OT rules . NFL vs. NCAA

Submitted by Michigan House '75 on January 19th, 2015 at 8:07 PM

Very seldom do I watch professional football and rarely until the end . I did watch the Seahawk/Green Bay game and, having not watched the coin toss and explanation of the rules, I was stunned at the end of the game when Seattle scored and won without Green Bay getting a chance at the ball. What is the thinking behind this? I heard this discussed on The Huge Show and was glad that others have been concerned by this type of overtime for some time. It seems too heavy on luck, especially with a coin toss. Wouldn't playing a quarter more realistically show who has the edge skill wise, not perfect but an improvement, or is the NCAA approach with each team getting the ball on the 20 better? I realize I'm a novice and could research this, but I'd really like to hear from Mgoblog members on this. Moderators - please pull if this is not, for any reason, thread worthy. Still learning.

MGoBoard

Football

JamieH

January 19th, 2015 at 9:11 PM ^

And just play "extra time" with no running clock until whichever team the head ref has money on is ahead, at which point he calls the game over.

Joined: 09/05/2009

MGoPoints: 28331

Baughlieve

January 19th, 2015 at 10:22 PM ^

Before penalty shootouts, they actually used a coin-toss to decide the winner.

The most important coin-toss in the history of football came in the semi-finals of the 1968 European Championships. Having drawn 0-0 with the Soviet Union, Italy progressed to the final after winning a coin-toss.

Joined: 11/22/2014

MGoPoints: 5753

The Barwis Effect

January 19th, 2015 at 9:23 PM ^

My main beef with college OT is that they don't differentiate between the stats a player accumulates during regulation vs stats accumulated during OT. It's two entirely different games and should be treated as such.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 10175

Mannix

January 19th, 2015 at 9:24 PM ^

Stats are 50/50 on scoring TD after winning coin flip.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 01/15/2009

MGoPoints: 12263

d_ill

January 19th, 2015 at 9:33 PM ^

Also, at least it's better than the "first to score wins" way it was a few years ago. The best I rememeber was a Jim mora saints team in ot vs atl (99% sure it was atl) kicked to them to start ot...and lost Another team did this as well...can't remember who

Joined: 02/09/2009

MGoPoints: 478

ESNY

January 19th, 2015 at 9:40 PM ^

I think another quarter is the best option (no sudden death). Gets rid of the inherent unfairness that it is now where a team may never get possession. Can even shorten quarters to 8 or 10 min to ease the burden.

In the playoffs, if you are still scoreless after one extra quarter then I'm fine with sudden death or alternative possessions starting at your own 35. If you don't score, The other team either takes over at the spot of the ball if you go for it on 4th down or you punt and then team gets the ball at the better of the 35 or the spot after the return (but it's live balls, so you can fumble a punt). That way you add some strategy instead of just letting a team get four tries to get a first down with no risk.

Joined: 11/06/2008

MGoPoints: 12310

blueball97

January 19th, 2015 at 9:42 PM ^

I think the NFL and college should adopt a morphed version of the current college OT. Both teams get a shot, but the ball starts at mid field not the 25. Repeat until there is a winner

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/19/2012

MGoPoints: 629

Cdat33

January 19th, 2015 at 9:46 PM ^

Why should you win? IMO there are three phases to the game for a reason. However there are good arguments for some change. Here's a good read about this topic. http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/2210620-nfls-overtime-rules-should… And here is a breakdown of how the new rules have worked out. http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2h30h8/statistical_look_at_the_new…

Joined: 01/19/2015

MGoPoints: 1792

Get Jim Harbaugh

January 19th, 2015 at 9:50 PM ^

Since when is the defense fully responsible for winning? That is why there are two sides to the game. If the defense cannot do it, the offense can pick up the slack and vice versa.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/20/2014

MGoPoints: -36410

Get Jim Harbaugh

January 19th, 2015 at 9:49 PM ^

The NFL OT rules are terrible. They made it a little better with the FG doesn't win right away, but it still sucks. Even if the team with the ball first scores ANYTHING, the other team should get a chance to tie or win with their own score. The NFL doesn't get it for some reason.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/20/2014

MGoPoints: -36410

An Angelo's Addict

January 19th, 2015 at 10:08 PM ^

Hate the nfl overtime, love the CFB overtime

Joined: 07/12/2011

MGoPoints: 7982

Mr. Owl

January 19th, 2015 at 10:09 PM ^

I also think OT stats should be a separate category and not count toward the regular stats, ESPECIALLY in college. Why should a QB get the record for TD passes, simply because his team played a few multi-OT games that he threw a few scores against a tired defense already backed up near its red zone? These stats shouldn't compare to those of teams that didn't play the extra.

Joined: 01/15/2015

MGoPoints: 346

justingoblue

January 19th, 2015 at 10:16 PM ^

I would definitely support giving the OT winner one point, so a 14-14 game that went into 3OT would end 15-14 instead of 36-28 or whatever.

Joined: 11/16/2010

MGoPoints: 29741

Mr. Owl

January 19th, 2015 at 10:43 PM ^

I hadn't even considered that some tie breakers can be point-based

Joined: 01/15/2015

MGoPoints: 346

chewieblue

January 19th, 2015 at 10:14 PM ^

After that, Brady wins.

Joined: 04/29/2010

MGoPoints: 5572

bronxblue

January 19th, 2015 at 10:29 PM ^

It's always struck me as a dumb rule. Yes, Seattle scored a TD, but it wasn't like GB was held in check all day by the Seahawk defense. I think the rule should be that you each get a chance with the ball until such time as one team scores over the other. Not even the college rule of starting on a particular yard line; just treat it as a sudden death-type final quarter.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171910

RED DAWN

January 20th, 2015 at 1:30 AM ^

GB only scored 1 td in 60 minutes.

Joined: 11/08/2010

MGoPoints: 4424

White-Pants

January 19th, 2015 at 10:54 PM ^

The NFL has gradually been changing the rules in favor of offensives as seen in higher scores over last couple of decades. Also scoring usually increases at the end of games more often than not. I cannot quantify my last statement, but is my observation. The OT rules have not changed accordingly. I believe following the college rule but maybe starting at the 50 vs the 20 as they do in college.

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 352

Cold War

January 20th, 2015 at 7:00 AM ^

Eliminate OT altogether. Simply put, if a game ends in a tie, the last team to score loses.

Everyone knows it going in, so if you're three down and driving in the final seconds you don't go for a field goal. You get the "all or nothing" feel at the end of a game.

Joined: 01/15/2012

MGoPoints: -3144

snarling wolverine

January 20th, 2015 at 7:33 AM ^

I don't know about that one. We'd have lost to Kansas in basketball in 2013 if they had that rule. If you tie the score, how can you lose? I don't see why you should be penalized for happening to score later in the game.

Joined: 12/14/2011

MGoPoints: 98566

CompleteLunacy

January 20th, 2015 at 9:30 AM ^

The NFL made a very important step in the right direction when they changed the rule so that a TD was the only way that gave you an instant-win.

But here's the thing. Aaron Rodgers, much as I loathe him, demonstrated the ability to reverse the crazy momentum that Seattle got and managed a brilliant game-tying FG drive. Game goes to OT and...he never even has a chance to help his team win. Given that an arbitrary coin toss had a hand in that, it just seems wrong. Arguably the best player on the field didn't even touch the ball once in OT. That's a problem to me.

Joined: 11/13/2010

MGoPoints: 12910