Thoughts on the proposed new NFL Overtime rule?

• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  Just read this, sorry if this was covered earlier: there is a new proposed rule under consideration regarding NFL overtime, where the first team to score 6 points would win the game. This would eliminate a long FG by the team who wins the toss.
  
  I have repeatedly whined about NFL OT rules for years, but let me say, I love this idea. Thoughts?
  
  Here is the article from CBS:
  
  http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/13068677/proposed-ot-change-move-the-kickoff-up-leave-the-rest-alone?tag=headlines;other
• thavoice

  First off, any rule they put into place for OT should be the same in the playoffs as in the regular season.
  
  Secondly, I wanna see the current format tweaked JUST a bit and allow each team one possession. Doesnt need to be six points to win it.
  
  There is a misconception that if you win the fllip you win the game on the first drive all the time. I posted hte stats on a thread like this last week.
• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  thavoice wrote: First off, any rule they put into place for OT should be the same in the playoffs as in the regular season.
  
  Secondly, I wanna see the current format tweaked JUST a bit and allow each team one possession. Doesnt need to be six points to win it.
  
  There is a misconception that if you win the fllip you win the game on the first drive all the time. I posted hte stats on a thread like this last week.

  thavoice, can you repost those stats? That would be interesting to see.
  
  I don't know, I think this new idea hits the mark. If a team marches down the field and scores a TD, then they deserved to win anyway. If the D holds them to a FG, their offense has a chance to win or at least extend the game. Seems smart to me.
• queencitybuckeye

  The idea I've seen that I like better is that the teams play by normal rules until one team has both the lead and possession.
  
  I would respectfully disagree with thavoice in terms of playoffs vs regular season. I would eliminate regular season overtime. In checking several random years, the average team plays to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Why bother?
• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  queencitybuckeye wrote: The idea I've seen that I like better is that the teams play by normal rules until one team has both the lead and possession.
  
  I would respectfully disagree with thavoice in terms of playoffs vs regular season. I would eliminate regular season overtime. In checking several random years, the average team plays to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Why bother?

  I actually like this rule as well: seems so simple, yet so perfect. Why is this change so hard???
• justincredible

  

  queencitybuckeye wrote: The idea I've seen that I like better is that the teams play by normal rules until one team has both the lead and possession.
  
  I would respectfully disagree with thavoice in terms of playoffs vs regular season. I would eliminate regular season overtime. In checking several random years, the average team plays to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Why bother?

  The idea you mention makes the most sense.
  
  Also, to your second point, you are saying they should get rid over overtime completely in the regular season?
• justincredible

  

  Just looked back over 2009 games real quick and it looks like Pitt played in 3 OT games and KC played in 2.
• queencitybuckeye

  justincredible wrote:

  queencitybuckeye wrote: The idea I've seen that I like better is that the teams play by normal rules until one team has both the lead and possession.
  
  I would respectfully disagree with thavoice in terms of playoffs vs regular season. I would eliminate regular season overtime. In checking several random years, the average team plays to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Why bother?

  The idea you mention makes the most sense.
  
  Also, to your second point, you are saying they should get rid over overtime completely in the regular season?

  
  Yes. If two teams play for three hours and no one has proven themselves better, shake hands and move on.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  I love it. That'd be perfect IMO.
• darbypitcher22

  

  Go to the college rule. I think its the fairest way to settle things
• SQ_Crazies

  

  darbypitcher22 wrote: Go to the college rule. I think its the fairest way to settle things

  No way. This proposal is better than the college rule. The college rule is a joke in college, it would be worse in the NFL.
  
  Taking the kickoff out of the equation and starting a team in field goal range is stupid.
• thavoice

  BigAppleBuckeye wrote:

  thavoice wrote: First off, any rule they put into place for OT should be the same in the playoffs as in the regular season.
  
  Secondly, I wanna see the current format tweaked JUST a bit and allow each team one possession. Doesnt need to be six points to win it.
  
  There is a misconception that if you win the fllip you win the game on the first drive all the time. I posted hte stats on a thread like this last week.

  thavoice, can you repost those stats? That would be interesting to see.
  
  I don't know, I think this new idea hits the mark. If a team marches down the field and scores a TD, then they deserved to win anyway. If the D holds them to a FG, their offense has a chance to win or at least extend the game. Seems smart to me.

  
  
  The NFL has had 325 overtime games since the rule was adopted in
  1974. The results:
  
  Both teams have had possession 235 times (72.3%).
  
  The team that has won the toss has won 169 times (52.0%).
  The team that has lost the toss has won 141 times (43.4%).
  223 games were decided by a field goal (68.6%).
  86 games were decided by a TD (26.5%).
  One game was decided by a safety (0.3%).
  There have been 15 ties (4.6%).
  
  Pretty sure that is pretty recent...like in the last couple of seasons.
  
  So ya can asusme that 27.7% of the time the team wins toss AND then the game. I am unsure of one thing tho...lets say the defensive team wins on a turnover....like a pick or fumble six...i assume they are counting that as both teams having possession.
• Thunder70

  

  First team to 6 wins...It's simple...
• SQ_Crazies

  

  thavoice wrote:
  223 games were decided by a field goal (68.6%).
  

  That's what turns me away.
• jpake1

  

  I believe some tweeking is needed. I don't really like this idea of needing more than a FG. PS: are they even allowed to attempt a FG? A TD is 6pts, what if they kick two FG's.. do they win? Sorry didn't read the link. I think that would take away from the ending of overtime. What happens if a team is looking at 4&3 at the 30 and they throw one into the endzone with 22 seconds remaining. Not too many times will a team drive 70yds in 22 seconds, but could a team get 3 yds in 22 seconds if they have a TO or two and kick a 57yd? Yea it's possible. But the rules would take away from that possible ending. I'd like them to set it up like college but get the ball at the 50yd and have to go for two each time.
• thavoice

  I still like both teams having one possession. Of course you still take the ball winning the toss.
  
  How bout this...if you go into OT..instead of a coin toss...maybe reference back to the beginning of the game. If team A won the toss to open the game then team B gets to make the decision what they want in OT?
• rock_knutne

  No need to change the OT rule. If your team lost the coin toss then play some defense!
• SQ_Crazies

  

  I would assume that it's first to 6 wins, and if the time in OT runs out and a team is up 3--they would win even without scoring 6. If they both had kicked FG's and OT was tied 3-3, I'd assume it would then be a tie.
• thavoice

  ^^good point. Havent read anything about what would happen if it ended 3-0, or hell, 2-0
  
  Would seem damned wrong to be up 3-0 @ end of OT and not get the win.
• Thunder70

  

  I've heard some people suggest doing it like baseball.
  
  Team A is home. Team B gets the ball first in OT.
  
  If Team B scores a FG or TD (no XPT allowed, must go for 2), Team A gets the ball. If Team B doesn't score, Team A wins.
• thavoice

  ^^possible. I wonder if some strategy would come into it. If your the home team do you go for a tie at the end of a game knowing you get the ball second in the OT?
  
  Only thing that scenario is diff than mine is elimintaing the coin flip. Some could agrue the home tteam has their advantage already and should get thta extra in OT too. At leas with a coin toss its feasible either team could win the toss.
• NOL fan

  BigAppleBuckeye wrote:

  queencitybuckeye wrote: The idea I've seen that I like better is that the teams play by normal rules until one team has both the lead and possession.
  
  I would respectfully disagree with thavoice in terms of playoffs vs regular season. I would eliminate regular season overtime. In checking several random years, the average team plays to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Why bother?

  I actually like this rule as well: seems so simple, yet so perfect. Why is this change so hard???

  that's an interesting idea that could produce some high scoring overtimes
• thavoice

  queencitybuckeye wrote: The idea I've seen that I like better is that the teams play by normal rules until one team has both the lead and possession.
  
  I would respectfully disagree with thavoice in terms of playoffs vs regular season. I would eliminate regular season overtime. In checking several random years, the average team plays to a tie every 1.5-2 years. Why bother?

  Little flaw in that reasoning. Yeah, a game may end in a tie once every 1.5-2 seasons, but many, many more of the games go into OT each year.
  
  the stat I posted had 325 OT games since 1974. I believe that is from 2005 or 2007 Doesnt matter. Comes to about 10 OT games a year.
  
  Your proposal of elimiting OT in the regular season would result in more ties.
  
  As a fan, as a season ticket holder...if I invest all the money, the time to watch the game i want a winner, and a loser.
  
  that is why Im ok with the shootout in regular season hockey. not the best way to do it...but practical. Ya gotta have a winner/loser in a game at the professional level
• Glory Days

  

  many regular seasons games are also decided by a FG. should we eliminate FGs in the 4th quarter too?
• Eric Taylor

  http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvoEE2DOeB_sAkMJb.LkbQB9t7l_?slug=ap-nflovertime