adding another 15 minutes and playing a full qtr, and possibly more, is the physical aspect of it and the beating the players can take.
  
  A altered sudden death, kinda like I explained, would be almost like baseball. IN baseball each team is guarenteed one offensive at bat. Could end soon...or later....dont know. Kinda has a sudden end to it.
  
  I wanna see a tweak..each team with one possession.
  
  Ive listened and read many opinions and proposals and nothing Ive heard is better than that.
• charliehustle14

  I'd like it a lot more if it applied to the entire season.
• TBone14

  

  The NFL OT rules should not remind me of beer pong rules, which some of the proposed scenarios do.
• Glory Days

  

  its actually a misconception that the team who gets the ball first wins most of the time. the numbers are actually close to 50/50. the biggest influence on who wins OT in the past few years has not been the stronger legs of the kickers when they kick a FG, but the kick off start being pushed back giving the return team better field position.
• Gblock

  well what happens if the team that gets the ball first turns it over and the other team gets a field goal? do you/should you get a chance to get the ball back?
• thavoice

  Glory Days wrote: its actually a misconception that the team who gets the ball first wins most of the time. the numbers are actually close to 50/50. the biggest influence on who wins OT in the past few years has not been the stronger legs of the kickers when they kick a FG, but the kick off start being pushed back giving the return team better field position.

  I had a link to an article that had teh OT stats. It was around the high 30's to lo 40's% that the game was one by team winning the flip and on the first possession. Overall it was a lil over 50% i belive that the team winning the flip won the game.......but the % was much less than that in scoring on the first possession
• thavoice

  did a QUICK search. These numbers are 1973-2003
  
  **365 OT games in NFL
  **52% team won toss won the game
  **43% team lost toss and won game
  **5% games end tie
  **72% of the games BOTH teams had at least one possession
  
  *********28% team won toss and scored on the first drive!
  
  There is DEF a misconcepton....too many believe you win the coin toss...and you win the game without the other team touching the ball