Jump to content

Overtime change?  

90 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to see a 7 on 7 OT?

    • Yes
      4
    • No
      86


Recommended Posts

Posted

Went and saw my local AHL team play tonight. Game ended up tied, so they went to sudden death OT. What I did not realize this meant, was instead of the usual 5+goalie players, they went to 3+goalie players. This got me thinking, what if the NFL did something similar? Keep the OT rules as they are, but instead of 11 players, go with 7. This I think would make it a little more exciting, thinking of the possible scenarios. You'd have center and QB obviously, maybe a couple guards/tackles. But then your other three players, you could go 2 RB,s 1 WR. Or 3 WR's. Or pull the guards/tackles and go all WR's. Etc..

 

Thoughts? 

Posted (edited)

How about a tiddlywink contest?

 

 

1 minute ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Seriously this is as bad as it gets. NYS Small school HS now have recognized 8 man football but lets try 7. Why not 4 like we used to play on the street under the light?

 

You have to get past the next telephone pole for a first down.

Edited by KD in CA
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, KD in CA said:

How about a tiddlywink contest?

 

You have to get past the next telephone pole for a first down.

 

Go hard to the Buick, then cut to Mrs Murphy’s front door! 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Go hard to the Buick, then cut to Mrs Murphy’s front door! 

 

Two feet down on the street before you step out onto the lawn or you're OOB!

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Just Jack said:

Went and saw my local AHL team play tonight. Game ended up tied, so they went to sudden death OT. What I did not realize this meant, was instead of the usual 5+goalie players, they went to 3+goalie players. This got me thinking, what if the NFL did something similar? Keep the OT rules as they are, but instead of 11 players, go with 7. This I think would make it a little more exciting, thinking of the possible scenarios. You'd have center and QB obviously, maybe a couple guards/tackles. But then your other three players, you could go 2 RB,s 1 WR. Or 3 WR's. Or pull the guards/tackles and go all WR's. Etc..

 

Thoughts? 

 

I went to my first NHL game last year. The Sabres 10th win in a row game.  It went to OT.  Like you I didn't reAlize they went to 3 on 3.  It was awesome and it ended pretty quickly.  I like it.

 

Not sure if translates into football ?though.

 

I thought it was good before they started messing with it.  Wasn't broke IMHO You gotta play all 3 sides of the football. It's gotta end sometime.

Posted

Just have a QB throw-off from the 50. Whoever heaves it through the goal posts wins. If they both do - back ‘em up ten yards and repeat. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

Hockey is the only sport that should have sudden death overtime. Football should have something similar to college overtime, just have them start at their own 25, not the opponents 25.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, wagon127 said:

Hockey is the only sport that should have sudden death overtime. Football should have something similar to college overtime, just have them start at their own 25, not the opponents 25.

Yes each team deserves equal amount of chances...

Posted

I think overtime should be scrapped altogether. That would make the end of games more exciting knowing you have to play to win. No more chip shot field goals to go to overtime - go for a TD or settle for a tie and kick the FG. Obviously, overtime would have to be part of the playoffs, but I think late game series would be more exciting knowing it's go big or go home.

 

Of course, you'd have the coaches out there that would be fine playing for the tie... but the Brian Flores' of the world would go for the win every time!

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...