Jump to content

So long, sudden death: Playoffs offer new overtime approach


BP

Recommended Posts

Atlanta Falcons coach Mike Smith is glad his top-seeded NFC team got a first-round playoff bye -- and not for the usual reasons of players getting healthy, getting more time to game plan, etc.

The added few days allow Smith, and every other team with a bye, to prepare for new overtime rules that were implemented this offseason but not put into effect until the playoffs. The eight teams involved in this weekend's wild-card games have to cram in order to be ready for the chance they get to overtime.

"This can influence decision making, especially how you play the last couple minutes of a ball game, in terms of playing for the tie or win in regulation," Smith said. "There are a lot of situations that you have to coach differently in overtime."

Beginning Saturday, sudden-death as we know it, is history -- until next regular season.

Unlike regular-season overtime rules that have been in place for years, both teams could have the chance to score in overtime, even if the first team with the ball kicks a field goal. Normally, the team to score first, regardless of how, wins. Not necessarily in the postseason.

If a field goal is made by the team in the first possession in overtime, the other team gains possession. If that team scores a touchdown, game over. If it kicks a field goal to tie, then the next team to score wins. The only way the game ends on the first possession is if that team scores a touchdown or if the defense forces a safety or returns a turnover for a score.

The changes didn't sit well with coaches, especially since the first time they could encounter them could be with a Super Bowl berth on the line. Teams now have to add another layer of preparation to their practices, in the film room and on the field because of the variety of uncharted scenarios that could present themselves.

The possibilities have had coaches trying to sort out every circumstance possible -- and there are plenty. For example ...

The kicking game

» If a kickoff is booted deep into the end zone, a player could be coached to take the touchback rather than try and bring it out and risk a fumble or a penalty that could give them awful field position and result in a punt close to or from the end zone. Both could give the opposition ideal field position.

» If the team has to punt on its first possession, does the return team double team the gunners? By having additional bodies blocking near where the ball could land, it could increase the risk of the ball touching a player on the return team. If that were to happen, the punting team would regain possession in good field position and possibly win with a field goal since the turnover is considered a possession.

Look for teams to stack the box with eight or nine defenders to force max protection and reduce traffic coming off the edges near the return man, a league source said.

On defense

» Players could be coached that if they intercept the ball in the end zone on the first possession to take the touchback. Should they return it and fumble in the process, it could give the opposing team possession in field goal range. The fumble of an interception would mean that each team has had a possession and now a field goal wins the game.

On offense

» Teams who get the ball first could be more aggressive trying to score touchdowns (one of the reasons the rule change was applied) so the other team won't get the ball back.

» If you trail by a field goal and are getting the ball with a chance to tie or win, every possession is a four-down possession, so play-calling on both sides of the ball could be different.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story/09000d5d81d72298/article/so-long-sudden-death-playoffs-offer-new-approach-to-ot

Mark Humphrey / Associated Press

The Saints' victory in the NFC Championship last season was just one of three playoff games that ended with a field goal on the opening possession of overtime. The winners of two of those games went on to claim the Super Bowl title.

OT playoff games won with FG on first possession:

2009 NFC Championship

Saints 31, Vikings 28

2002 AFC Divisional playoff

Titans 34, Steelers 31

2001 AFC Divisional playoff

Patriots 16, Raiders 13

link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

god i hate this lets make NFL like college thinking. its such bs. youre freaking professionals if youre defense cant stop the other team you dont deserve to win.

I actually like the new adjustment. As it stands the NFL overtime rules and College overtime rules are still really different. To me it just increases the incentive to go for the touchdown instead of coasting to a FG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like the new adjustment. As it stands the NFL overtime rules and College overtime rules are still really different. To me it just increases the incentive to go for the touchdown instead of coasting to a FG.

You really are the voice of reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like the new adjustment. As it stands the NFL overtime rules and College overtime rules are still really different. To me it just increases the incentive to go for the touchdown instead of coasting to a FG.

I like the new rule too. Just the timing is awful. You dont implement this right now. Teams are preparing for a playoff game, and now they have to take time to discuss the new rules and their strategy if OT was to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leave it to the NFL to botch this . All they had to do was make the teams play out a 5th Quarter. The second team to get the ball (assuming the first team gets a Field goal) in this system basicly has 4 downs every series no matter where they are on the field which can have an impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the new rule too. Just the timing is awful. You dont implement this right now. Teams are preparing for a playoff game, and now they have to take time to discuss the new rules and their strategy if OT was to happen.

I was thinking about that and I guess the reason why it's being done this way is to prevent more ties in the regular season from happening. Other than that, I don't understand why you'd implement a new system during the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about that and I guess the reason why it's being done this way is to prevent more ties in the regular season from happening. Other than that, I don't understand why you'd implement a new system during the playoffs.

JVOR I thought this system was for the Playoffs only ?

"Beginning Saturday, sudden-death as we know it, is history -- until next regular season".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leave it to the NFL to botch this . All they had to do was make the teams play out a 5th Quarter. The second team to get the ball (assuming the first team gets a Field goal) in this system basicly has 4 downs every series no matter where they are on the field which can have an impact.

Which makes it more important to score touchdowns in overtime... The new system doesn't eliminate field goals as a viable solution, it just makes it plan B for teams instead of Plan A, which is what is the case now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which makes it more important to score touchdowns in overtime... The new system doesn't eliminate field goals as a viable solution, it just makes it plan B for teams instead of Plan A, which is what is the case now.

I see what your saying but if your in field goal range on 4th and long you kick it everytime I see no reason why they just cant let them play out the quarter which also brings in the element of clock management and using time outs in a smart way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like the new adjustment. As it stands the NFL overtime rules and College overtime rules are still really different. To me it just increases the incentive to go for the touchdown instead of coasting to a FG.

I agree. A decent KOR, a couple first downs and a FG seems like a cheap way to win a game. I like that the first team to get the ball has to go for the TD. I hope this becomes the rule going forward. It does really change the way a team might approach the OT period, too. Do you defer and risk losing on the TD, preferring the chance for last licks? Do you kick a FG on 4th & short, or do you go for it and potentially lose by a FG?

It adds intrigue, and the NFL offices like sort of thing. I'm sure the coaches hate it, just like they hate the two-point conversion option. It's just one more way to get second-guessed on Mondays.

Leave it to the NFL to botch this . All they had to do was make the teams play out a 5th Quarter. The second team to get the ball (assuming the first team gets a Field goal) in this system basicly has 4 downs every series no matter where they are on the field which can have an impact.

The players don't want to play a full additional quarter, and would fight that rule change tooth and nail. The players probably don't like this rule, either, as it's likely to keep them out on the field longer, but it's a fair compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. A decent KOR, a couple first downs and a FG seems like a cheap way to win a game. I like that the first team to get the ball has to go for the TD. I hope this becomes the rule going forward. It does really change the way a team might approach the OT period, too. Do you defer and risk losing on the TD, preferring the chance for last licks? Do you kick a FG on 4th & short, or do you go for it and potentially lose by a FG?

It adds intrigue, and the NFL offices like sort of thing. I'm sure the coaches hate it, just like they hate the two-point conversion option. It's just one more way to get second-guessed on Mondays.

The players don't want to play a full additional quarter, and would fight that rule change tooth and nail. The players probably don't like this rule, either, as it's likely to keep them out on the field longer, but it's a fair compromise.

Slats Im talking playoffs only here. I say leave it as is for the reg season sudden death. Im not sure players would complain about a 5th quarter in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. A decent KOR, a couple first downs and a FG seems like a cheap way to win a game. I like that the first team to get the ball has to go for the TD. I hope this becomes the rule going forward. It does really change the way a team might approach the OT period, too. Do you defer and risk losing on the TD, preferring the chance for last licks? Do you kick a FG on 4th & short, or do you go for it and potentially lose by a FG?

I don't see much of an advantage to deferring. It's still advantageous to have the ball first. If the receiving team punts or turns the ball over it becomes sudden death for the rest of the game. The only slight reason you might do it is for field position, but even then that's way too hard to predict. I'd rather have the shot at the touchdown.

The 4th and short argument is interesting. The coach really is going to have to make a tough decision in that case based on field position. Conservative coaches will probably never do it, but here's food for thought. If you are the team with the ball first (say the Jets). 4th and 2 and looking at a 50 yard field goal. do you punt, kick the FG, or go for the conversion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is kind of nonsensical. Am I the only one who notices that most of the issues discussed in this article would be just as much, if not more, of a problem under the old rules? A turnover in scoring range was just as likely to cost you the game before, considering with sudden death any score ended it. While I agree there will need to be certain strategic differences (namely, going all out for the TD on the opening drive of OT and possibly being less apt to settle for a tie late in regulation), none of what this article outlines really applies.

About the only difference for defensive strategies is stopping a drive for a FG is still a relative success on the first drive of OT, and on offense the difference would be trying to score a TD on the opening drive of OT and if the first drive is a FG, the other team's offense then being in 4-down territory. Granted there's strategic differences that will come into play with coaches, and I'm not a particular fan of this change, but the differences are not in the way this article is making it seem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They made this rule because some dumb people whined last year. Now the same dumb people will whine about the new rules. The lesson is to ignore the dumb whiners, but the NFL is too stupid to figure that out.

Mean while, this year 89% of the overtime games were won after the first possession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive been giving this some thought and its hard not to come up with something to discredit any idea but ..... I think taking the coin flip out of the equasion would be the answer. A few reasons why I say this but heres how it would work.

Rather than flipping a coin and stopping the game, Just extend the game into a real sudden death situation. If the game is tied at the end of the 4th Quarter just treat it as if you were going from the 1st to the second quarter with no interruption. The reason I say this is because if a team goes on a 90 yard drive to tie a game at the end of regulation the other teams defense has to be exausted so why should a coin flip decide who should get the ball next ? If the team on the defensive end of that 90 yard drive loses the flip they are in a sh*t load of trouble due to a coin flip. I think it would be better if they just extend the game and let it play out. Of course there can be some issues with this system as well, but that factor would be known going in. The only issue I see with this system is that if the game is already tied the team with the ball would not have to play to the clock which would ruin that end of game excitement. The only Issue I have with OT is the coin flip. Maybe if the game is still tied at the end of regulation the team with the ball loses their current drive position and has to recieve a Kick off >

I still feel the only true way to play an OT is to just play out a 10 minute quarter this way there are no excuses either way. There really is no way to argue a full quarter of play when it comes to possible advantages or disadvantages and you only have to do this in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...