Thoughts on the Overtime Rule?
by Sniff on Mar 17, 2010 11:36 PM EDT
20 comments
Just read an article about the proposed playoff Overtime proposed changes. I would like to get the thoughts from the Panther Nation on what they think of the current OT rules and proposals for changes.
I really hate to see a hard fought contest come down to a coin flip to decide the outcome of a game. The winner of the coin toss wins 59.8% of the time. A good kickoff return and a couple of first downs and you kick a field goal to win the game.
I personally feel that the NFL should adopt the exact same overtime rules implemented for college football with the following exception. Each team gets the ball on the 35 yard line, instead of the 25. Dont really like a realistic field goal opportunity if you dont gain a single yard on your turn in OT. Each time the game is tied after each team has the ball, they back up 5 yards for the next possession. After 3 possessions, each team must go for a two point conversion.
Your thoughts?
The content of these posts are those of the person/idiot making the post only
0 recs |
20 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
And besides....
Thought we all could use a break from, “Now just who should we take with our 2nd round pick?”
Sorry bout that...
Guess I should have linked to the proposal. Basically this..
If winner of toss kicks field goal, other team gets possession. If winner scores TD, game over. If both teams kick field goal on their possession, current OT rules apply for next period, first to score wins.
I still dont like the rule.
What part don't you like?
It’s an improvement from the current rule but don’t agree that a TD wins the game with the loser of the coin toss not getting at least one opportunity. Why only FG but not TD?
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
Because a TD require your defense to show up.
That’s why some people liked the old system, it meant you had to pay your defense to actually show up. This system compromises, it makes it harder for a team that wins the toss to keep the other team’s offense off the field, while at the same time making your defense have to keep them out of the endzone.
Jake Delhomme, QB Carolina Panthers, 2003-2009.
120 TDs+16000+ passing yards=Good
89 INT's+27 lost fumbles=Bad
Most comeback wins since 2003=Priceless
by Flowing Willow on Mar 20, 2010 8:17 AM EDT up reply actions
I like what they are proposing
The main problem I have is teams going a few yards and kicking a field goal. The rule would give more incentive to go for it all and I think in the end the better team will end up winning whether they win the flip or not.
That's a good point...
If a team has a good FG kicker that might be incentive to just kick the FG but you’re right, the temptation to just go for the TD and win it might make the choice interesting.
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
I like parts of your idea...
I don’t really like the “use the college OT rules” idea, but I do like part of your proposal. If the NFL were to adopt this OT policy I do like making the teams start at the 35, and part of me likes your idea to make teams back up 5 yards for every OT possession – that makes it more difficult, but at the same time, it could make the game take too long if teams have to keep backing up and suddenly have to drive 80 yards down the field to score.
My proposal is to just play an extra 12 minute period. If the game is still tied in the playoffs, then play a 10 minute period. Then, an 8 minute period. If the game is still tied after 3 OT periods, then sudden death rules apply.
All I know is: something has to be changed. The current format is no good for fans because nobody likes seeing a team win a coin toss, make one first down, and kick a field goal to ruin an otherwise great football game.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
I like what they are proposing
Assuming you have a decent return, most teams get the ball around the 25-30 yard line. Average field goal range is around the 30-35 yard line of the other team. That means at most, you only have to drive 45 yards to get a shot to win. It’s unfair to ask the defense to hold them to that. This evens it out a bit, your defense still has to prevent a TD, but if it gives up 45 yards for a field goal, it’s not the end of the game.
Jake Delhomme, QB Carolina Panthers, 2003-2009.
120 TDs+16000+ passing yards=Good
89 INT's+27 lost fumbles=Bad
Most comeback wins since 2003=Priceless
Not sure what they're proposing..
But I’d like to see a touchdown be the final nail in the coffin. No field goals, in OT it’s all or nothing.
Assuming we can’t just get rid of FG’s in OT, I’d say if a team makes a FG, the other team gets the ball to either A) fail to score and lose the game, B) match the FG and give the ball back, or C) score a touchdown and win.
Basically, first TD wins but it’d be possible to win by FG with a great defense.
My thought on the matter
I don’t like what we have now, and I don’t like what they’re proposing,
Right now OT puts way too much power in winning the coin toss. It’s stupid that a game like the Superbowl can end up hinging on heads or tails.
This is what I would do: 15 minute overtime… plain and simple. Both teams play the equivalent of one extra quarter. During the regular season if the game remains tied after this time period, then the game ends in a draw. During the playoffs they adopt the same OT system we have now and implement it after the 15 minute period.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
I also blog the Panthers at www.realbitsofpanthers.com
by James The Aussie on Mar 18, 2010 7:15 AM EDT reply actions
At least they have opened the topic for discussion.
For years the NFL has argued that there is nothing wrong with the current system. I think that we can all agree that this is not true! The only thing about the college system that is good is that both teams get an opportunity on offense. The current NFL proposal is the best that I have heard to date. Both teams will get an opportunity on offense which is all you can ask for. It doesn’t favor lady luck or any particular aspect of the game (e.g.-special teams, offense, or defense). And it takes the game to sudden death if they are still tied after their initial offensive possession which will address the length of game issue. I have heard many ideas that are way to “tricked up” and would deviate greatly from the regulation time rules. I don’t want to have to play a game of rock, paper, scissors, call my lawyer, and break out an abacus to figure out what happens next in OT. Keep in mind that the networks that are broadcasting the games will not be able to continue to air the game if it goes on and on and on.
You're right - it's good that the league realizes there is a problem
That’s a start, and hopefully they will come up with something, anything, to make the system better.
As long as the Panthers don't trade for Michael Vick or draft Tim Tebow, my sanity (what's left of it, at least) will remain intact for 2010.
If the networks are too worried about time to air a game going to OT then have them either choose to air the overtime, or relinquish the remaining broadcast to the NFL network.
There has to be a better solution and I see an extra quarter as the best method.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
I also blog the Panthers at www.realbitsofpanthers.com
by James The Aussie on Mar 18, 2010 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I"m thinking it's different
Keep in mind that the networks that are broadcasting the games will not be able to continue to air the game if it goes on and on and on.
I believe the network can finish airing the original game they started broadcasting through the finish. Only if they change games or switch games after their first game is finished are the on a time limit.
My Take
1. I love the college football format, the only problem is, stats would get incredibly inflated in the NFL. Quarterbacks in OT games might routinely start throwing 6 TDs a game and records would be broken really quickly. Maybe start them at the 50 instead of the 25 (college). I hate the current overtime system in the NFL but not quite as much as I hate the proposal…
by SouthernPanther on Mar 18, 2010 10:00 AM EDT reply actions
Stats
The same could have and probably was said when the league only had 14 games and wanted to increase it. And now as there is talk of the season expanding to 17 or 18 regular season games.
Do we discount Farve’s or Manning’s records just because they play more seasons? No.
Should have said
Do we discount Farve’s or Manning’s records just because they play more seasons? No.
more games per season.
Stats (part 2)
Plus these stats would be strictly tied to overtime games. The stats for regulation time would still stand, as in most TD thrown in regulation vs most TD thrown in regulation + overtime.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
