Sudden Death in NFL overtime

[SSSnail]

Play a full quarter, whoever wants it more will win.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I think each team should get a drive from their own 20. Similar rules to college, but not starting in scoring position.

Home team always goes LAST.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: SSSnail
Play a full quarter, whoever wants it more will win.

That would make sense to me. Have them do a full quarter, so it's not just a rush to see who can draw the first pass interference call to set up a field goal. If it's still tied at the end of 15 minutes, then it's either a tie (regular season) or you keep playing (postseason).

It would make games really drag on though. If they did that, it would make more sense to cut the quarter length to 8 minutes or something.

 

[MrPickins]

I think that OT should be an extension of the regular game in that the entire team should be tested, not just its offense or defense. That includes special teams.

I would like to see a system where each team is allowed a possession, but the other team gets to kick off to them.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: SSSnail
Play a full quarter, whoever wants it more will win.

That would make sense to me. Have them do a full quarter, so it's not just a rush to see who can draw the first pass interference call to set up a field goal. If it's still tied at the end of 15 minutes, then it's either a tie (regular season) or you keep playing (postseason).

It would make games really drag on though. If they did that, it would make more sense to cut the quarter length to 8 minutes or something.

Actually, I would rather they play this way...

 

[Deeko]

The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Because football is far more physical of a game than baseball or basketball (though people will argue the latter) - and with fatigue comes a far greater risk of serious injury? Maybe?

I do agree though, the sudden death thing is stupid. I'd go until the first unanswered score (meaning give an automatic possession to the opposing team and let them have that possession to answer back, if not, game over).

 

[SSSnail]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Because football is far more physical of a game than baseball or basketball (though people will argue the latter) - and with fatigue comes a far greater risk of serious injury? Maybe?

I do agree though, the sudden death thing is stupid. I'd go until the first unanswered score (meaning give an automatic possession to the opposing team and let them have that possession to answer back, if not, game over).

Like tennis, volleyball, ping pong, etc...

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Because football is far more physical of a game than baseball or basketball (though people will argue the latter) - and with fatigue comes a far greater risk of serious injury? Maybe?

I do agree though, the sudden death thing is stupid. I'd go until the first unanswered score (meaning give an automatic possession to the opposing team and let them have that possession to answer back, if not, game over).

Yeah, makes more sense that way. Running an entire period is nice in theory but it would be very long (quarters seem to take about 45 minutes of real time, longer if it's the last one).

Oh, and instead of an automatic possession, have a kickoff. Gives each team's Special Teams unit a chance to play.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Because football is far more physical of a game than baseball or basketball (though people will argue the latter) - and with fatigue comes a far greater risk of serious injury? Maybe?

Someone would score before that happens. They have backups if people are tired. The actual reason is TV contracts. The networks don't want games going that far over their allotted times, because in most cases there's another game on that will now no longer be watched.

 

[ZetaEpyon]

Originally posted by: Deeko
The networks don't want games going that far over their allotted times, because in most cases there's another game on that will now no longer be watched.

This does not happen. There were numerous occasions this season where the network could not broadcast the end of a long game due to "contractual obligations". I even remember one instance with the CBS crew basically just sitting there giving a play-by-play update because they couldn't actually show the action.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: ZetaEpyon

Originally posted by: Deeko
The networks don't want games going that far over their allotted times, because in most cases there's another game on that will now no longer be watched.

This does not happen. There were numerous occasions this season where the network could not broadcast the end of a long game due to "contractual obligations". I even remember one instance with the CBS crew basically just sitting there giving a play-by-play update because they couldn't actually show the action.

They're starting to add more clauses to the contracts like that - for instance, ever since the last network contract update, there can never be a game on at the same time as the local game. If you live in Philly and the Eagles are on Fox, there will not be a game on CBS - even if CBS has the doubleheader.

The networks have very specific things they want you to see - and thus, they don't want games going long. In the example above, if that Philly game were at 1pm and Fox had the doubleheader, and that Philly game went into OT, it would stay on - over top of the 4pm game. Networks don't like that.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Here's a question for you: Can you prove that the best team didn't win in sudden death? The winning team made the big play when it counted most, and the other team didn't. Even if they were dominated but eeked it out, can you logically say that the other team deserved to win when they never made the big stop when it counted most? Therein lies the question. There is ALWAYS the argument that IF the team deserved to win, they would have played like it. No if's, and's or but's. And this is why the current sudden death OT = fine.

Hell, no game is decided on one play (or drive) alone, both teams had PLENTY of chances to win before OT. Put up or shut up.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Here's a question for you: Can you prove that the best team didn't win in sudden death? The winning team made the big play when it counted most, and the other team didn't. Even if they were dominated but eeked it out, can you logically say that the other team deserved to win when they never made the big stop when it counted most? Therein lies the question. There is ALWAYS the argument that IF the team deserved to win, they would have played like it. No if's, and's or but's. And this is why the current sudden death OT = fine.

Hell, no game is decided on one play (or drive) alone, both teams had PLENTY of chances to win before OT. Put up or shut up.

I don't remember the statistic off hand, but I read somewhere that the team that wins the coin toss wins a rather disproportionate amount of NFL overtime games. It puts way too much emphasis on the coin toss, basically.

 

[oznerol]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Deeko
The NFL sudden death system is stupid. The college system is stupid too. What's wrong with the way the MLB and NBA do it? Just do extra periods until the game is over.

Here's a question for you: Can you prove that the best team didn't win in sudden death? The winning team made the big play when it counted most, and the other team didn't. Even if they were dominated but eeked it out, can you logically say that the other team deserved to win when they never made the big stop when it counted most? Therein lies the question. There is ALWAYS the argument that IF the team deserved to win, they would have played like it. No if's, and's or but's. And this is why the current sudden death OT = fine.

Hell, no game is decided on one play (or drive) alone, both teams had PLENTY of chances to win before OT. Put up or shut up.

The biggest issue with sudden death overtime in football is the one-possession win.

The coin-flip puts the ball in one team's hands. It's not like sudden death in Soccer or Hockey, where there are multiple possessions until a goal is scored.

Basically, if you win the toss and elect to receive, you are saying your offense (or special teams) will beat their defense. If you drive down the field and score on that possession, all that is really proven is that your offense was better than their defense.

 

[KeithTalent]

Mayeb they should bring back the XFL opening scramble: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFL#Opening_scramble for NFL overtime, that would be a little more fair than a coin toss.

KT

 

[Tret]

I like it the way it is for football.

 

[josh0099]

I think it would be a lot better if they said no field goals.

 

[ric1287]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Mayeb they should bring back the XFL opening scramble: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFL#Opening_scramble for NFL overtime, that would be a little more fair than a coin toss.

KT

never happen. Imagine losing your fasted guy on the "coin toss".


I need to find an XFL football, they had the greatest grip i have ever used.

 

[FallenHero]

Originally posted by: ducci

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: ducci
Does anyone know of an instance where the team that won the coin flip chose to kick?

Even defense-oriented teams like the Bears and Ravens would choose to receive.

It's a definite advantage. Imagine 2 with terrible defenses, tied something like 56-56, going into overtime. The team that wins the toss has the edge.

When more well-rounded teams are involved, it's less of an issue. A great defense will beat out a great offense.

Since the quickest way to win is to score, why would a team ever choose to defend? That's a no-brainer. OT tests the defense of the team that loses the coin toss. If they choke under pressure, too bad.

Well, like I said - defense-oriented teams.

The Bears had (have) a god-awful offense, but their defense got them to a Super Bowl. If given the option, I wonder if they would trust the defense to score rather than the offense.

It was (is) a running joke that the first play for the bears offense should be a punt so our D can take the field.

 

[EMPshockwave82]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: OOBradm
29% of the time the team that wins the toss drives down and scores without the other team touching the ball. Overall, however, the coin toss winner only wins 52% of the time. It seems fair but these numbers are somewhat misleading because in 1994 a rule changed moved the kickoff back 5 yards to the 30 yard line (those numbers were based on data from 1973-2003). Since then, it's been about 60%. Prior to the rule change, the coin toss had no predictive value for deciding who would eventually win the game. Since 1994, the coin flip winner has a clear advantage.

And statistically speaking since 1994 there hasn't been >1000 overtimes, I guarantee you. Sample group is too small, have you ever taken stat 101 and done the coin flip experiment?

Even assuming 3 OT's a week since 1994, that would only = 672. Not a large enough sample to make a conclusion.

Have you ever taken a deeper dive into statistics and heard about the Central Limit Theorem? I actually learned that in my entry level stats course. 30 data points is enough to make a set of data statistically relevant unless I am completely mistaken. (note: It obviously won't be perfect in every situation)

 

[EMPshockwave82]

Originally posted by: josh0099
I think it would be a lot better if they said no field goals.

I agree with this statement the most. Field goals being allowed is what makes it unfair in my opinion. Either they should remove field goals from the game or make it so you have to be ahead by 6 to win in OT (then it would take 2 field goals at least).

 

[JulesMaximus]

WHAAAAAA!!!

The Colts lost to the Chargers in Sudden Death Overtime...Wha.

 

[KK]

They should have sudden death in baseball too.

 

[sash1]

they should do penalty kicks. just have the kickers line up and boot 40 yarders until they miss