View topic - NFL Overtime Rule Changes?

[Jeemie Profile]

Jeemie- The coin flip idea seems like another reasonable part of an overtime fix.

Would the team be required to select for both kickoffs at the same time? ex. If a team defers to the second half then they take the risk of not getting the ball in OT.

No- that's why I phrased it the way I did. Team winning the coin toss gets first choice in OT.

Deferring will still only affect the first half choice.

[zapunto Profile]

I admire the NFL for attempting to lower the value of the coin toss by doing what they did, but the emphasis is in the wrong place.

What the league should REALLY do is the move the kickoffs from the 30-yard line BACK to the 35-yard line in OT. The NFL used to have this for all kickoffs, but they changed it In 1994, in order to make the league more exciting and to have more kickoff returns and less touchbacks. The drawback of doing this was that it RIDICULOUSLY increased the value of the OT coin toss. Moving the kick back would allow teams to boom it in the end zone, and make offenses earn their salt by driving for a FG from the 20. Really good touchback kickers (I hate to say, like Billy Cundiff, who set an NFL record for touchbacks this year) would really earn their paycheck.

The NFL put it this rule as a knee jerk to last year's NFC championship game, where in OT, Ryan Longwell boomed a kickoff to the 1-yard line, which Pierre Thomas returned to the 40-yard line. Two lousy first downs later, the game was over.

[Still Peon Profile]

My proposal is that the first team to 6pts wins. At least this way games aren't decided by the field goal team until after both sides have had the ball. Under this scenario it would force a team to score a TD if they wanted to win without ever allowing their opponent a chance. Much more strategy, as well as defense gets incorporated in this plan. Assuming that no team scores 6, the team that has the most points at the end of the extra period wins. So, Cincinnati would still have received credit for their victory over Cleveland, assuming that the franchise really did make his kick .

I think it is stupid for teams who suck in the red zone to be able to win in OT just because they )1. Win the coin toss )2. Kick a field goal. Does anyone have any other proposals?

This.

The current overtime solution changes the dynamic of the game in such a way, that if the other team has scored 3 pts, then you are forced to go for it on 4th down on your possession, whereas you would not normally risk giving up great field position by doing so. The above solution of 6 pts solves the current overtime problem while keeping some of the old rule's principles, namely that you need to be able to win the game in any phase of play.

[Steel Holiday Profile]

I admire the NFL for attempting to lower the value of the coin toss by doing what they did, but the emphasis is in the wrong place.

What the league should REALLY do is the move the kickoffs from the 30-yard line BACK to the 35-yard line in OT. The NFL used to have this for all kickoffs, but they changed it In 1994, in order to make the league more exciting and to have more kickoff returns and less touchbacks. The drawback of doing this was that it RIDICULOUSLY increased the value of the OT coin toss. Moving the kick back would allow teams to boom it in the end zone, and make offenses earn their salt by driving for a FG from the 20. Really good touchback kickers (I hate to say, like Billy Cundiff, who set an NFL record for touchbacks this year) would really earn their paycheck.

The NFL put it this rule as a knee jerk to last year's NFC championship game, where in OT, Ryan Longwell boomed a kickoff to the 1-yard line, which Pierre Thomas returned to the 40-yard line. Two lousy first downs later, the game was over.

Why not take it a step further and say if it is still tied after a full OT period then there is no Mel Blount rule, and no penalizing the Deacon Jones head slap? Let's really bring back the good ol' days.