The Big Cat Posted February 27, 2010 Posted February 27, 2010 Link EDIT: Original Report (from Twitter)
DarthICE Posted February 27, 2010 Posted February 27, 2010 Link We need a one possession each team rule.
Omar Little Posted February 27, 2010 Posted February 27, 2010 The NFL should be embarrassed that its overtime is the way it is. It's completely unfair and senseless that each team is not guaranteed a possession.
Ramius Posted February 27, 2010 Posted February 27, 2010 While i'd prefer a one possession per team rule in OT, i'd be ok with the "first one to 6" rule that they are proposing. It makes the first team consider whether to try the FG and then try to stop the other team, or to continue to push hard for the TD.
nucci Posted February 27, 2010 Posted February 27, 2010 Play a full 15 minute quarter. Get rid of sudden death. If there is no scoring then game ends in a tie.
billsfan89 Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Have 1 of 2 changes 1- If you want to keep the element of one play can end it have it that you need a TD or 2 field goals to win. 2- Have each team gets one possession
sullim4 Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Here's a novel idea: Why not allow ties after 4 quarters? Why is a tie such a bad thing? It would encourage teams to go for two and not kick field goals during regulation. In the case of the playoffs, why not just keep playing full 15:00 quarters until the game is NOT tied at the end of one?
reddogblitz Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 If it's not broke, don't fix it. It's not broke. Everybody knows the rules going in. Well, except Donovan McNabb. If you don't win the toss, you gotta stop 'em. Last time I checked defense was part of the game. It's not like they're shooting free throws or something. You'll never convince me otherwise. Ok, say it is you gotta score 6. What happens in the first over time game and Leodis runs the opening kick back for a TD? That's 6, right? Or, just do like one of the commenters for the article said, just ban FGs in OT. That would work too, wouldn't it? I wouldn't be opposed to that.
reddogblitz Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Why is a tie such a bad thing? Because this is America pal. If you like ties, watch soccer. They got a lot of 'em. And nothing beats a nil-nil draw. You leave after the game feeling like a total dumbass for watching it with no result. No thanks.
Mark Vader Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 We need a one possession each team rule. That would be the simplest way to do it. I would add that if neither team has scored on it's one possesion then it becomes sudden death.
kota Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 They look at it every year. It won't change again. the players dont' want it changed. Plus you have to consider TV committments. You cant' have a game go for 4-5 hours.
billsfan89 Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 If it's not broke, don't fix it. It's not broke. Everybody knows the rules going in. Well, except Donovan McNabb. If you don't win the toss, you gotta stop 'em. Last time I checked defense was part of the game. It's not like they're shooting free throws or something. You'll never convince me otherwise. Ok, say it is you gotta score 6. What happens in the first over time game and Leodis runs the opening kick back for a TD? That's 6, right? Or, just do like one of the commenters for the article said, just ban FGs in OT. That would work too, wouldn't it? I wouldn't be opposed to that. If defense is part of the game why doesn't the other teams D have to step on the field. At least have the D give up the length of the field I mean if a player takes the opening kick out to the 30 then the D only has to give up 40 yards in order to be in field goal range.Should a D giving up less the half the field mean the team has a good shot to win a game? If a coin flip has a 20 plus percent swing on the outcome of a game I say the system is broken
nucci Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Because this is America pal. If you like ties, watch soccer. They got a lot of 'em. And nothing beats a nil-nil draw. You leave after the game feeling like a total dumbass for watching it with no result. No thanks. There are still tie games in the NFL.
EndZoneCrew Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 The NFL should be embarrassed that its overtime is the way it is. It's completely unfair and senseless that each team is not guaranteed a possession. That's BS......life is not fair.....keep it the same
Bleed Bills Blue Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 As much as I hate a 50 yard run back, a couple of quick out passes, a run up the middle and FG to win the game in overtime, if you don't allow FGs in OT, what does that say about the value of them in regulation? Unfortunately, it just doesn't seem logical to me to say they're great through the first four quarters but not the 5th quarter. Nope, I think you've got to play a full 15 minutes...hey, it ain't baseball, ties happen!
Bleed Bills Blue Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Or, if you can't stand the thought of a tie... Just trot out your kickers and start with a 30 yard FG attempt, one shot each. Then back up 5 yards and do it again. Keep backing up 5 yards until someone misses.
Steely Dan Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Play a full 15 minute quarter. Get rid of sudden death. If there is no scoring then game ends in a tie. I don't think the TV networks would allow that. Because this is America pal. If you like ties, watch soccer. They got a lot of 'em. And nothing beats a nil-nil draw. You leave after the game feeling like a total dumbass for watching it with no result. No thanks. Great description of Soccer. I like the one possession rule best but first to six is better than what they have now. JMO
1billsfan Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 That's BS......life is not fair.....keep it the same I totally agree. Plus one huge effect is that it would totally change the 4th quarter suspense of NFL games. When in a tie game situation, both teams know that they'll get a possession, the NFL would lose ALL of it's 4th quarter drama. Why would a team want to risk trying to force the ball down a long field with only two minutes to play? Both teams have 60 minutes to score enough points to win, too bad if you lose the coin toss. Stop crying and play some defense or try an onsides kick you babies. I can't believe they are trying to fix a game that is so loved just the way it is. Morons.
KD in CA Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Play a full 15 minute quarter. Get rid of sudden death. If there is no scoring then game ends in a tie. +100000 This is how it used to be and is the best solution. Why everyone got so horrified at the thought of a tie is beyond me. Doing anything based on # of possessions is just a horrible idea.
1billsfan Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 +100000 This is how it used to be and is the best solution. Why everyone got so horrified at the thought of a tie is beyond me. Doing anything based on # of possessions is just a horrible idea. Two things... 1. No Sudden Death ruins the sense of urgency and suspense at the end of a game which thrives on those two things. 2. These men had 60 minutes to decide who was the best team that day. It's a politically correct "feel good" solution in game that's supposed to be the toughest on the planet. Win it in 60 or live with the consequences. That's life, life is not always "fair" and it's not supposed to be always "fair".
Recommended Posts