Plaschke is latest to rail against NFL Overtime rule

[Piotr Rasputin]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-plaschke27-2010jan27,0,50672,full.column

Includes this nice bit of idiocy:

"I actually think you should give the other team a possession," Dan Marino, Hall of Fame quarterback, said Tuesday on a CBS conference call. "Especially [with] Brett Favre. He threw an interception. Give that guy a chance, one chance. Give him at least one possession in overtime."

Um . . . why? So it's "FAIR!!!!"?

But this is the money quote:

"Basketball's overtime rule is simply an extension of the regular game."

Indeed.

So is the NFL's.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Since the Saints won, I love the overtime rule.

The NFL is unwilling to do what they do in college (which is fair) because they don't want games to be extended by an hour as they sometimes are in college.

It's all about the TV contract. I would argue that games go into OT so rarely that it's worth switching, but since the Saints won, I'm happy with it the way it is.

 

[Bubbler]

College overtime is stupid in the extreme. The NFL needs to stay away from it like the plague.

Has anyone asked the players about this? I've read in the past that there are some who want overtime to get over with ASAP given the wear and tear on their bodies and the fact that a lengthier overtime would become farcical because the players' stamina would steadily decrease.

I suppose I'd be in favor of one do-or-die possession for a team that hasn't had the ball, but I'm just as OK with the current system. Win the ****ing game in regulation if you don't want to be hooked by one-and-done OT.

 

[Batman]

The union is also against changing the rules, aren't they? Longer games mean more plays, more chances for injury.

But here's the thing. The Vikings had their chance to win in regulation. They threw it away. If the Vikings had kicked a field goal to win it as time expired, nobody would be clamoring that the Saints should have had another chance.

 

[WaylonJennings]

They should switch. The current system is a ludicrous way to decide an important game. Or any game. At least allow each team equal offensive possessions, kind of like baseball.

 

[Cousin Oliver]

Just end the game in a tie.

 

[Starman]

The current overtime rules often produce a winner through sheer circumstance, with little relation as to which team is actually superior.

In order to rectify this situation, overtime play should be extended until one team takes a lead of at least 17 (seventeen) points, and both teams touch the ball at least twice. To reach this level a team would have to score three times more than the opponent, thus proving without dispute they are truly the more deserving team...



















uh yeah

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

They should switch. The current system is a ludicrous way to decide an important game. Or any game. At least allow each team equal offensive possessions, kind of like baseball.

The nature of baseball is that each team gets equal possessions.

The nature of football is that to gain possession, you must take the ball away from the opponent.

How is it ludicrous to decide a game just by playing a few more minutes of actual football? It's the same thing as baseball or basketball: it's just more of the same sport. Despite Buck's repeated point that "if it comes down to the kickers, experience favors Ryan Longwell and the Vikings!" it was never going to come down to an exchange of possessions or kicks.

The stat that only 54 percent of coin-toss winners win in OT is pretty telling.

 

[mb]

The stat I saw though, is that since the kickoff was moved back, the team that wins the toss wins 60% of the time.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

The only cogent criticism I have read or heard about current OT rules came from Bill Belichick, who noted they take clock management out of the game, which is a very important element. He also added he did not have a specific solution to the problem.
An eight-minute OT, followed by a tie in regular season games or sudden death in playoffs? Would that work?

 

[Oz]

They should switch. The current system is a ludicrous way to decide an important game. Or any game. At least allow each team equal offensive possessions, kind of like baseball.

But baseball is step up that way with the half-innings, that's not necessarily built into football.

I did some research on this the other night, the moment I heard the first complaint about the overtime rules. There have been 14 overtime games this season, and five ended on the first drive -- one of those being the Packers-Cardinals playoff game Arizona won with a defensive touchdown. So four times in 14 times, the team that won the coin toss drove down the field to win the game. The other 10, each team had at least one possession.

So, no, it's anything but automatic that winning the coin toss means a victory for that team.

About the only change to overtime I would possibly support is first team to score six points wins, which wouldn't necessarily mean each team would get one possession.

 

[mb]

This year's regular season OT games and total OT possessions:

Week 1: Steelers 13, Titans 10 (1 OT possession)
Week 4: Cincinnati 23, Cleveland 20 (7 OT possessions)
Week 5: Dallas 26, Kansas City 20 (4 OT possessions)
Week 5: Denver 20, New England 17 (1 OT possession)
Week 6: Jacksonville 23, St. Louis 20 (1 OT possession)
Week 6: Buffalo 16, N.Y. Jets 13 (6 OT possessions)
Week 11: Kansas City 27, Pittsburgh 24 (2 OT possessions)
Week 11: N.Y. Giants 34, Atlanta 31 (1 OT possession)
Week 12: Baltimore 20, Pittsburgh 17 (4 OT possessions)
Week 13: New Orleans 33, Washington 30 (2 OT possessons)
Week 15: Tennessee 27, Miami 24 (2 OT possessions)
Week 16: Tampa Bay 20, New Orleans 17 (1 OT possession)
Week 16: Chicago 36, Minnesota 30 (5 OT possessions)


Now ESPN's boxes were a little FUBAR in spots, so it's entirely possible I've screwed something up. Barring that, the stats this year show:

Overtime games: 13
Team that won the toss won the game: 7
Team that lost the toss won the game: 6
Team that lost the toss never got a possession: 5

 

[Starman]

A more fundamental problem is that FG kickers have become too accurate:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/kicking/sort/fieldGoalPct/seasontype/2

I don't feel like adding up all the league totals, but it looks like the median NFL kicker makes about 84 percent of his FG kicks (and 99 percent of extra points -- more than half the kickers in the league didn't miss an extra point this year).

1. Narrow the goalposts to 15 feet (from the current 18-6).

2. Institute a rule that the holder of a place kick must spot the ball no closer than 10 yards to the line of scrimmage (vs. the current 7 yards commonly used).

 

[mb]

Dude, did you *see* the playoffs this year? It was one great big festival of missed field goals.

 

[fishhack2009]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-plaschke27-2010jan27,0,50672,full.column

Includes this nice bit of idiocy:

"I actually think you should give the other team a possession," Dan Marino, Hall of Fame quarterback, said Tuesday on a CBS conference call. "Especially [with] Brett Favre. He threw an interception. Give that guy a chance, one chance. Give him at least one possession in overtime."

Um . . . why? So it's "FAIR!!!!"?

But this is the money quote:

"Basketball's overtime rule is simply an extension of the regular game."

Indeed.

So is the NFL's.

Not really, Piotr.

NBA overtime doesn't end with the first point.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Rules ain't changing anytime soon.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Dude, did you *see* the playoffs this year? It was one great big festival of missed field goals.

It blows my mind how awful kickers have been this year, even in domes and kicker-friendly stadiums (San Diego, Arizona)

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I don't think they should change it to college. I've covered a couple of those six and seven overtime games and it just gets absurd.

I agree that they will never change it. The only way I would tweak it would be to take the kicker out of the mix. You want to win, score a touchdown. That might even the playing field a bit, but those numbers from this season seem to indicate that it's evening out.

I have no sympathy for a kicker or a quarterback who ****ed up in regulation thinking it's only fair to get another shot in OT.

 

[spnited]

You don't want to lose on the first possession...PLAY DEFENSE!
It's sudden death. By definition, first score of any kind wins.
I see absolutely no problem with the system the way it is.
And it is not going to change in my lifetime.

 

[cranberry]

The key play in the Saints-Vikings game shouldn't have been the "heads" call by the Vikings dude on the OT coin flip. Each team should have at least one possession.