How to change OT (in the NFL)

[BigJohn&TheLions]

I have always hated how a great NFL game can go to OT and then a 55-yd FG ends it all. Very anti-climatic. My solution? After a team scores, give the other team one posession to win. Not like college, but kick off and then one posession. No FG or extra point. If the first score is a FG you have to go for it on every 4th down and put it in the endzone. If the 1st score is a TD then you need a TD and 2-pt conversion. Evey game would end on an exciting, tension filled play.

[yabanci]

They should do away with overtime all together.

[korme]

They should have each coach wrestle for an unlimited period, no holds barred, first blood decides the game.

[wbatl1]

Originally posted by Shorty3281
They should have each coach wrestle for an unlimited period, no holds barred, first blood decides the game.

Not giving the falcs much chance are you. Dan Reeves would be down in two seconds.

[Coffee Warlord]

Nah, I like how the ZFL deals with ties.

Bring on the Kickers!

[Pumpy Tudors]

I support overtime exactly the way it is. Fans are constantly clamoring for "more excitement" out of their games, but I'll take ANY overtime game over a honker like Cleveland's recent win over Arizone (44-6!). The point of overtime isn't to pump up the fans. The only reason for overtime is to produce a winner. The current format does that just fine.

[revrew]

Originally posted by Coffee Warlord
Nah, I like how the ZFL deals with ties.

Bring on the Kickers!

I heart CW.

Y'know, if the NFL did overtimes like the ZFL, Bo Jackson could have still had a career.

[mckerney]

I always thought the 'give the other team a posession!' idea was dumb. If you're going to keep playing, play a whole damn 15 minute period.

[VPI97]

Originally posted by mckerney
If you're going to keep playing, play a whole damn 15 minute period. Bingo

[tucker342]

Okay, each team gets one posession. If the first team scores, and the second team doesn't, team 1 wins. If the 1st team gets a field goal, and the 2nd team gets a touchdown, the 2nd team wins. And if it's still tied after they each get a posession, then they go into sudden death.

[mckerney]

If each team needs a posession, why is it so hard to play a full period instead of some lame half-assed sudden death?

[Honolulu Blue]

Originally posted by mckerney
If each team needs a posession, why is it so hard to play a full period instead of some lame half-assed sudden death?

In a word, television. We're a lot more likely to get a one-possession rule or a college made-for-TV event than adding an extra 45 minutes to a game's running time. Gotta get to the next game or "60 Minutes" as soon as possible.

[Pumpy Tudors]

How about just leaving it the way it is?

*beating dead horse into ground*

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Pumpy Tudors
How about just leaving it the way it is?

*beating dead horse into ground*

That's what would work best for me.

[BigJohn&TheLions]

Originally posted by tucker342
Okay, each team gets one posession. If the first team scores, and the second team doesn't, team 1 wins. If the 1st team gets a field goal, and the 2nd team gets a touchdown, the 2nd team wins. And if it's still tied after they each get a posession, then they go into sudden death. <p>The problem here is that you're creating the exact same problem that sudden death creates: ending the game on a FG. Eliminating kicks on the "extra" posession would end the game with a winner on either time running out, 4th down play, TD, or 2 pt conversion.

[MJ4H]

Man I might actually watch the NFL if they did OT like college.

[BigJohn&TheLions]

Originally posted by MattJones4Heisman
Man I might actually watch the NFL if they did OT like college. <p>Like college??? You like a 10-10 defensive battle that ends up 56-53 setting all kinds of bogus records???

[sabotai]

That's why I don't like college OT. Artificially inflates stats and scores (and correct if I'm wrong, and I may very well be, but doesn't score effect the computer rankings?)

My thoughts on OT. Play f'n special teams and defense if you don't want the opponent scoring on their first drive. If you can't stop a 30 yard kick return to say the 40 yardline and then can't stop the offense from driving another 30 yards to set up a 47 yard FG...you don't win. Very simple.

[oykib]

Why not say that you have to score four points to win in overtime. That is unless the period runs out.

That would mean a touchdown (the other tem really can't complain if they give one up on the first possession) or two scores.

[Easy Mac]

Originally posted by BigJohn&TheLions
<p>Like college??? You like a 10-10 defensive battle that ends up 56-53 setting all kinds of bogus records???

I think he just wants OT that way so Matt Jones will get picked up by an NFL team... he is the God of college OT.

[ISiddiqui]

In a word, television. We're a lot more likely to get a one-possession rule or a college made-for-TV event than adding an extra 45 minutes to a game's running time. Gotta get to the next game or "60 Minutes" as soon as possible.

Bingo. TV would rather have each team gets a posession rather than a full period.

[dawgfan]

Originally posted by sabotai
That's why I don't like college OT. Artificially inflates stats and scores (and correct if I'm wrong, and I may very well be, but doesn't score effect the computer rankings?)

My thoughts on OT. Play f'n special teams and defense if you don't want the opponent scoring on their first drive. If you can't stop a 30 yard kick return to say the 40 yardline and then can't stop the offense from driving another 30 yards to set up a 47 yard FG...you don't win. Very simple.

Ding ding ding - we have a winner.

Why do so many people only consider offense when proposing 'solutions' to OT? If you want your team to have a possession in OT and you don't win the coin toss, play some f'ing defense and get the ball!

[EagleFan]

For the each team gets the ball once crowd. What do you do if team B returns an interception for a touchdown. Trot out their offense to give the other team's defense a chance to do the same? If your whole arguement is about 'what's fair', isn;t that the only 'fair' thing to do.

Leave it like it is. If anything, maybe move the kickoff up to the 35 or 40, but maybe leave the kick out of bounds penalty to go to the 40 or you'll have teams kicking out of bounds so they won't have to kick off to some of the better return men (since the spot would only be the 30 if they were to kick from the 40, which might be more favorable than a possible return to the 40 or worse).


Either that, or each team carries one midget on their team for just such an occasion and we have midget mud wrestling to decide the winner.

[Honolulu Blue]

Originally posted by EagleFan
For the each team gets the ball once crowd. What do you do if team B returns an interception for a touchdown. Trot out their offense to give the other team's defense a chance to do the same? If your whole arguement is about 'what's fair', isn;t that the only 'fair' thing to do.

This is just one person's opinion, but I'd end the game right there. Team A had the ball and failed. Team B had the ball (briefly) and succeeded. Therefore, Team B should win.

The toughest situation would be onside kicks. There is a lot of changes of possession by design in that case. Do we credit the receiving team with a possession if they don't get the ball? Food for thought.

[albionmoonlight]

Kickers have gotten better in recent times. The one slight change that I would make to overtime is, instead of having it begin with a kickoff, I would have it begin with a free kick punt from the 40 yardline. That way, special teams are still a factor, but the kicking team is more likely to pin the receiving team back in its territory to start the OT.

[Racer]

Originally posted by oykib
Why not say that you have to score four points to win in overtime. That is unless the period runs out.

That would mean a touchdown (the other team really can't complain if they give one up on the first possession) or two scores.

Exactly.

[Butter]

You guys have some wacky ideas.

How about making the winning team score exactly 2 points? Safety or nothing! You think you've seen blitzing before... just wait!

[KevinNU7]

The team that loses the coin toss in OT shouldn't bitch about not getting a possession because they had a chance to win in regulation. If you can't take care of business in regulation then don't come crying because you didn't get the rock in OT

[BigJohn&TheLions]

[i]If you want your team to have a possession in OT and you don't win the coin toss, play some f'ing defense and get the ball! [/B] <p>THe only problem in this logic is that in OT the defense is already at a disadvantage. The defense wears down faster than the offense. This is well known. How many times have you seen a defense play excellent and then fall apart in OT? And I'm not talking about when they go into "prevent" mode...

[Sun Tzu]

I think an original idea would be to set the ball down at the 50 yard line, and have each one member of each team make a dash at the ball from 15 yards away. Whichever player is first to maintain posession of the ball, that team will be victorious.

[CraigSca]

I don't have the data in front of me, but doesn't the team that wins the toss for OT win roughly 50% of the time? Doesn't that imply then, that there's not really a problem?

Mind you, the fact that placekickers have dramatically increased their accuracy in the past 10-20 years *could* increase the possibility of a "one possession and done" scenario. However, I'm so sick of bastardizing a sport just so we can have a nice and tidy outcome.

College Football's OT is a joke, and soccer's shootout is even more laughable.

Whatever they do, I hope they don't change the sport.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally posted by Sun Tzu
I think an original idea would be to set the ball down at the 50 yard line, and have each one member of each team make a dash at the ball from 15 yards away. Whichever player is first to maintain posession of the ball, that team will be victorious.

Well, it's not COMPLETELY original, as this is similar to what the XFL did in lieu of an opening kickoff. I will say, though, that I support leaving overtime as it is, if Sun Tzu's method were used to determine first possession of OT, I would definitely support that.

[John Galt]

The easiest and best solution to OT is just to move the kickoff line back to where it was. That system created a 50% win rate for decades in the NFL between the team kicking and receiving. Only when they moved the kickoff back 5 yards did this problem start.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally posted by John Galt
The easiest and best solution to OT is just to move the kickoff line back to where it was. That system created a 50% win rate for decades in the NFL between the team kicking and receiving. Only when they moved the kickoff back 5 yards did this problem start.

If you do that, you might as well just eliminate the kickoff altogether and place the ball at the coin toss winner's 20. Move the kickoff back to the 35, practically automatic touchback.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Pumpy Tudors
If you do that, you might as well just eliminate the kickoff altogether and place the ball at the coin toss winner's 20. Move the kickoff back to the 35, practically automatic touchback.

There managed to be many KO returns in the era of the kickoff from the 35. Especially now that most teams don't have roster space to carry an extra kicker for KO's, I think you will see a good number of returns, just like you used to. At least, it will provide an equal chance in OT without completely corrupting the game with bizarre rules like in college.

[sabotai]

Not really Pumpy. It's only an extra 5 yards, and I've seen a lot of kickoffs fielded from the 10-15 yardline. It would only push that back to make it fielded from the 5-10 yardline.

[Phoenix]

college should do a sudden death like the pros - the weak soccer-like shoot out stuff is lame

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by CraigSca
I don't have the data in front of me, but doesn't the team that wins the toss for OT win roughly 50% of the time? Doesn't that imply then, that there's not really a problem?

Mind you, the fact that placekickers have dramatically increased their accuracy in the past 10-20 years *could* increase the possibility of a "one possession and done" scenario. However, I'm so sick of bastardizing a sport just so we can have a nice and tidy outcome.

College Football's OT is a joke, and soccer's shootout is even more laughable.

Whatever they do, I hope they don't change the sport.

Excellent post, I agree with everything said. College football OT is a joke and cheapens the game. Also, sabotai is right, play ST and defense and then you would get the chance to win on your own.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Wasn't the kickoff pushed back to the 30 because of the number of touchbacks? I'm not speaking of anybody here, but so many people complained that there weren't enough kickoffs being run back, so they moved the spot. Now the kickoffs are being brought back too far? Damn it, do people want a kickoff return or not? You know, I still like the idea of leaving everything as-is, but I now like the face-off idea (ball at the 50, have one guy from each team charge it) more than anything. People want fair? That's as fair as it gets.

[SlapBone]

How about a shootout? Line up all the defense on the yardline of your choice and start sending runningbacks and linebackers at it.

Make it like red-rover...