Opinions on NCAA Overtime...
All this talk about Woolfolk moving back to CB and him going for the strip in OT against State has got me thinking about the overtime period in college football.
So...
Does anyone else hate the way overtime is run in college football as much as me?
I think it's dumb as hell. The baseball equivalent is like them holding a homerun derby to decide the winner instead of extra innings; it's stupid.
If I were head of the NCAA, here's what overtime in college football would be. Put 10 minutes on the clock. New coin toss. Play with regular rules, regular kickoff. Each team must receive a possession within those 10 minutes. Other than that, it's regular football. No more INTs in the endzone going back to your opponents 25... nope, to your 20, just like it would during the rest of the game.
Anyway, what's everyone's thoughts on OT?
October 8th, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^
but most kickers hit it most of the time. I just don't think a team should be stuffed for no gain and go 3 & out, then get a quality fg try. Pushing it back would reduce the number of ridiculous overtimes. It doesn't happen often, but when I see a 5 overtime game, I think circus rather than classic.
October 8th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
Since the mandatory two-point conversion has been added to the third OT period, overtime games that go beyond that have become extremely rare. Yeah, they're weird, but so is a 15-inning baseball game. `
October 8th, 2009 at 2:30 PM ^
I don't think pushing it back would reduce the number of crazy-long overtimes. I think it would actually increase them. Probably exponentially. Very few OT series actually result in touchdowns. This year, only 6 of 20 offensive series (2 per OT period) ended up with a touchdown. That would go way down, obviously, when the ball gets moved back, to the point where touchdowns are taken almost out of the equation. I think you'd see a huge increase in the number of 3OT, 4OT, 5OT games if the ball were moved back as the game became a field goal fest. I'm even more convinced now after looking those numbers up that the ball should stay right where it is on the 25.
October 8th, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^
to counter that argument. I was thinking more along the lines of teams not advancing far enough to even kick a field goal, but with 4 downs it would be hard to stop. Perhaps, I should re-think my position. God, I've been wrong alot lately. Thankfully, I much prefer the current system to sudden death anyway.
October 8th, 2009 at 12:32 PM ^
Right now, in week 5, kickers are averaging 60.6% field goals from 40-49 yds. It doesn't take a whole lot of common sense to realize the higher percentage of made FGs are in the first third of the span (40-43) and the lowest is at the tail end. The same kickers are at 46% from 50-59 yds.
Bottom line: The starting position needs to move back AT LEAST 10 yds. I think a good compromise between game length and having to earn the FG, is the 40 yd line. You have to pick up a first down before you can kick a FG.
October 8th, 2009 at 8:56 PM ^
So? It's not like a field goal guarantees you victory in OT. Often, even a TD doesn't do so.
The problem with moving the distance back is that it would likely make overtime take longer. There would likely be more scoreless sessions. How much can you ask of players that have already played a tight game for 60 minutes?
October 8th, 2009 at 12:46 PM ^
I like the college overtime system. I like how both teams get a shot with the ball. I remember in 2005 when UM beat MSU in over time. IIRC, it was just one over time and the MSU kicker missed a field goal, the UM kicker makes his and game over. On College Gameday the great Lou Holtz(sarcasm)did not like the result of this game and said the college over time system was "not fair." I think he just said that because UM won. He then went on to say he liked the pro over time system better, which Mark May and Reece Davis did not agree with. Then Hotlz said that if a tie is like kissin your sister then the college over time is like kissin your brother, and since kissin your sister is better then kissin your brother, college should either use an over time system like the pros or go back to having ties. I tried to find a video of this on youtube but I could not. How Lou Holtz still has a job I don't know.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:23 PM ^
you say that college football ot would be equivalent to a baseball extra innings being a homerun derby. Are you an idiot? It is already just like baseball extra innings. Each team gets a chance to score. Are you trying to say that it is too easy to score in ot in college football? I really hope that your not because we couldn't. College football ot is 1000 times better than sudden death.
October 8th, 2009 at 3:08 PM ^
I'm not sure where all the sudden death comparisons come from as I have said nothing about sudden death other than it being worse than the college system.
October 8th, 2009 at 3:12 PM ^
Look college football makes it easier to score because they put the ball at the 25 already in field goal position. Perhaps a better baseball equivalent is putting a runner on second base to start the inning. The great thing about baseball's extra inning is that they continue to play the game as they were throughout the game until a winner emerges. If the college system included a kickoff and one possession per team, per OT, then that's one thing. But, they don't do that.
October 8th, 2009 at 1:46 PM ^
I wouldn't mind seeing the start be moved back to the 30 or the 35, but on the other hand the "automatic field goal" position has a positive effect: even if you fail on offense, you have a good chance of coming away with points, forcing the opponent to "play to score" as well.
Of course, if you take a sack or fumble, you could face a difficult field goal, so the system punishes negative plays. With today's kickers the 30 yl would be a good change to the markers.
The starting line changes depending on level; in college it's 25, in my youth league it is the 5, in some systems I've seen the line moves up as you play more overtime periods. The whole point, though, is to give both teams a reasonable and equal shot to score and thus win the game in a short amount of time. (If no one scores, no one can win.)