nfl overtime rule change

How does playing overtime under a different set of rules improve the game?
If you can kick a game-winning field goal with 3 seconds left in regulaton, why do you need to do more than that to win in OT?

 

Because both teams had a chance to possess the ball in regulation. And I'm not in favor of the part of the proposed rule that would allow the game to end on the first possession if the team scores a touchdown. I do not, however, see a problem with the league making a rule that both teams should have at least one possession. Personally, I would leave it alone, but I can see the argument for some kind of change.

Could be worse. The NFL could stop playing the Super Bowl at a neutral site and instead give the home-field advantage to the team from the conference that wins the Pro Bowl.

 

Give up the pathetic moronic attempts to make this a baseball-football argument, douchebag.

 

my friend spnited is 100 percent on the money. the only change -- if there is ever to be one -- should only involved an assurance that each team have the ball at least once. beyond that, like saying three points is not enough -- just doesn't work for me.

i mean, if you can win by one point in regulation, why more than three in ot? the only exception should be if the defense scores on a safety or return on the first possession after the flip. in that case, obviously team 2's offense need not take the field.

but again, my vote is to just LEAVE. IT. THE. EFF. ALONE. 8)

 

Because it would be improved with the change

 

Again, I keep seeing people propose changes in scoring mandates or goal post changes, ect.
I keep seeing people rip them for making things too difficult.

What the hell is so hard to grasp about a 10 minute OT period that plays out from start to finish with no sudden death?

 

What are the numbers on ot games?
how many were played
how many were won on the first possession

as i recall, the nfl doesn't really have that many ot games anyway, so this doesn't seem like a huge issue.

 

This still doesn't assure that both teams get a legitimate possesion. I like it the way it is, if you are worried about losing a coin toss make sure it never gets that far.

 

The number that seems most relevant to me is that showing the coin flip advantage, that's where the basic unfairness in the current setup lies. As I understand, the team that gets the coin flip wins the game more than 60 % of the time, and in my opinion, that is way too high. A frickin coin flip should not be such an important factor in determining who will win. If this rule change will push the coin flip advantage closer to 50%, where it should be, then it is a good change.

And this really isn't that big of a change. The only games it will affect are the ones where the flip winner kicks a field goal on its first possession. All other OT games will play out exactly the same as they do now.

It's just a minor tweaking that will diminish the unearned advantage that the coin flip winner gets. I fail to see why that's objectionable.

 

There were 14 OT games in 2009 regular season, 16 in 2008.

It's not a huge issue.

My proposed changes to reduce placekicking efficiency addresses a more prevalent problem for the whole sport: the overdominance of FG kicking skewing strategic options for coaches and producing a more boring and predictable game.

 

Actually, I'd see doing one of two things with extra points: Either increase their length to 40 yards in the NFL, 35 in college and 30 in high school or do what the XFL did: Require teams to run or pass for an extra point.

As far as field goals are concerned, I'd agree with reducing the width of the goalposts.

 

I'm in the camp that says no change is necessary. If your defense can't stop a team from driving 30-40+ yards for a field goal with the game on the line you don't deserve to win (or a chance to win).

However, if a chance is necessary I'm in favor of a modified version of RedSmith's plan.
A full 10-minute overtime period. If it's still tied, then go to sudden death, with the team that got the ball first in the 10-minute overtime kicking off to the other team -- thus adding intrigue to the decision the team that wins the coin-toss in the 10-minute OT makes.