I hope they do this for regular season games too!!
Owners approve change to playoff overtime format - NFL - CBSSports.com Football
Owners approve change to playoff overtime format - NFL - CBSSports.com Football
NFL: Rules Change For NFL OT
- Thread starter RhoadsRage
- Start date
This look about right for Vikes fans???
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L90bzqdEI9I&feature=related"]YouTube - Super Nut Kick[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L90bzqdEI9I&feature=related"]YouTube - Super Nut Kick[/ame]
The rule change is not a good one in my opinion: "If a team wins the coin toss and then kicks a field goal, the other team gets the ball. If the game is still tied after that, play will continue under the current sudden-death rules. Should the team winning the toss immediately score a touchdown, then the game is over." And it's just for the playoffs? The NFL would be best served to go with college OT format for both the regular season and post season.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
I can't decide if I like this or not. I haven't heard a good enough argument pro or con. I do think that if they make a change, it should be for the entire season and not just the playoffs
So.....wouldn't it be better to try this out in the preseason or regular season? I have a hard time believing that it is a good idea to implement this in the playoffs FIRST....hell, Donovan McNabb doesn't know the regular season OT procedure, how is he supposed to remember TWO different OT procedures?
I would assume the game would be over since they would have to kick the ball off back to the other team. Just using my logic there...
Why on Earth would the Vikings vote AGAINST this???
And what happens for a safety?
I'm guessing a safety would just end the game since the team taking the safety would've already had an offensive posession.
Not a bad change, although I don't have a problem with the current system. Atleast it'll stop teams from playing conservatively just to kick a field goal, and if you can't stop a team from scoring then that sucks for you.
It's all about TV. Remember the rule changes to shorten(!?!) the game for TV*. They are trying to quiet the critics while still having as short of an overtime as possible. If a TD is scored, then they can end the game; they don't have the "we held them to a field goal argument". They can make the argument that if you wanted a possession you should have at least held them to the field goal. Only if a team settles for a field goal do they have to lengthen the game.
*To me that is like trying to shorten sex, but hey, that's just me. If you've got a good thing, why shorten it?
While this is a step in the right direction, the NFL took a big step in the mudd with this rule change.
It's still going to be possible for just one team to possess the ball without the other team really having a chance at the ball. The opening kickoff of overtime could be returned for a touchdown. Game over. Or a long pass like what happened a couple years ago in the Packers @ Broncos Monday night overtime game. Brett Favre 82 yard touchdown pass to Greg Jennings on the first play following the kickoff of overtime. And what if there is a penalty that is missed by the officials and contributes to the touchdown since penalties are non-reviewable?
What I would like to see is a "First down-touchdown" rule. Using the Packers @ Broncos game as an example, if the Packers score a touchdown with out gaining a first down before the touchdown, as they did with the 82 yard pass, then the Broncos get a chance at the ball to match the touchdown. If the Broncos don't score a touchdown, then game over. Packers win. If they do match the touchdown, then play on.
If the Packers gain even one first down then have the Favre to Jennings bomb for a touchdown, then game over. Packers win.
Make the defense try to force a 3 and out. That way, each team has a chance at the ball, since the defense could also score. If the defense doesn't force a 3 and out or score, then all the offense has to do to win is score a touchdown. If the Packers had gained a first down then kicked a field goal, then the Broncos get a chance at the ball. Basically just add the first down part to the rule change that was made today.
It's still going to be possible for just one team to possess the ball without the other team really having a chance at the ball. The opening kickoff of overtime could be returned for a touchdown. Game over. Or a long pass like what happened a couple years ago in the Packers @ Broncos Monday night overtime game. Brett Favre 82 yard touchdown pass to Greg Jennings on the first play following the kickoff of overtime. And what if there is a penalty that is missed by the officials and contributes to the touchdown since penalties are non-reviewable?
What I would like to see is a "First down-touchdown" rule. Using the Packers @ Broncos game as an example, if the Packers score a touchdown with out gaining a first down before the touchdown, as they did with the 82 yard pass, then the Broncos get a chance at the ball to match the touchdown. If the Broncos don't score a touchdown, then game over. Packers win. If they do match the touchdown, then play on.
If the Packers gain even one first down then have the Favre to Jennings bomb for a touchdown, then game over. Packers win.
Make the defense try to force a 3 and out. That way, each team has a chance at the ball, since the defense could also score. If the defense doesn't force a 3 and out or score, then all the offense has to do to win is score a touchdown. If the Packers had gained a first down then kicked a field goal, then the Broncos get a chance at the ball. Basically just add the first down part to the rule change that was made today.
If a team didn't deserve to win, they probably wouldn't have made it to overtime to begin with.
Since your Bronco fan, how would you had felt if there was a clear hold on the 82 yard bomb that allowed Favre more time to make the game winning throw and the officials missed the hold?
When there is a big play, such as an 82 yard bomb or 75 yard run on the ground, how often does a penalty (such as holding) occur whether it's called or not? Quite a bit.
The first down rule helps to eliminate the "one and done game over" plays to make sure the game doesn't end on a missed penalty.
If you are going to make it that elaborate you might as well just say each team is guaranteed a possession after that when anyone leads - game over.
Not exactly. In my first down rule, if the offense gains a first down AND then a touchdown, the defensive team doesn't get a chance at the ball.