NFL Playoffs 2022

[WrigleyField 22]

How about this OT proposal from John Harbaugh?

 

 

why would a team ever NOT take the ball, regardless of where it is spotted. I can't think of any scenarios.

 

I could see it if the other team picks the 1 yard line. Even for an elite offense like the Chiefs it can be hard to get out of your own end zone and if they can't get a 1st, suddenly the other team gets great field position.

 

Also its not sudden death so it helps the team that gets the ball 2nd unless the other team goes on a 99 yard drive that eats up the entire 7:30

I thought the Ravens proposal was still sudden death?

 

Also a similar prisoners dilemma sudden death proposed here (along with the Ravens one)

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/three-best-ways-to-fix-nfl-overtime-after-chiefs-wild-playoff-win-over-bills-brings-ot-rules-under-scrutiny/

 

I don't love these kind of gimmicks, but better than a coin toss. Would still much prefer a "continuation" or "two halves" solution with no sudden death (unless it's a 2 score mercy rule).

 

Also my most controversial take is to end regular season ties at regulation.

[UMFan83]

Also my most controversial take is to end regular season ties at regulation.

 

I don't hate that and I think it would drive more teams to win in regulation. I can live with more ties in that scenario

[OleMissCub]

 

I could see it if the other team picks the 1 yard line. Even for an elite offense like the Chiefs it can be hard to get out of your own end zone and if they can't get a 1st, suddenly the other team gets great field position.

 

Also its not sudden death so it helps the team that gets the ball 2nd unless the other team goes on a 99 yard drive that eats up the entire 7:30

 

Ok I guess I’m just confused about this, so help me out.

 

Team A picks the 1 yard line. If Team B defers does Team A get the ball at that spot wherein they’d only have to go 1 yard to score? That’s how I read that proposal, thus my confusion about why a team would ever defer.

 

Team A wins the toss

Team B chooses the 1 yard line

Team A can choose whether to take the ball at their own 1 yard line OR have Team B start at their own 1.

 

Rest of the game proceeds as normal.

 

OK, thanks. I was definitely confused about that.

[CubinNY]

 

Ok I guess I’m just confused about this, so help me out.

 

Team A picks the 1 yard line. If Team B defers does Team A get the ball at that spot wherein they’d only have to go 1 yard to score? That’s how I read that proposal, thus my confusion about why a team would ever defer.

 

Team A wins the toss

Team B chooses the 1 yard line

Team A can choose whether to take the ball at their own 1 yard line OR have Team B start at their own 1.

 

Rest of the game proceeds as normal.

 

OK, thanks. I was definitely confused about that.

It's still a terrible idea.

[soccer10k]

Just guarantee each team a possession in OT and if it’s still tied, it’s sudden death after. The second team can decide how aggressive they want to be, whether that’s going for it on 4th down and bypassing a tying field goal or going for 2 to win if both teams get a TD.

[minnesotacubsfan]

10 mn OT, deal with the coinflip the way mentioned above (1st quarter who received receives, if it goes to 2OT the half time team who received receives, etc). 1 OT for reg season and after that ends in a tie, play until someone ends an OT on top in the postseason.

 

I really hate the gimmicks, the ("you win if you score a TD, but not a FG" kind of crap we have now, etc). Just play it out. Yesterday Mahomes and Allen might have thrown for 7 TD ea if you let them go at it.

[WrigleyField 22]

Another gimmick idea. But saw someone suggest a spin on the blind bid for field position: Instead of chosing the starting yard line, chose that starting distance.

 

So Reid would chose say 18. So it would be 1 and 18 and Bills can elect to start with ball or defer (from whatever fixed yard line, say own 25). True sudden death from there.

 

I normally hate OT gimmicks but anything is better than a coin toss and all these prisoner dilemma gimmicks at least will create hours of Monday morning QB second guessing :lol:

[squally1313]

Similar to college OT, both teams start at the 50, 2 minutes on the clock, each team gets one time out (for purely clock purposes) per OT period. Would be open to making FGs illegal after like, 2 OTs.

[jersey cubs fan]

better yet, keep it simple as is and if you don't want to "lose by coin flip" then finish the 4th quarter with the lead.

 

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

[WrigleyField 22]

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

Wow really?!? That's so crazy, could have sworn that was the rule.

 

Honestly though, there's no need to even have a coin toss. What purpose does it serve? Why not just continue play? It seems utterly pointless to reset play and then go Sudden death. Why?

[squally1313]

better yet, keep it simple as is and if you don't want to "lose by coin flip" then finish the 4th quarter with the lead.

 

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

 

Teams that win the coinflip in playoff OT are 10-1.

[Soul]

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

Wow really?!? That's so crazy, could have sworn that was the rule.

 

Honestly though, there's no need to even have a coin toss. What purpose does it serve? Why not just continue play? It seems utterly pointless to reset play and then go Sudden death. Why?

 

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that. Not a bad idea IMO.

[WrigleyField 22]

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

Wow really?!? That's so crazy, could have sworn that was the rule.

 

Honestly though, there's no need to even have a coin toss. What purpose does it serve? Why not just continue play? It seems utterly pointless to reset play and then go Sudden death. Why?

 

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that. Not a bad idea IMO.

I should add, continuation is really only ideal if you're willing to play a full timed period. If you want to do sudden death still, well anything is kind of junky. Sudden death is just a lot more fun in a more low scoring and free flowing possession game like hockey or soccer.

[Andy]

better yet, keep it simple as is and if you don't want to "lose by coin flip" then finish the 4th quarter with the lead.

 

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

 

Teams that win the coinflip in playoff OT are 10-1.

Again, regular-season results, with a much bigger sample size, are that the coin-flip winner wins exactly half the time.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

better yet, keep it simple as is and if you don't want to "lose by coin flip" then finish the 4th quarter with the lead.

 

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

[Soul]

better yet, keep it simple as is and if you don't want to "lose by coin flip" then finish the 4th quarter with the lead.

 

there's no rule that says you have to give up a touchdown on the opening drive

 

Teams that win the coinflip in playoff OT are 10-1.

Again, regular-season results, with a much bigger sample size, are that the coin-flip winner wins exactly half the time.

Still don't like it and would support a reasonable change. I like the idea of both teams having both units on the field at least once.

[raw]

 

Teams that win the coinflip in playoff OT are 10-1.

Again, regular-season results, with a much bigger sample size, are that the coin-flip winner wins exactly half the time.

Still don't like it and would support a reasonable change. I like the idea of both teams having both units on the field at least once.

 

I completely missed the word "least" and was intrigued by both offenses on the field at the same time.

[jersey cubs fan]

This is like all the people whining about the fairness of wild card play in games in MLB. Shut the horsefeathers up and win the game you whiners.

[Soul]

Again, regular-season results, with a much bigger sample size, are that the coin-flip winner wins exactly half the time.

Still don't like it and would support a reasonable change. I like the idea of both teams having both units on the field at least once.

 

I completely missed the word "least" and was intrigued by both offenses on the field at the same time.

 

I'm all about increased chaos so let's work this out. Teams each start at the 1 and whichever gets to the 50 first wins.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

This is like all the people whining about the fairness of wild card play in games in MLB. Shut the horsefeathers up and win the game you whiners.

If this was a Bills board maybe you'd have a point. The rule objectively sucks and should be changed. "Win instead of deal with overtime" is some infintile playground argument non-sense.

[WrigleyField 22]

If suddent death is an absolute given (or the current variation of sudden death) :

 

My final compromise request would be to just follow the lead from XFL and do away with the coin toss altogether. Beginning of game included.

 

Home team chooses to receive or defer, and the KO swaps at halftime and at each OT period. As home team in the playoffs, you've earned the right to go for a strategic edge. You can play for the opportunity to get the extra second half possession by deferring, which is what most teams do today, or play for OT.

 

The benefit to deferring is to attempt to gain the possession edge in the 2nd half. But if you do that you'll give up the ball in OT.

 

Or take the ball first and guarantee that in an OT scenario you'll get first ball.

 

The 17 game record replaces 50/50 luck and there is still some strategic choice involved. We kill a silly ritual of a coin toss altogether. I imagine most home teams chose ball first, but who knows.

 

I also wouldn't mind a 2pt conversion requirement to end it on the first drive.

[jersey cubs fan]

This is like all the people whining about the fairness of wild card play in games in MLB. Shut the horsefeathers up and win the game you whiners.

If this was a Bills board maybe you'd have a point. The rule objectively sucks and should be changed. "Win instead of deal with overtime" is some infintile playground argument non-sense.

It's like one of those, but completely not.

[raw]

This is like all the people whining about the fairness of wild card play in games in MLB. Shut the horsefeathers up and win the game you whiners.

If this was a Bills board maybe you'd have a point. The rule objectively sucks and should be changed. "Win instead of deal with overtime" is some infintile playground argument non-sense.

 

I mean, the Bills legit had no business even being in overtime though, so this situation it makes sense somewhat. But in a game that's truly back and forth where it doesn't involve 1 team completely collapsing to get the game to OT, then "just win the game" doesn't mean as much.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Why don't we just say whomever wins the coin toss in OT wins the game? Maximum lameness, maximum random. SHOuldA WoN iT In REGulaTiOn, AmIRITe?!

[squally1313]

This is like all the people whining about the fairness of wild card play in games in MLB. Shut the horsefeathers up and win the game you whiners.

 

And here I thought I was being reasonable by wanting more of what's probably the best football game I've ever seen. Should we do a coin flip before the wild card game to see who gets to be the home field? Or draw cards to see which pitcher from the rotation gets to start? Maybe just decide it's half an inning, flip a coin to see who's pitching and who's hitting, and go from there? If you want to win just do it bro.