New NFL Overtime Rule

RobTheDrummer · Post by **RobTheDrummer** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d ... nfirm=true

I like it.

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

I like it also. I don't see why they didn't do that sooner ..

BloodyFingers · Post by **BloodyFingers** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

I like it too !!! I think they should have win in over time with a TD not a FG.....

PStl · Post by **PStl** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

like it

Charltor · Post by **Charltor** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

should be for all season, not just the playoffs.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

Charltor wrote:should be for all season, not just the playoffs.

They are going to vote in May if the new rule is for the whole season or just the playoffs.

I think they should try it for one season, and see how it works.

VENTGtr · Post by **VENTGtr** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

Ya. The idea of new rules for post-season is strange. Try it for a year. More chances to see if it works during the regular season even if just to check out the feasibility for post.

Tegamal · Post by **Tegamal** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

I think it should be for the full season, but I do like it. Too many games end in a cop out field goal.

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

Tegamal wrote:I think it should be for the full season, but I do like it. Too many games end in a cop out field goal.

Agreed, it should be for full season ...

Flaw · Post by **Flaw** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

i don't like this rule change. every team has a defense, have a good one and stop the team from kicking a field goal. i mean what's the difference if you beat a team in the first 2 minutes of overtime, or the last 2 minutes of the game? Also for the losing team of overtime you had 60 minutes to beat the team before overtime, don't whine about losing to a coin toss.

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

Flaw wrote:i don't like this rule change. every team has a defense, have a good one and stop the team from kicking a field goal. i mean what's the difference if you beat a team in the first 2 minutes of overtime, or the last 2 minutes of the game? Also for the losing team of overtime you had 60 minutes to beat the team before overtime, don't whine about losing to a coin toss.

If you look at the way it is. This rule will even it out more. Especially when there are kickers who made over 50 yard tries. The logic of why they are doing it is a good one, and one that could work ...

Flaw · Post by **Flaw** » Friday Mar 26, 2010

f.sciarrillo wrote:
Flaw wrote:i don't like this rule change. every team has a defense, have a good one and stop the team from kicking a field goal. i mean what's the difference if you beat a team in the first 2 minutes of overtime, or the last 2 minutes of the game? Also for the losing team of overtime you had 60 minutes to beat the team before overtime, don't whine about losing to a coin toss.
If you look at the way it is. This rule will even it out more. Especially when there are kickers who made over 50 yard tries. The logic of why they are doing it is a good one, and one that could work ...

Well that is what the kickers get paid for. They all can't kick 50 yard field goals. Also how many teams released kickers last year? i can think of 4 teams that switched kickers just off the top of my head. I think overtime is going to lose a lot of suspense because now that they cant win with field goal, so if one is scored then its the other teams turn?!. This isn't college! When overtime happens THIS is when the players million dollar contracts are earned. The defense, special teams, and the offense all make money to do their jobs. This is when their jobs are put to the test, when they cant make mistakes.

Plus like i said its a game winning dive if a team does it in the last 2 minutes of the game, even if its a field goal. When its over time it becomes "another game decided by a coin toss." well if you don't want your teams game to be decided in a coin toss, you had 60 minutes to win before that coin toss. So if you lose the coin toss better hope your million dollar special teams can stop a kick off return. Also you better hope your million dollar defensive players can stop a team from reaching the kickers range.

its the pros for a reason, its not always fair.

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Saturday Mar 27, 2010

Too many games are won because one team has a guy who can kick 50+ yards and the rest of the game becomes meaningless. Make the goal posts narrower. Increase the difficulty.

Flaw · Post by **Flaw** » Saturday Mar 27, 2010

Hawk wrote:Too many games are won because one team has a guy who can kick 50+ yards and the rest of the game becomes meaningless. Make the goal posts narrower. Increase the difficulty.

This is true, but a lot of games have been lost on a field goal miss from 50 yards and under. Also a coach probably won't gamble on a field goal in overtime from 50 yards out. The kicker probably has made from that far, but IF he would miss the other team will get field position on or around the 40 and that's about 3 first downs till the other team is in field goal range.

As for making the field goal narrower, that would make a lot of sense, I agree, but we are talking about people who do make a living off of kicking a ball. I think they could adapt to that after sometime.

BDR · Post by **BDR** » Saturday Mar 27, 2010

About damn time. No games, especially playoff games, should be decided by a coin flip.

BDR

T@rgetDrone · Post by **T@rgetDrone** » Saturday Mar 27, 2010

Initially, I was going to say I do not like this rule. After more consideration, it is an improvement over the former OT rule (coin toss critical). So I guess I am not all for this as much as I prefer it over the previous.

Sometimes when we try to solve problems we do not try to fix the problem but focus too much on patching its holes. I think most agree that the major problem was the coin toss. To the NFL's credit, they DID address it. HOWEVER, they ingested the FG issue as a "problematic symptom" of determining an OT winner. WTF! IF FG's are such a big deal then do something (as a few have suggested) about raising the difficulty level. Skinny up the crossbar spread, make them kick a heavier or less appealing FG ball. Hell, have the goal posts dart about as if at a low-rent putt putt hole.

I suppose I can live w/the new rule but w/all the NFL's resources, one would think they could do much better than this.

Bag · Post by **Bag** » Sunday Mar 28, 2010

All the stupid fucks had to do was this... When team A scores, FG or TD, they have to kick off to team B. Then team B has one last chance (drive) to tie or win. That would also make team A try for a TD instead of just getting close and kicking a FG. I don't know why they have to complicate shit.

I'd like to see college football do this also. Their system is better than "Sudden Death" but at the very least, they should not start teams out already in FG range. If you must stick with that system, at least make them start at the 40, instead of the 25.

Flaw · Post by **Flaw** » Sunday Mar 28, 2010

Bag wrote:All the stupid fucks had to do was this... When team A scores, FG or TD, they have to kick off to team B. Then team B has one last chance (drive) to tie or win. That would also make team A try for a TD instead of just getting close and kicking a FG. I don't know why they have to complicate shit.

Well if Team A scores a TD the game is over. But a field goal is scored then there is a kick off and Team B has a chance to tie or win with a TD.

Bag · Post by **Bag** » Sunday Mar 28, 2010

Flaw wrote:
Bag wrote:All the stupid fucks had to do was this... When team A scores, FG or TD, they have to kick off to team B. Then team B has one last chance (drive) to tie or win. That would also make team A try for a TD instead of just getting close and kicking a FG. I don't know why they have to complicate shit.

Well if Team A scores a TD the game is over. But a field goal is scored then there is a kick off and Team B has a chance to tie or win with a TD.

Why bother with that? Team B should get a chance to tie or win no matter what. Why complicate stuff?

Merge · Post by **Merge** » Sunday Mar 28, 2010

It's about time.

beatlemaniac · Post by **beatlemaniac** » Monday Mar 29, 2010

exactly. why should you lose a chance to get int he play-offs because of a rule that allows you maybe to stay in the play-offs. I bet they change it soon to include the entire season. it will possible make games last longer now but that's ok with me. tv schedulers won't be happy though with games bleeding over into the next game's time and or later at night. jerry c from white shadow and beatlemaniacs

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Monday Mar 29, 2010

beatlemaniac wrote:exactly. why should you lose a chance to get int he play-offs because of a rule that allows you maybe to stay in the play-offs. I bet they change it soon to include the entire season. it will possible make games last longer now but that's ok with me. tv schedulers won't be happy though with games bleeding over into the next game's time and or later at night. jerry c from white shadow and beatlemaniacs

Yep, they should just make that the season rule too. Games are longer?...good! Like the guy on the commercial said: "we aren't ready to go yet...anything you can do to put this thing into overtime??"

What possible down side is there to longer games and more football?

beatlemaniac · Post by **beatlemaniac** » Monday Mar 29, 2010

yes lonewolf We wouldn't be watching if we wewren't willing to stay tuned in for an exciting overtime. The more I think about it probably is that the first game of a double header would go over the start time of the next game and the sponsors don't want the viewers of game one to miss any of their ads. ILL BET THAT HAD A LOT TO DO WITH THE RIDICULOUS IDEA OF JUST HAVING IT DURING THE PLAY OFFS. during playoff time the games don't usually start right way and they were probably ok with that. again the fan gets cheated because of money . Why don't they just start the next game when the first game is over . hope they get it right and soon

RobTheDrummer · Post by **RobTheDrummer** » Tuesday Mar 30, 2010

They could easily shorten games with less fucking commercials! I mean, how many times do you see the same commercial over and over and over and over....well, you get my point.

BDR · Post by **BDR** » Tuesday Mar 30, 2010

Bag wrote:All the stupid fucks had to do was this... When team A scores, FG or TD, they have to kick off to team B. Then team B has one last chance (drive) to tie or win. That would also make team A try for a TD instead of just getting close and kicking a FG. I don't know why they have to complicate shit.

I'd like to see college football do this also. Their system is better than "Sudden Death" but at the very least, they should not start teams out already in FG range. If you must stick with that system, at least make them start at the 40, instead of the 25.

This.

BDR