NFL Offseason

[Guest]

I think the fear is that 8 quarter game between two bad offenses, which turns into a 3 or 4 week hangover.

 

Same theory on why hockey reg season games don't just play on.

 

Hockey and soccer have other mitigating reasons not to play on(scoring increments of 1, fewer total scoring plays, constant movement that causes a greatly diminished game at length, etc.). And if people are truly terrified about injury or player fatigue, then make the OT periods like 7 minutes. You have no problem with teams playing 75 minutes under the current setup, and the odds of anyone playing a game longer than 81 minutes in that instance would be very, very slim.

 

The real point is that in a possession based game like football and basketball, placing importance on who scores first is crazy. Especially in a 16 game season where 1-2 games can make an enormous difference.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

An 8 minute OT would be quite compelling. The shortened time would promote some sudden death tendencies, especially if a team scored after a 5-6 minute drive...and would then create a lot of 2 minute drills to end the game which to me is very exciting.

[jersey cubs fan]

The real point is that in a possession based game like football and basketball, placing importance on who scores first is crazy. Especially in a 16 game season where 1-2 games can make an enormous difference.

 

 

Comparing football and basketball is asinine and there is nothing crazy about sudden death in football.

[Guest]

You also completely missed the entire point and glossed over the problems with how a football game would be played under NBA rules. The rules don't "easily allow" for a game to go 5 quarters. It's actually kind of hard to do.

 

How? Right now you kick off and play until someone scores or 15 minutes, whichever comes first. How could there possibly be obstacles if you just said "forget about the 'until someone scores' part, and make it 7-8 minutes"? What am I missing? You can debate about how possession is handled from OT1 to OT2, but that's obviously done all the time with halftime and traditional overtime.

[Banedon]

jersey and I definitely disagree on the sudden death idea. (which is nothing new, it's been a long running debate) I hate it. It's a main reason why I am behind the OT elimination idea.

[Guest]

The real point is that in a possession based game like football and basketball, placing importance on who scores first is crazy. Especially in a 16 game season where 1-2 games can make an enormous difference.

 

 

Comparing football and basketball is asinine and there is nothing crazy about sudden death in football.

 

Yes, there's a lot wrong with having a coin flip dramatically alter the odds of winning a game in a 16 game season, especially when it's quite easy to avoid that problem.

[CubColtPacer]

An 8 minute OT would be quite compelling. The shortened time would promote some sudden death tendencies, especially if a team scored after a 5-6 minute drive...and would then create a lot of 2 minute drills to end the game which to me is very exciting.

 

This is what I would love. Lots of strategy potential and a high likelihood of a drive to end the game to try to tie/win. If the players don't want to play more than 1 OT in the regular season, I'm perfectly fine with that. That would probably still leave less than 10 ties a year. That's still a lot less anticlimactic than sudden death is, which has some exciting finishes but is usually pretty boring.

 

If the holding/contact rule were implemented, I could easily see teams choosing to rush nobody on every 3rd and long and effectively making it impossible to throw. Running offenses would become much more valuable as well, which would both increase injuries once again and also lead to the subjectivity he's hoping to avoid (the main one being whether the player holding is still in the tackle box or not). I can't see that rule ending well.

[Banedon]

How do you determine who gets the ball first in this 8 min overtime? Coin flip? I really don't see how that fundamentally solves one of the main issues that NFL overtime presents.

[Guest]

How do you determine who gets the ball first in this 8 min overtime? Coin flip? I really don't see how that fundamentally solves one of the main issues that NFL overtime presents.

 

The team getting the ball first might have the upper hand in a shortened overtime period, but imagine it would be far less than the 10% advantage that they get in sudden death.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

How do you determine who gets the ball first in this 8 min overtime? Coin flip? I really don't see how that fundamentally solves one of the main issues that NFL overtime presents.

 

I'd still use coin flip in an 8 minute overtime. And yes, the odds still are in favor of the team winning the toss, but I think a little less. First of all, unless that team holds the ball for the entire 8 minutes , the other team is going to get a chance to score. Most drives are a little shorter than 8 minutes...especially if each team were giving 2 timeouts which they could use to stop the clock.

 

There's not going to be a perfect system. I think an 8 minute OT would be great. It wouldn't greatly lengthen games, it keeps the intensity level up and urgency to make a stop on the defense or score on the offense.

[Banedon]

Two 7:30 overtimes and then a "kick-off" from the 50 yard line, most FG's made wins, a la soccer and hockey.

 

 

 

:stickman:

[UMFan83]

How about an 8 minute OT, no FGs or XPs allowed, teams must go for 2 after every TD?

 

OK I put no thought into that at all, no need to rip it apart with "logic"

[Soul]

I'm not thrilled with FGs but some of these teams........they can't score TDs.

[rocket]

 

dude's gonna kill himself by the end of the year.

[Pushfrog98]

I vote that OT be dealt with the old fashioned way. Best 2 out of 3 Tug-of-War. Offense plays the opposing teams Defense. Special Teams go at it in tie-breaker 3rd match.

[PosterToBeNamedLater]

I don't really get why people were that upset with sudden death either. I know someone mentioned that the coin flip can greatly alter the odds of winning, but if I remember correctly, the team that wins the coin flip only wins 50-something percent of the time.

 

I know they would never change it to this because they want the teams rushing to score at the end, but I always just felt that if the game is tied after the 4th quarter, they should just continue on from wherever they left off like it was a change from the 1st to 2nd quarter and finish in a sudden death style. The team that has the ball continues from the down and distance they left off at. Having the lead after 60 minutes is already completely arbritrary. Who cares if the winner is the team that takes the lead at 60+ minutes? Seems more fair than the coin flip, considering the team that just scored could get it right back.

[Banedon]

I don't really get why people were that upset with sudden death either. I know someone mentioned that the coin flip can greatly alter the odds of winning, but if I remember correctly, the team that wins the coin flip only wins 50-something percent of the time.

 

I know they would never change it to this because they want the teams rushing to score at the end, but I always just felt that if the game is tied after the 4th quarter, they should just continue on from wherever they left off like it was a change from the 1st to 2nd quarter and finish in a sudden death style. The team that has the ball continues from the down and distance they left off at. Having the lead after 60 minutes is already completely arbritrary. Who cares if the winner is the team that takes the lead at 60+ minutes? Seems more fair than the coin flip, considering the team that just scored could get it right back.

 

The current OT rules are a hell of a lot better than that suggestion, and I kinda hate the current OT rules.

[Derwood]

Simple OT solution: no punting allowed

[PosterToBeNamedLater]

Simple OT solution: no punting allowed

That would probably make the coin flip even more important. I would think it would be better to kickoff first in that scenario.

[PosterToBeNamedLater]

I don't really get why people were that upset with sudden death either. I know someone mentioned that the coin flip can greatly alter the odds of winning, but if I remember correctly, the team that wins the coin flip only wins 50-something percent of the time.

 

I know they would never change it to this because they want the teams rushing to score at the end, but I always just felt that if the game is tied after the 4th quarter, they should just continue on from wherever they left off like it was a change from the 1st to 2nd quarter and finish in a sudden death style. The team that has the ball continues from the down and distance they left off at. Having the lead after 60 minutes is already completely arbritrary. Who cares if the winner is the team that takes the lead at 60+ minutes? Seems more fair than the coin flip, considering the team that just scored could get it right back.

 

The current OT rules are a hell of a lot better than that suggestion, and I kinda hate the current OT rules.

Do you hate it because it takes away a team trying to rush down the field at the end? I can see that. I guess it is just whether you want the excitement of someone trying rush to score at the end or being more fair. I didn't mind the old OT rules, but just thought this would be more fair. A tie game in sudden death is already exciting. I wouldn't really care either way--and honestly wouldn't totally mind ending the games in a tie.

[Derwood]

Simple OT solution: no punting allowed

That would probably make the coin flip even more important. I would think it would be better to kickoff first in that scenario.

 

Ok, then....college rules

[Andy]

Simple OT solution: no punting allowed

That would probably make the coin flip even more important. I would think it would be better to kickoff first in that scenario.

 

Ok, then....college rules

I don't like college rules. I'd rather see college OT start from the 50 if they're going to do it that way.

[Soul]

I don't really like ANY of these rules. I don't think there's a great solution available.

 

 

BTW, I don't like hockey's solution either. I think some sports will just not have great OT rules. It can't be solved to everyone's satisfaction.

[Banedon]

I don't really get why people were that upset with sudden death either. I know someone mentioned that the coin flip can greatly alter the odds of winning, but if I remember correctly, the team that wins the coin flip only wins 50-something percent of the time.

 

I know they would never change it to this because they want the teams rushing to score at the end, but I always just felt that if the game is tied after the 4th quarter, they should just continue on from wherever they left off like it was a change from the 1st to 2nd quarter and finish in a sudden death style. The team that has the ball continues from the down and distance they left off at. Having the lead after 60 minutes is already completely arbritrary. Who cares if the winner is the team that takes the lead at 60+ minutes? Seems more fair than the coin flip, considering the team that just scored could get it right back.

 

The current OT rules are a hell of a lot better than that suggestion, and I kinda hate the current OT rules.

Do you hate it because it takes away a team trying to rush down the field at the end? I can see that. I guess it is just whether you want the excitement of someone trying rush to score at the end or being more fair. I didn't mind the old OT rules, but just thought this would be more fair. A tie game in sudden death is already exciting. I wouldn't really care either way--and honestly wouldn't totally mind ending the games in a tie.

 

I hate it because football doesn't work as a "short game". Yes, occasionally there's a quick drive, big pass, etc. But generally it's a grind it out, get 3-4 yards, try to sprinkle in the occasional big play game, and I dont' think that fits well into a confined space. I think OT ends up giving a win to one team and a loss to another, for a game in which both proved equal over the course of 60 minutes of play. I'd rather give them a tie and move along. Obviously that's not an option in the playoffs, and something has to be done there.

 

I wonder how ties instead of OT would have affected this past season? If I get some time later in my Friday, I'll see if I can figure that out.