Update: New NFL overtime rule…Both teams get ball in playoff games

[RamUK]

OT is a solution to a problem that doesn't even exist.

Just call it a tie (draw) for fucks sake.

If it's level at the end of the game then guess what? You didn't deserve to win because you didn't.

But similarly, you didn't deserve to lose, because you didn't.

Each team gets half a win, which coincidently, is exactly what they fucking deserved.

The only reason for over time is that there has always been over time, it's not based on an inherent need outside of the playoffs.

For the playoffs, scrap the give the win to the team with the best regular-season record.

In The Ryder Cup, to regain it you have to win it you cannot tie. But a tie means you do retain it.

If that is a bridge too far (which it will be for many), then just give the ball to the team with the better record and the first score of any type wins it.

For some teams, HFA offers little advantage anyway.

I'll just take cover now.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

OT is a solution to a problem that doesn't even exist.

Just call it a tie (draw) for fucks sake.

If it's level at the end of the game then guess what? You didn't deserve to win because you didn't.

But similarly, you didn't deserve to lose, because you didn't.

Each team gets half a win, which coincidently, is exactly what they fucking deserved.

The only reason for over time is that there has always been over time, it's not based on an inherent need outside of the playoffs.

For the playoffs, scrap the give the win to the team with the best regular-season record.

In The Ryder Cup, to regain it you have to win it you cannot tie. But a tie means you do retain it.

If that is a bridge too far (which it will be for many), then just give the ball to the team with the better record and the first score of any type wins it.

For some teams, HFA offers little advantage anyway.

I'll just take cover now.

Playing good football in the playoffs is part of the NFL formula. It’s a long season. The best teams are playing good football in January. Other teams in weak divisions usually wither. I wouldn’t want a part of the experience to be corrupted by going back to regular season records to determine anything. Teams don’t all play the same strength of schedule.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

The owners are going to work on OT changes in the coming weeks

NFL overtime rule change possible, but 24 votes 'not easy to get'

Several teams have proposed changes to the NFL's overtime rule. Three-fourths of the owners must vote in favor to change such a rule.

www.yardbarker.com

 

[RamUK]

Playing good football in the playoffs is part of the NFL formula. It’s a long season. The best teams are playing good football in January. Other teams in weak divisions usually wither. I wouldn’t want a part of the experience to be corrupted by going back to regular season records to determine anything. Teams don’t all play the same strength of schedule.

With something as radical as I'm proposing, people will almost always look for reasons why it won't work or why it shouldn't happen rather than weighing up the pros and cons rationally (not saying you're being irrational here btw).

The main point I'm making, is overtime serves no purpose when it comes to the integrity of the game, a tie is fine.

I can see how it has a purpose for the TVs networks because it makes things incredibly exciting (presuming they have the time to show it) and generates ad revenue.

I can also see how fans accustomed to it just being this way will hate it because it takes a shift in mindset in an even more radical way than having TV replays (that lots of people pushed back on at the time and now are just part of the game).

The regular season record was just one idea.

If you were playing OT, you could equally base the team to get the ball on most first downs or most TDs in that game. A coin toss should always be a last resort rather than the go-to way.

 

[dieterbrock]

With something as radical as I'm proposing, people will almost always look for reasons why it won't work or why it shouldn't happen rather than weighing up the pros and cons rationally (not saying you're being irrational here btw).

The main point I'm making, is overtime serves no purpose when it comes to the integrity of the game, a tie is fine.

I can see how it has a purpose for the TVs networks because it makes things incredibly exciting (presuming they have the time to show it) and generates ad revenue.

I can also see how fans accustomed to it just being this way will hate it because it takes a shift in mindset in an even more radical way than having TV replays (that lots of people pushed back on at the time and now are just part of the game).

The regular season record was just one idea.

If you were playing OT, you could equally base the team to get the ball on most first downs or most TDs in that game. A coin toss should always be a last resort rather than the go-to way.

I dont disagree with your take as it pertains to the regular season, but a playoff game needs to be settled. No sport that has overtime, extra time etc allows ties to occur.
I just dont understand what is so difficult about altering the current system to allow both teams a possession, regardless of the outcome of the first possession.
When the outcome of a coin flip favors a team 91% of the time, the system isnt working

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

With something as radical as I'm proposing, people will almost always look for reasons why it won't work or why it shouldn't happen rather than weighing up the pros and cons rationally (not saying you're being irrational here btw).

The main point I'm making, is overtime serves no purpose when it comes to the integrity of the game, a tie is fine.

I can see how it has a purpose for the TVs networks because it makes things incredibly exciting (presuming they have the time to show it) and generates ad revenue.

I can also see how fans accustomed to it just being this way will hate it because it takes a shift in mindset in an even more radical way than having TV replays (that lots of people pushed back on at the time and now are just part of the game).

The regular season record was just one idea.

If you were playing OT, you could equally base the team to get the ball on most first downs or most TDs in that game. A coin toss should always be a last resort rather than the go-to way.

There cannot be a tie in the playoffs. In the regular season it’s okay.

The real issue is wether or not both teams should get a fair chance to score in the overtime period, or not. Simply awarding the win based on record or most first downs is not a fair way of deciding a winner.

When it comes to a fair way of who gets the ball first then a coin flip is as good as any, as long as both teams get a chance to have the ball in overtime.

 

[majrleaged]

It's totally fair to blame the rules. We've seen over and over again how the NFL has gotten rules badly wrong-- what is a catch?-- and taken years to more or less straighten them out. The OT rules are another example imo.

Ok. So they both get the ball. We know the bills scored cause we all can predict that from what had been happening in the game. (Blue font.) Chiefs get the ball and then they score. What changed. Nothing except more exhaustion. Which increases the chances of injury.

that game is an outlier. You don't change the rules for outliers

 

[nighttrain]

There cannot be a tie in the playoffs. In the regular season it’s okay.

The real issue is wether or not both teams should get a fair chance to score in the overtime period, or not. Simply awarding the win based on record or most first downs is not a fair way of deciding a winner.

When it comes to a fair way of who gets the ball first then a coin flip is as good as any, as long as both teams get a chance to have the ball in overtime.

 

[majrleaged]

Both teams defenses were gassed. It shouldn't come down to a coin toss. I'd rather watch another entire quarter than a great game end on a totally crappy note. Neither team deserved it to end that way. The fans didn't deserve it either.

I really don't know why the NFL worries about keeping OT short. I freaking love football. I'll watch a full extra quarter if they'd let me. Its better than having a coin flip have so much weight in the outcome of the game. Maybe its not fair for those teams in the next round of the playoffs but that's where you can say they should have taken care of business in regulation the week before. Consider that either one of those teams could have won that game if the toss goes their way. Its too big of a factor.

I would love to watch more of a great game as well, but I do think fatigue is an important factor for injury and the next game. I Remember San Diego was a great team, but after the Miami over time. They couldn't hold up the next week to Cincinnati and the cold the following week.

As far as both teams touching the ball. You have to earn it. Keep them out of the end zone. If both teams score TDs. The Chiefs still get the ball an extra time. The Bills are still gassed. What does it change? It made sense to change the rules regarding winning the toss and then kick a field goal, but I think keeping the opponent out of the end zone is a reasonable requirement for 90% of the games.

 

[majrleaged]

Team that won coin toss has now won 91% of the games under current format.
It’s surely not a fact to say that Buffalo would have scored, but given the nature of how successful the teams have been winning the coin toss combined with how Buffalo had scored with ease, it is a logical assumption.
Why any team would be afforded such an obvious advantage due to the flip of a coin is puzzling to me.

You probably thought of this too. 91% of the teams didn't score a TD, so most over times see both teams touch the ball. Seems fair to me.

How else should they decide who gets the ball. It probably The most fair way to decide. 50/50 chance.

It's an over reaction to change the rules when it is such a small percentage of games where both offenses dominate so clearly.

 

[majrleaged]

Team that won coin toss has now won 91% of the games under current format.
It’s surely not a fact to say that Buffalo would have scored, but given the nature of how successful the teams have been winning the coin toss combined with how Buffalo had scored with ease, it is a logical assumption.
Why any team would be afforded such an obvious advantage due to the flip of a coin is puzzling to me.

Yikes. I have been responding to alerts and didn't read the entire thread. So I went back a couple of pages and read you stat that included the number of 1st possession TDs. Food for thought. I don't agree with changing the rules, but regarding the playoffs, it does cheapen my outlier point.

 

[dieterbrock]

You probably thought of this too. 91% of the teams didn't score a TD, so most over times see both teams touch the ball. Seems fair to me.

How else should they decide who gets the ball. It probably The most fair way to decide. 50/50 chance.

It's an over reaction to change the rules when it is such a small percentage of games where both offenses dominate so clearly.

91% of the teams that won coin toss, won the game. 59% scored touchdown on initial possession, so no, most times both teams dont get the ball. These are staggering statistics favoring the winner of a coin toss.
It's not an over reaction, it's actually quite the opposite. Rationally speaking, in a playoff game, what logic would allow a coin toss to be such a favorable process? Both offense and both defense get a shot. That seems fair to me.
Why would you be opposed to that?

 

[PARAM]

One of the talking heads floated an interesting angle. Winner of the coin toss gets to pick what yard line to start from while the loser gets to pick who gets the ball.

Winner says "the 15 yard line"; loser says "you take the ball"
Winner says "the 40 yard line"; loser says "we'll take the ball"

I suggest just make it a timed period.....10 minutes, 12 minutes, 15 minutes. Play it just like a regular game and whomever scores the most points wins.

 

[Classic Rams]

Old school OT rules.

Should've never touched it.

First score wins.

Stop 'em on D if you want your offense to see the ball.

So I'll go with the Eagles prop in this case.

 

[PARAM]

The problem with going back to "first score wins" is kickers are so much better now. If you get the ball at your 25, you need about 37 yards of offense to win the game. Get down to the opponents 38 and it's a 55 yarder. Back in 2001, the NFL average for FG success from 50 yards out was .521. The last 4 years:

2020 .631 (an 11% difference from 20 years ago)
2019 .579
2018 .638
2017 .695 (a 17% difference from 2001)


So if we average the averages, it's .635.7. Going back to "first score wins", winning the toss gives you better than a 63% chance of winning in OT with just a FG, which means losing the toss only gives you less than a 37% chance. More than a 26% difference for the coin flip? Way too high, particularly in the postseason. Best way to go is no FGs....first TD wins. Or keep it just the way it is.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I would love to watch more of a great game as well, but I do think fatigue is an important factor for injury and the next game. I Remember San Diego was a great team, but after the Miami over time. They couldn't hold up the next week to Cincinnati and the cold the following week.

As far as both teams touching the ball. You have to earn it. Keep them out of the end zone. If both teams score TDs. The Chiefs still get the ball an extra time. The Bills are still gassed. What does it change? It made sense to change the rules regarding winning the toss and then kick a field goal, but I think keeping the opponent out of the end zone is a reasonable requirement for 90% of the games.

It relies too much on luck. Both teams had stronger offenses than defenses. Both defenses were gassed. With all of the scoring late in the game that was very clear. So it stands to reason that whoever won the coin toss had a very clear advantage.

I’d rather see both teams forced to utilize all three phases of their team instead of one teams best versus another teams worst, especially considering that they had the same weakness.

 

[rdlkgliders]

Remove the helmets of the OL and DL for the first series,
On the second series hand them swords. To keep it from Getting silly you can't slash the quarterback above the waist

 

[RamUK]

There cannot be a tie in the playoffs. In the regular season it’s okay.

The real issue is wether or not both teams should get a fair chance to score in the overtime period, or not. Simply awarding the win based on record or most first downs is not a fair way of deciding a winner.

When it comes to a fair way of who gets the ball first then a coin flip is as good as any, as long as both teams get a chance to have the ball in overtime.

I realise there can't be a tie in the playoffs and when I suggested first downs I was referring to who got the ball first not deciding the game.

I know deciding the game on strength of schedule is tough, but the teal with the weaker schedule goes into the game knowing they have to win in the same way as the team looking to take back the Ryder Cup knows.

Ialso realise teams p[eak at different times, but it's another way of keeping teams playing their strongest team at the end of a season because HFA has been locked up.

No solution is perfect otherwise it would have been figured out. And trust me nothing is as bad as losing the European Championship Final on a penalty kick shootout after a 3 week tournament like England did last June.

I do agree that a flip of a coin shouldn't then heavily influence your odds of winning, so I'm in favor of both teams getting a possession.
.

 

[majrleaged]

91% of the teams that won coin toss, won the game. 59% scored touchdown on initial possession, so no, most times both teams dont get the ball. These are staggering statistics favoring the winner of a coin toss.
It's not an over reaction, it's actually quite the opposite. Rationally speaking, in a playoff game, what logic would allow a coin toss to be such a favorable process? Both offense and both defense get a shot. That seems fair to me.
Why would you be opposed to that?

Well, I do have concerns regarding fatigue and increased injury risk in regular season. My concern carries over to post season too. Just not as much. In the case of the KC and Buffalo game I view it as an outlier. It looks like three long drives to get where we got. A lot of extra time on the field.

But as I said, it is an outlier and I wouldn't have a problem if they changed only the playoffs. But I think it is unnecessary. I have no problem the way that game ended. Both teams had a whole game to win it. Bills missed there chance by letting KC score with only 13 seconds. That decided the game. Not the coin toss.

 

[majrleaged]

It relies too much on luck. Both teams had stronger offenses than defenses. Both defenses were gassed. With all of the scoring late in the game that was very clear. So it stands to reason that whoever won the coin toss had a very clear advantage.

I’d rather see both teams forced to utilize all three phases of their team instead of one teams best versus another teams worst, especially considering that they had the same weakness.

In this case, Bills letting them tie it with 13 seconds left. They lost it then.
Every one looks at the end and forgets that earlier plays might have had a bigger impact on the game. No luck involved.
I'm good with the rules as they stand