Changing OT in playoffs

[CanadaSteve]

58 minutes ago, THE BARON said:

They should make OT a shortened time period.  10 minutes.  No sudden death.  With the rules that the league has now, it totally favors the offense,  Too much comes down to the coin toss.  It pays no mind to the body of work that was done by both teams for four entire quarters.  

I like that idea too.  If you take the entire 10 minutes to score, so be it.  But very seldom would that happen.  Each team would get a chance to score, and probably as quickly as possible.  Unless of course you try and milk the clock.  LOTS of strategy could come into play.  

In actuality, that might be the best decision.  And if after 10 minutes it is still tied, you could go to 5 minutes.  Even better: PENALTY KICKS!  Make it all come down to the kickers!

[playtowinthegame]

19 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

Thanks for that well thought out post.  Here's a GIF with you in mind:

WhaT a CoMeBacK. Still not as good as the Chiefs with 13 seconds left.

[Scott Dierking]

1 hour ago, More Cowbell said:

Ok, wait a minute, do you expect during the 10 minute rest period for the networks not to run commercials?I mean this is really goimg to a bizarre tangent now but after a 10 minute break, the break is over and you start the game. 

Good God. 10 minutes in the locker room. 3 minutes for the networks and 2 minutes for the flip pontification. 

[playtowinthegame]

Bills D sucked a big D, so let's change the rules to OT again? That's ridiculous. Defense matters. F this Josh Allen needed the ball again. Overtime is absolutely fine when the League tweaked it in 2010 after the Vikings/Saints NFC Championship game that didn't allow Brett Favre to touch the ball again in OT.

[NamathToSauer]

'Don't want to hear any whining from the Bills. game should have never gone to OT. If you can't stop a team from going 45 yards is 13 seconds you deserve to lose. They also made a mistake giving them a TB. Should have tried to kick it short to the 5 or 10. make them fair catch it deep or take time of the clock on a return.Rules are fine. Make a stop

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

After thinking about this and going back and forth in my head, leave the rules as they are. Make a stop and go score. Stop whining. 

[LockeJET]

I didn’t read the entire thread but what I would do is keep the rules exactly the same except if the first team comes down and scores a touchdown then the other team can still score a touchdown to tie or go for two for the win. if they do tie it with a TD, then just have the next score wins after that. 

[CSNY]

6 hours ago, Irish Jet said:

It's ridiculously unfair. Games should not be decided by a coin toss.

Play a full extra quarter with sudden death implemented if there's no winner after that. Let the team's control who had possession entering that phase by going straight into sudden death from the previous play. 

The game is not decided on a coin flip. The game is decided on the teams ability to score and teams ability to not allow a score. Coin flip only decides who gets the ball first. Play defense and get off the field no need to change rules 

[Jets1958]

22 minutes ago, LockeJET said:

I didn’t read the entire thread but what I would do is keep the rules exactly the same except if the first team comes down and scores a touchdown then the other team can still score a touchdown to tie or go for two for the win. if they do tie it with a TD, then just have the next score wins after that. 

yep - that solution is about the fairest way to fix the issue. I think it shroud be the rule for the regular season as well.

[JohnnyD]

Seems to me that the College OT is the fairest. Since it looks like the NFL wants do away with kickoffs as much as possible anyway - Just give each team's offense the ball at a specific yard line (I would choose each teams own 25 yard line) and go until one team has more points than the other after any even number of total possessions.

This scenario IMHO is the most reasonable methodology if the goal is to limit any controversy. It also has the added benefit of perhaps less overall plays than a full overtime period.

You could limit this to playoff games and still allow regular season ties at the end of regulation. This might actually force more strategy decisions at the end of regular season games.

Sent from my SM-G975U using JetNation.com mobile app

[TheNuuFaaolaExperience]

Once I saw that the team who wins the coin flip goes on to win the game just barely above 50% of the time, I no longer care enough to change the rule. It's not unreasonable to expect a playoff defense to hold the offense to a field goal. Make the stop on the first possession or drive down field and score a TD. Football and life are unfair. 

[56mehl56]

2 hours ago, playtowinthegame said:

Bills D sucked a big D, so let's change the rules to OT again? That's ridiculous. Defense matters. F this Josh Allen needed the ball again. Overtime is absolutely fine when the League tweaked it in 2010 after the Vikings/Saints NFC Championship game that didn't allow Brett Favre to touch the ball again in OT.

Again this has nothing to do with who deserved to win. Either side can argue it was their team who deserved it more.

The problem is the OT rule is flawed , allowing a random outcome to dictate a potential winner. 

[More Cowbell]

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Good God. 10 minutes in the locker room. 3 minutes for the networks and 2 minutes for the flip pontification. 

Whatever. You are making no sense. Let's have a 10 minute locker room break and then come out and stand on the sidelines for 3 minutes while the network runs comercials that could have been run while we were in the locker room., then have a coin flip and kickoff. Sounds perfectly normal. 

[CSNY]

21 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

Again this has nothing to do with who deserved to win. Either side can argue it was their team who deserved it more.

The problem is the OT rule is flawed , allowing a random outcome to dictate a potential winner. 

I disagree as the outcome is not decided on a random event. As I said in the above post it is decided on teams offense ability to score and the other teams defense to stop them from scoring.Coin toss determines who gets ball first and that is all. It’s up to the team on defense to prevent them from scoring and provide  the ball to their offense so they can score. 

[Peace Frog]

Play defense. 

[CSNY]

23 minutes ago, Peace Frog said:

Play defense. 

AMEN!!!!!

[56mehl56]

22 minutes ago, CSNY said:

I disagree as the outcome is not decided on a random event. As I said in the above post it is decided on teams offense ability to score and the other teams defense to stop them from scoring.Coin toss determines who gets ball first and that is all. It’s up to the team on defense to prevent them from scoring and provide  the ball to their offense so they can score. 

So then why kickoff after scoring a TD during regulation time , let the scoring team keep the ball since the Defense needs to stop them. So if you have a dominant offense you can hold the ball for all 60 minutes. Basically this is what you are saying with overtime , its up to the D to stop them.    

[bostonmajet]

I think they should make a change to the rules, just not the OT rules. They should adjust the passing rules to make it less difficult for a defense to play against a strong offense - or not call the tick-tacky stuff; or call of the offensive PI more often.

Either way, some of this can be blamed on the coaching staffs. With no time left in the game, why is Bowles blitzing? Why even use 4 man rush - let the QB sit back there as time was running out and had to throw quickly. Play cover 3 and keep everything in front of them.

For the Bills, why not squib kick it? It would take up some time. Instead they get the ball on the 25.

Either way, overtime wouldn't have been needed. What if we give each team a drive and then they both score TDs and then the first team (which wins a coin flip) would win with a FG. The teams have 60 minutes to win the game, if you give up a big drive at the end of the game with just tens of seconds without TOs, you deserve to loose, IMO.

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

8 hours ago, Larz said:

This is exactly the game that 
could get it changed 

Why this game?  If any games should have led to the change it was the Pats beating KC in the AFC title game a few years ago and the Pats beating the Falcons in the SB.  The Bills deserved to lose. If you can't protect a 3 point lead for 13 seconds, you don't deserve the ball in OT.

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

5 hours ago, FootballLove said:

Both teams had a full 60 mins to make plays and AVOID OT.

How about sudden death OT like in hockey but with FGs? Any FG format you want. Say home team goes first, has 5 trys for a 50yrd FG. Away team goes next. Kicker with the most 50 yarders wins the game. Still tied? Move to 55 yarders. Bet we see kickers getting drafted before the 5th round!

You must be a soccer fan. You just described the football version of Penalty kicks.  

[56mehl56]

1 minute ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Why this game?  If any games should have led to the change it was the Pats beating KC in the AFC title game a few years ago and the Pats beating the Falcons in the SB.  The Bills deserved to lose. If you can't protect a 3 point lead for 13 seconds, you don't deserve the ball in OT.

So by that same logic say the Bills punt to the Chiefs with 13 seconds left in the 1st half and the Chiefs drive down to score a tying FG , should the Chiefs get the ball back to start the 2nd half because if you can't protect a lead with 13 seconds you don't deserve the ball. What's the threshold - anything under a minute , two minutes . As I said earlier by this logic why kick at all , the team scoring, retains possession until the opposing D can stop them - that's the absurdity of what you guys are saying . 

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

1 hour ago, 56mehl56 said:

Again this has nothing to do with who deserved to win. Either side can argue it was their team who deserved it more.

The problem is the OT rule is flawed , allowing a random outcome to dictate a potential winner. 

Sports are random.  You are cherry picking one OT game and saying change the rules just because Buffalo was able to score as easily as KC?  What would the narrative have been if a Kelce or Hill fumbled in OT and the Bills ran it back for a TD and won?  Or what if the punter shanks a punt and sets up a team for a short field to kick a FG and win?  I can come up with a bunch of ways OT games are won or lost.  I think less than 25% of OT games are decided on that first drive.  NFL football OT rules are fine.  It is still football.  Either of those teams could have won in regulation with any kind of defense.  Was KC even covering Davis?   Those were not pinpoint passes. He was wide open - twice - in the last 2 minutes.  

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

The most popular sport in the world - soccer - has the most inane, ridiculous way to decide its games - penalty kicks.  Would you want football decided by a skills competition?  The college rule is too gimmicky.  There is an advantage to losing the coin toss. If you get a stop, a FG wins. Is that fair?  Why not make it first team to 6 in OT wins? 

An NFL team that gives up a 75 yard drive after 60 minutes of play deserves to lose.  

[Scott Dierking]

50 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

Whatever. You are making no sense. Let's have a 10 minute locker room break and then come out and stand on the sidelines for 3 minutes while the network runs comercials that could have been run while we were in the locker room., then have a coin flip and kickoff. Sounds perfectly normal. 

1. coinflip. 

2. Teams then proceed to locker room for 10 minutes.

3. While teams are going to the locker room. 1:30 (3) commercials for network.

4. Teams in locker room or 10 minutes.

5. Networks do their slapdick commentary during those 8 minutes.

6. Teams leave lockerroom. 1 minute commercials.

Total time is around 15 minutes. This in't that hare and you can slice and dice it many ways.

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

8 minutes ago, 56mehl56 said:

So by that same logic say the Bills punt to the Chiefs with 13 seconds left in the 1st half and the Chiefs drive down to score a tying FG , should the Chiefs get the ball back to start the 2nd half because if you can't protect a lead with 13 seconds you don't deserve the ball. What's the threshold - anything under a minute , two minutes . As I said earlier by this logic why kick at all , the team scoring, retains possession until the opposing D can stop them - that's the absurdity of what you guys are saying . 

Because the rules set who kicks off in each half.  And after the opening coin toss, the teams know who is getting the ball to start the game and the second half.  The stats indicate that there is no great advantage to winning the OT coin toss. 53% of teams that win the OT coin toss win the game.  BFD.

[Klecko73isGod]

10 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

First off....Game for the ages!  Probably one of the best football games played in the longest time I can remember.

That said.  This overtime rule in the playoffs.  I can understand (kind of) why they have it the way they do for regular season.  But when it comes to the playoffs, should both teams not get at least one possession?  I mean, it literally comes down to a coin toss.  Would have made that game even more exciting if Buffalo gets a chance to go down and score as well.

 

No. They shouldn't have different rules designed to create phony drama.

Last time I checked Buffalo was allowed to play their defense in overtime last night.

They had a chance. They didn't get the job done.

[TJ]

When NE won the toss in AFC championship game and Mahomes never saw the field, Chiefs suggested to change OT rules in League meeting.  Buffalo voted against it.  Bills can kiss my ass.

[Orangejet88]

10 Minute OT.  If a TD is scored on the 1st drive, other teams gets a shot, but must go for 2 if they score a TD.

[CanadaSteve]

4 hours ago, playtowinthegame said:

WhaT a CoMeBacK. Still not as good as the Chiefs with 13 seconds left.

Just out of curiosity.....are you trying to be dick rather than have a conversation about the topic?  

[CanadaSteve]

2 hours ago, JohnnyD said:

Seems to me that the College OT is the fairest. Since it looks like the NFL wants do away with kickoffs as much as possible anyway - Just give each team's offense the ball at a specific yard line (I would choose each teams own 25 yard line) and go until one team has more points than the other after any even number of total possessions.

This scenario IMHO is the most reasonable methodology if the goal is to limit any controversy. It also has the added benefit of perhaps less overall plays than a full overtime period.

You could limit this to playoff games and still allow regular season ties at the end of regulation. This might actually force more strategy decisions at the end of regular season games.

Sent from my SM-G975U using JetNation.com mobile app


 

Another great suggestion.

Each team gets three possessions.  Total points wins.

LOTS to think about:

1) Do we always go for TD's or kick field goals?

2) Do you always go on 4th down to try and score, or do you have to punt if you are deep in your zone? 

I think that could be a great way to solve the issues. 

[CanadaSteve]

4 hours ago, LockeJET said:

I didn’t read the entire thread but what I would do is keep the rules exactly the same except if the first team comes down and scores a touchdown then the other team can still score a touchdown to tie or go for two for the win. if they do tie it with a TD, then just have the next score wins after that. 

Another possible solution.  I think the key is each team should get an offensive series. 

[CanadaSteve]

47 minutes ago, Klecko73isGod said:

No. They shouldn't have different rules designed to create phony drama.

Last time I checked Buffalo was allowed to play their defense in overtime last night.

They had a chance. They didn't get the job done.

There was only one series Klecko.  It isn't about the Bills defense screwing up, its about how the offense doesn't get a chance to respond.  

Again...baseball analogy.  Only one team gets to bat in extra innings. 

[CSNY]

1 hour ago, 56mehl56 said:

So then why kickoff after scoring a TD during regulation time , let the scoring team keep the ball since the Defense needs to stop them. So if you have a dominant offense you can hold the ball for all 60 minutes. Basically this is what you are saying with overtime , its up to the D to stop them.    

How did you get there. Because when you score a TD or FG on offense you have achieved an end point and desired result of your turn with the ball and the defense was unable to stop you. Now after goal has been achieved and you’re rewarded with points you relinquish ball and it’s your turn to stop them if you can. You stop them you get the ball back 
 

[MysticalJet2]

I say just make the OT a 10 min qtr. and let it go to the end regardless of who scores first, etc.

[Klecko73isGod]

22 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

There was only one series Klecko.  It isn't about the Bills defense screwing up, its about how the offense doesn't get a chance to respond.  

Again...baseball analogy.  Only one team gets to bat in extra innings. 

Oh for goodness sakes. It's not like they changed the rule for this game.

Everyone knows the deal going in - hold them to a field goal and your offense gets a chance. 

Stop acting like it was unfair because it wasn't.