OT: How to Fix NFL (and College?) OT Rules

Moving the ball back increases the chances that neither team will score, and thus the game will go on longer.  The objective should be to wrap games up relatively quickly.

I think it was fine to make teams go for two after scoring a TD on the second OT attempt, but that was enough of a change.  They should have stopped there.  Going to one-play possessions after that was too much.  

I used to love the college OT, one of my favorite tiebreaking systems. Then they changed it to the gimmick system they have now with only 2-point conversion attempts. The PSU-Illinois game was indeed entertaining, but it was not a fair way to decide a football game. 

And the issue with the imbalance toward the team who possesses the ball second is real. It's a huge advantage to know if you need to use four downs or not. 

The college rules are equally horrible. They take out many aspects of the game and focus exclusively on the red-zone interaction.  This is a tremendous disadvantage to some excellent teams who emphasize things like k/p returns, field position, etc.  It also makes it disadvantageous for teams with deep threats around which they set up much of their office, i.e. teams that often score on big plays, the fear of which allows them to set up other offensive pieces.  I for one felt a strange relief this year when OSU got into the red zone, knowing they essentially couldn't beat us deep any longer, and felt that our game matched up favorably should we have gotten to OT.  Frankly, that wasn't fair to negate their deep passing attack through the OT rules.  

Personally, IMO, in any timed sport, a tie should be a tie. They played within the rules and finished with the same score.  They were equal.  Understanding that playoffs must create a winner, they should play two additional shortened halves- so that punting remains a part of the game, perhaps 10-min halves- but halves are needed so that teams have maximum opportunity for equal possessions.  In short, they should strive to keep as many dimensions of play in the actual game active in the OT framework, involving the whole field, normal play, with an attempt at equal possessions.  

In baseball, we have extra innings - hooray!! 

In football we have Sudden Death

~ George Carlin

Put 10 minutes on the clock and play. The college and NFL overtimes are akin to MLB having a homerun derby from second base. 

I love this. It's incredibly simple, minimizes changes to the rules, and is fair.

That's more fair than the current system, but still strongly disadvantages the team that loses the coin toss. The first team to get the ball wins if they score and stop the opposing team. The second team has to stop the opposing team, score, and then stop them again.

Which is more fair than the current system, but it also comes with the potential to draw out the game significantly (if teams alternate scores), and therefore I think it would be unlikely to be adopted.

At a certain level, I think all football OT systems aren't great because the leagues rightfully prioritize not letting the game get too long, which is far more important in football than, say, baseball. I think a potential solution is that the regular season stays the way it is now, and the playoffs use a more fair but potentially longer system.

Start with Ukraine. I think they're going to need any help they can get. Russia seems set on taking over that country, my military coup or political coup (or some combination of both).

I haven't seen any recent polls but there seem to be a statistically significant piece of the Ukraine population that would actually favor Russian leadership. Stock market is just fine (according to my portfolio).

This is the right answer. Just play an extra quarter of regular football. 

I think it's wise to have OT "restart" the game, so that there is time pressure to win in regulation. But then I kind of agree here. One whole quarter. It's not as exciting as sudden death, but it seems like a fairer system. I'd be interested in experimenting with just maintaining the game state at the end of that period if it is still tied--that is, not going to a fresh kickoff, just sudden death as soon as the fifth period expires. 

Yes, but this only works because so few possessions end in a score in hockey. You couldn't play, e.g, basketball the same way; that'd be crazy.

I agree with your proposal -- just keep adding quarters. They can shorten them -- I think 10 minutes would be fine -- but, yeah, keep playing football (just like they do for basketball, for that matter).

They lost because they couldn't get two different stops. Not because they called tails. This argument framing drives me nuts.

2nd team has a massive advantage in college. Just not as "apparent" but the advantage is about equal.

Dennis Franklin disagrees with this approach.

But that system would do nothing to address the perceived problem with yesterday's game.  It even makes it worse, because now the team that wins the coin toss starts at midfield instead of their own 25+/-.