OT: OT (as in "overtime"... specifically "NFL overtime")
My apologies if this has been discussed on these boards before or if it is all over espn (I wouldn't know because I canceled my cable). But I wanted to vent about the stupidity of the NFL sudden death overtime.
The NFC championship was basically decided tonight by a coin flip. Maybe some would argue that the Vikings defense had their chance in OT to stop them, blah, blah.... If two teams are evenly matched enough that regulation ends in a tie, I do not believe that one team driving 40 yards and kicking a field goal, without the other team getting a chance, shows the superiority of the winning team. In fact, in a high scoring game both teams would average more than 3 points per possession, and thus a 3 point OT drive for the win would actually be unsuccessful drive according to that game's standards.
Anyway, I know that luck always plays a part in every game, but in this instance the NFL could change its rules to eliminate how big a part luck plays. The OT coin flip gives one team a huge, unearned advantage. The NFL needs to do it like college. That is the fairest way. So, congrats Saints. Way to pick heads or tails.
[Edit: I loved the "each team must get at least one possession" idea discussed in the comments. Actually, I think I like it even more than the college overtime system.]
January 25th, 2010 at 4:29 AM ^
It was Steve Hutchinson who called the wrong side of the coin in OT.
That's the part that makes me mad.
January 25th, 2010 at 7:36 AM ^
but eliminate field goals in OT. College should conform to that system as well. NFL system is a coin-flip-field goal, college system exploits the weaknesses of some teams to much while playing directly into the hands of another, and the 6-7-8 overtime games become ridiculous. Sudden death-first touchdown wins. (But keep in mind, most often there are only 3-5 NFL games on TV per week excluding the NFL ticket, so the field goal to win it becomes valuable for the TV schedule)
January 25th, 2010 at 7:43 AM ^
I don't think that's feasible. You want games to be resolved in fairly short order, not just for TV but to keep the players' safety in mind. Asking teams to score a TD, when they've got to go the length of the field, could take a long time. How much more can you physically demand of players when they've already gone a full game?
I think the college system is pretty close to ideal. The only change I'd make is that I'd require teams to go for two in either the first or second OT session, instead of waiting for the third.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:46 AM ^
I also thought about this, but it seems unreasonable to change the rules of the game for OT. I agree, playing to get into FG range and kicking one is easier, but it's not a gimme. What killed me was the two calls in OT that went against the Vikes. The PI call was BS (IMO he didn't touch him) and the pass that got them into FG range hit the ground. I think that this is the bigger problem with the NFL system, missed calls can decide a game and the team without the ball always gets the short end.
I think that the NFL should just add a 5th quarter as OT. No sudden death. Alternatively, they should make a team win by some amount (like 2 fgs or a TD), so that you can't just kick one FG and win the game (but could score a TD, which is a legit way to win in OT IMO).
January 25th, 2010 at 8:01 AM ^
They should do a FG kick off...5 fgs from the 30 yard line. Jk...I thought that a lot of those reviews were in favor of the Saints...it looked like on the 4th down play that the ball came loose and the running back lost possession just for a split second...that would have pushed the spot back...and also that catch that set up the FG looked to have touched the ground, maintaining possession is a different story. The vikings had all the chances in the world to win that gm. Favres dumb INT when he could have ran for 5 yards to set up the FG and the defense had plenty of chances to stop them in OT.
January 25th, 2010 at 8:09 AM ^
tails never fails. I actually cringed when I heard Hutchinson call heads.
I did find it interesting that every review in OT went the way of the home team. I thought they missed a hold on the play they called the PI penalty which was questionable as to if the ball was catchable or not. IMHO the catch by Meachum definitely hit the ground and it looked like the ball moved as he didn't have firm control with both hands.
I also thought on the play where Favre hurt his ankle it was obvious that the Saints defender dove at his legs which is a penalty, but was not called.
January 25th, 2010 at 8:43 AM ^
the OT system in the NFL or in the NCAA, but I don't think there will be a change anytime soon. Injury concerns and time constraints do limit the NFL system, but both the NCAA and NFL systems could be better IMO. The NFL system could use a "must win by 4 points" system, but again, this could make a game last forever. The NFL could also institute a rule that the coin toss winner must take the ball at the 20 yard line, which would require the receiving team to drive about 45 yards, which I think still gives the defense a chance to make a stop.
The one change I'd make to the NCAA system would be to have each team start from the 35 yard line (rather than the 25), which would set up a 52 yard field goal after a 3 and out instead of a 42 yard field goal. Each of the changes that I've proposed would make it more difficult to score which I think is a current problem.
January 25th, 2010 at 11:49 AM ^
I like the "must win by 4" idea, but you're right that a game could last forever.
Why not go to a system where the first team to 8 points wins?
A game could still end in a single possession, but at least it would be an exciting possession, rather than ending in a field goal as 85 percent of NFL overtimes do. It would also create more strategy.
It still has the problem of possibly lasting forever, but that's on the players. Maybe keep the 15-minute time limit for regular season overtimes and add that the team leading after 15 is the winner, whether they have scored 8 or not.
January 25th, 2010 at 11:08 PM ^
I'd have them start even further back, like midfield or their own 40. It just requires a little bit more nuance and strategy that way.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:00 AM ^
Actually, the statistics are closer than you'd think; but, I still agree, the mere fact that you can lose without touching the ball in OT is a little unsettling.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:09 AM ^
Opponents of the current NFL system will never have a better example for their argument than yesterday. In a game of that magnitude it is tough to justify not giving the team that lost the toss at least one possession. I don't know why the NFL won't consider the college system - perhaps it would be admitting someone else had a better idea? To me it is entertaining, virtually guarantees scoring, and resolves the game without a lot of grinding and punting back and forth. One huge problem with the NFL overtime in regular season games is you can have a full extra quarter, with the risk of injury it brings, and still walk away with a tie. That part makes no sense.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:16 AM ^
The only thing that would change in the system they have now is that the team that wins the toss would have to kick to the other team at least once.
Suppose toss winner kicks a field go...At present it's game over. If they have to kickoff after that, they will have incentive to go for TD rather than FG.
On a tie at end of 1st OT then use present sudden-death system with toss winner having advantage.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:23 AM ^
Sudden Death, but only after both teams have had at least one possession? This would put some pressure on the first team to score a TD, and reduce the advantage of first possession. In this case, Minn would have gotten the chance to go down and score to tie the game, and play would have continued in sudden death fashion until a winner was determined.
January 25th, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^
The same idea as Steve in PA's above. While no system is perfect, including college overtime, this is the best idea that I've heard. The rule would come into play only if the team that received the kickoff scores a TD or field goal on their first possession, and the rule would require the scoring team to kickoff once to the other team. Even if the team receiving that kickoff fumbles and doesn't actually get their offense on the field, game over. At least they had their chance. Besides that one instance of an initial scoring drive, the overtime remains sudden death just like it is.
I think this is the fairest thing that I've heard that tests all the same team skills as in regulation time. From now on, I'm a proponent of this idea (not that it will actually be instituted...).
January 25th, 2010 at 9:38 AM ^
If Favre doesn't make that completely idiotic throw with under a minute to go, we aren't talking about this.
January 25th, 2010 at 10:19 AM ^
unless that crazy pass was completed (with under 10 seconds to play), you were looking at a field goal of over 50 yards. Minnesota lost the opportunity to win the game at the buzzer, but the attempt was in no event a gimmie. Most likely, the FG is missed and the game still would have gone to OT and we would still be having this argument.
Completely unsatisfying way for a game to end. Only way the NFL will ever change is when the Super Bowl ends in OT without one team ever touching the ball..
January 25th, 2010 at 10:42 AM ^
There's always talk about the NFL system vs the college system and I think both have their flaws, however I think both are appropriate for the levels they are used for.
The only reason they have Overtime periods in sports is to eliminate the nefarious Tie game. It's not necessarily about being equal as it is just trying to eliminate a team from winning (making sure a team loses). Both systems do that. Whether it is completely fair or not might not be the point.
Maybe one suggestion for fixing the system is doing something like what Soccer does and have 1-2 periods of overtime play, and even if one side scores, continue the overtime period until it is completed.
That way if one side scores, the other side still has the opportunity to score. If they don't score the other team can get the ball back and put more points up or run out the clock.
There might be more potential for injury, but at least both sides would get the ball and it wouldn't go into 5 OT's like a college game would.
January 25th, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^
would like to see them change, so each team gets at least one possesion, but that will not happen anytime soon so we should just learn to like it the way it is
January 25th, 2010 at 11:51 AM ^
Pretty simple, why not just play an extra ten minute quarter?
January 25th, 2010 at 11:54 AM ^
Forget overtime; they should play a game of 500 to break the tie. One of the refs throws the ball and each team gets three receivers.
Lock the thread.
January 25th, 2010 at 11:55 AM ^
This is a good place to mention again how much I hate booth-initiated replays, like they use in college football and apparently in NFL overtime. I absolutely hate it. If I have a strong interest in one of the teams then of course I don't want them to get screwed, but as a fan that just wants to watch some exciting football, I detest the "let's spent five minutes checking each little thing" mindset. One overtime drive, three lengthy pauses to review a decision, all three upheld. Just wasted a lot of time and sucked all the drama out. Final drives of football games are getting to be as bad as the last two minutes of a basketball game.
January 25th, 2010 at 1:07 PM ^
The problem with doing the college OT system in the NFL is that the kickers are too damn good. Anything under 50 yards is pretty easy for most guys. It would just end up being a FG kick-off. Still better than what they have now though.
I like the idea of a 10-minute quarter, there's still an advantage for the team that wins the toss but not as much. The system as it is right now has to go. I hate Favre and the Vikings as much as the next guy but it's just so unfair that the game is essentially decided by a coin flip (unless Marty Morningweg is your coach!) Hopefully this game is a catalyst for changing the rule.
January 25th, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^
How about a two minute drill for each team? You get the ball at your own 20 or 30 and you've got two minutes to put it in the endzone. Turnover, you lose your possession. Tie after the two minute drill? run it again. seems like it mitigates part of the injury factor, fairs the game out and only distorts the integrity of the game a little...(unlike Hockey's shootout...)
January 25th, 2010 at 4:54 PM ^
First team to score 6 points wins.
What most people are mad about is the fact that with a reasonable return on the kickoff it isn't hard to make 3-4 first downs and kick a field goal. Game over.
As professionals, I don't think that they each need a possession, and I'm not sure that that is the main issue. I think people are just upset that 35 yards and a field goal can determine an entire game in overtime.
A game can never be completely fair. Even with college's system, the team that goes on offense second has an advantage. Having the winner score 6 points gives a defense a reasonable opportunity to come up with a stop, but also makes field goals important. Field goals should be important in overtime as they are important in close games in regulation.
I could go on for a long time about this, but I really think that the first to 6 points would be a great system.