tailgater
Monday, January 9, 2012 2:39:00 PM
The Denver victory has brought to light yet again the issue of overtime in the NFL.

The new rule is an improvement, but it's still not as perfect as it should be.

The best "out of the box" suggestion that I've heard is to make the teams play until one team has both the Lead and the Ball.

Any other ideas?

sd72
Monday, January 9, 2012 2:42:14 PM
Just add another quarter, and play against the clock as well.
HockeyDad
Monday, January 9, 2012 2:45:02 PM
Make them play OT with only 5 players per team.
riverdog
Monday, January 9, 2012 2:53:54 PM
I sure didn't like it last night!!! No dog in the fight, but did have dogs that needed to pee, took them out at end of regulation thinking I'd have at least five minutes to get back in........... and Denver is going nuts celebrating. Holy crap... the freaking things over and I missed the end after a three hour investment. Ahhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! {;-)
dubleuhb
Monday, January 9, 2012 2:57:36 PM
That was the first time the new rules were used, and we didn't get a good grasp of how it will really work. No one seen that coming. I don't see why each team should not get at least one offensive chance regardless of whether they score 3 or 6.
DrMaddVibe
Monday, January 9, 2012 3:04:52 PM
Terrible rule and terrible way to start it.

I really thought that ANY changes to league play was up to an owner vote.

Teams have been playing a certain way all damn year and NOW they want to change the rules?

riverdog
Monday, January 9, 2012 3:08:54 PM

I don't see why each team should not get at least one offensive chance regardless of whether they score 3 or 6.

dubleuhb wrote:

Exactly.

HockeyDad
Monday, January 9, 2012 3:16:05 PM
I think the rule change is actually already a year old. It is a bit goofy.
z6joker9
Monday, January 9, 2012 3:21:12 PM
If you don't want to risk losing in OT, win in regulation.

If you want a chance to win in OT, don't let them score a TD. Hold them to a FG or less (or get the ball first).

Or just do it college style. I think it's completely stupid to have one way to do it in the normal season, and one way in the playoffs.

Nicar
Monday, January 9, 2012 3:29:39 PM

The Denver victory has brought to light yet again the issue of overtime in the NFL.

The new rule is an improvement, but it's still not as perfect as it should be.

The best "out of the box" suggestion that I've heard is to make the teams play until one team has both the Lead and the Ball.

Any other ideas?

tailgater wrote:

How so, that doesn't make sense... they went over the stupid rules... Pitt lost the coin flip, Denver received... Denver scored.. game over.. just like in past it would have been.

wheelrite
Monday, January 9, 2012 3:53:21 PM
It's all about TV schedules..

That's why they do it in the playoffs and not the regular season..

pdxstogieman
Monday, January 9, 2012 6:35:37 PM
Play ten minute OT periods. Whoever is ahead at the end of the OT period wins same as regulation. Repeat 10 minute OT periods until there is a team ahead at the end of an OT.

Or do the stupid crap they pull in soccer. Have your field goal kickers come out and kick 5 field goals from 50 yards and whoever makes the most, their team wins.

Not serious about the 2nd idea but just shows how effing stupid soccer OT rules are.

stogiemonger
Monday, January 9, 2012 6:55:35 PM
I believe the idea was originally sudden death so that the game would end quickly. I like sudden death O.T. because it makes teams not want to go into overtime to begin with. This is what we had all season, and now we change it for the playoffs? It did.And...in the first game it was implemented, the outcome was exactly the same as if there were no rule change. I'm sorry, but what did we fix here? This, of course would be different if it were a field goal, then the opposing team gets a possession. If we don't like game winning field goals, why don't we just eliminate them from the game entirely? Dumb azz NFL rules committee.

Another overtime option would be another quarter of football. Games would last too long. (IMHO) Bring back sudden death.

nickatnite
Monday, January 9, 2012 7:04:36 PM

Terrible rule and terrible way to start it.

I really thought that ANY changes to league play was up to an owner vote.

Teams have been playing a certain way all damn year and NOW they want to change the rules?

DrMaddVibe wrote:

I think the rule change is actually already a year old. It is a bit goofy.

HockeyDad wrote:

The rule was changed last year. Hadn't been any OT games in the playoffs til yesterday.

wheelrite
Monday, January 9, 2012 7:07:27 PM
I think having a tied score would be more interesting...
nickatnite
Monday, January 9, 2012 7:08:08 PM

Just add another quarter, and play against the clock as well.

sd72 wrote:

Play ten minute OT periods. Whoever is ahead at the end of the OT period wins same as regulation. Repeat 10 minute OT periods until there is a team ahead at the end of an OT.

pdxstogieman wrote:

That was the first time the new rules were used, and we didn't get a good grasp of how it will really work. No one seen that coming. I don't see why each team should not get at least one offensive chance regardless of whether they score 3 or 6.

dubleuhb wrote:

All excellent alternatives.

wheelrite
Monday, January 9, 2012 7:13:13 PM
^^

never happen, not any of those options...

It would F up the TV schedules which are all about money...

blackfoot11
Monday, January 9, 2012 7:26:09 PM

How so, that doesn't make sense... they went over the stupid rules... Pitt lost the coin flip, Denver received... Denver scored.. game over.. just like in past it would have been.

Nicar wrote:

i hadda look at that twice myself.............

Stinkdyr
Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:36:11 AM
god is on Tboner's side. He arranged the rules to suit his prodigy.

so it was writ, so it was done.

🇨🇮

tailgater
Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:45:13 AM

How so, that doesn't make sense... they went over the stupid rules... Pitt lost the coin flip, Denver received... Denver scored.. game over.. just like in past it would have been.

Nicar wrote:

New rule or not, whenver there is an important OT game that ends on the first possession, everyone complains about the rules.

Truth is, the rules are imperfect and in situations like this it becomes glaringly obvious.

The push to eliminate a field goal/one possession victory is due to the vast improvement to the NFL kicking game.

The thought is to eliminate this "easy" victory, and in theory I think it's a good concept.

Of course, one 80 yard TD pass to start the OT will make us all think differently.

Mobile! Terms | Privacy | Contact Us | Help | © 1998-2026, CigarBid.com