There is a lot of back and forth about how overtime should be handled. Scoring a TD is an automatic win but if you kick a FG, the other team gets a shot.
Arguments can be made to support whatever your position is on whether this is fair.
I would propose to handle overtime differently. Each overtime period would be set for a fixed amount of time. A shortened period (5 minutes or 7 minutes, etc). This way, you play it out like it is just an extension of the end of the 4th quarter.
In the regular season, if both teams are still tied at the end of the shortened period, then it ends in a tie. If it is playoffs, you play for an additional period.
It is just an idea... the current format just does not sit well with me.
If nobody wins in the first 5 minutes, you have the kickers alternate 40 yard field goals. If both make them, you move back 5 yards and try again. You keep moving back until someone wins. If both miss on the same yardage attempt, each team picks a QC coach and they fight to the death at the 50 yard line.
Big difference between NFL and NHL.
You want the better team to eventually win.
There are far fewer field players on a hockey team. The goalies defend against the teams on the field at the end.
In a FG shootout the result depends on one specialized player out of 22 starters (plus SS) on the team. Not nearly as representative.
+1
To the extent that you're solving a problem with this, do you really think the outcome of the game last night would have been any different?
Buffalo probably does go right down the field and scores the game, and then KC probably answers right back again.
And we'd have people complaining that KC got the ball twice but Buffalo only got it once.
Quote:
If the first drive results in a TD. it’s not that hard…
To the extent that you're solving a problem with this, do you really think the outcome of the game last night would have been any different?
Buffalo probably does go right down the field and scores the game, and then KC probably answers right back again.
And we'd have people complaining that KC got the ball twice but Buffalo only got it once.
KC would never get the ball back. Buffalo would have gone for 2. Anyone with semblance of a brain knew Buffalo was done defensively. if Buffalo scores, their best shot to win was getting 2 yards with Josh Allen.
I know yesterday was unfortunate because the Bills didn't get the ball in what was an all-time great shootout. I know that the NFL is more offensive oriented than ever.
But on average, it is still heavily in the defenses favor that they'll atleast stop the offense from scoring a TD. That 32% number above is also taking into account all drives. The number for drives started after a kickoff is even less than that number.
I would still heavily consider a scenario where both teams get the ball regardless of the situation. I'd vote "YES" on that. But I also don't think the OT rules are totally flawed, the defense still needs to step up. But obviously in games like last night, that is unlikely to happen.
Quote:
If the first drive results in a TD. it’s not that hard…
To the extent that you're solving a problem with this, do you really think the outcome of the game last night would have been any different?
Buffalo probably does go right down the field and scores the game, and then KC probably answers right back again.
And we'd have people complaining that KC got the ball twice but Buffalo only got it once.
Last I checked the defense has a say in the outcome. Stop the other teams offense or cause a turnover.
People need to realize this is a team game. The defense is critical to winning. The rules are fine. They made it so the team with first possession has to score a TD or the other team gets possession.
Quote:
In comment 15571601 Dave in PA said:
Quote:
If the first drive results in a TD. it’s not that hard…
To the extent that you're solving a problem with this, do you really think the outcome of the game last night would have been any different?
Buffalo probably does go right down the field and scores the game, and then KC probably answers right back again.
And we'd have people complaining that KC got the ball twice but Buffalo only got it once.
KC would never get the ball back. Buffalo would have gone for 2. Anyone with semblance of a brain knew Buffalo was done defensively. if Buffalo scores, their best shot to win was getting 2 yards with Josh Allen.
That's very possible. I've thought about that, too. But Buffalo wasn't exactly gaining an edge with ST strategy last night (like the kickoff at the end of regulation), so we can't necessarily assume they'd have made the right choice there, although I do agree with you that going for two would be the call.
But the flip side is that if the rule was different, and both teams are guaranteed a possession, would KC defer and then they'd be the ones going for 2 to win? And in that case, isn't the coin toss still deciding the game?
This
The defense yesterday was abysmal
Quote:
In comment 15571645 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 15571601 Dave in PA said:
Quote:
If the first drive results in a TD. it’s not that hard…
To the extent that you're solving a problem with this, do you really think the outcome of the game last night would have been any different?
Buffalo probably does go right down the field and scores the game, and then KC probably answers right back again.
And we'd have people complaining that KC got the ball twice but Buffalo only got it once.
KC would never get the ball back. Buffalo would have gone for 2. Anyone with semblance of a brain knew Buffalo was done defensively. if Buffalo scores, their best shot to win was getting 2 yards with Josh Allen.
That's very possible. I've thought about that, too. But Buffalo wasn't exactly gaining an edge with ST strategy last night (like the kickoff at the end of regulation), so we can't necessarily assume they'd have made the right choice there, although I do agree with you that going for two would be the call.
But the flip side is that if the rule was different, and both teams are guaranteed a possession, would KC defer and then they'd be the ones going for 2 to win? And in that case, isn't the coin toss still deciding the game?
Maybe. I dont think there is an easy answer to any of it. I think it was just a situation where pretty much th ecoin flip winner decided the outcome.
Ive toyed with the idea of playing a 5th quarter, but I am not sure the answer is there either.
The thing that sucked last night is OT was about a anti-climatic as possible. Which kind of ruined what was a great game. I hate the college version as well.
OT just seems to be whatever you decide, it causes problems.
Quote:
In comment 15571647 GNewGiants said:
Quote:
In comment 15571645 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 15571601 Dave in PA said:
Quote:
If the first drive results in a TD. it’s not that hard…
To the extent that you're solving a problem with this, do you really think the outcome of the game last night would have been any different?
Buffalo probably does go right down the field and scores the game, and then KC probably answers right back again.
And we'd have people complaining that KC got the ball twice but Buffalo only got it once.
KC would never get the ball back. Buffalo would have gone for 2. Anyone with semblance of a brain knew Buffalo was done defensively. if Buffalo scores, their best shot to win was getting 2 yards with Josh Allen.
That's very possible. I've thought about that, too. But Buffalo wasn't exactly gaining an edge with ST strategy last night (like the kickoff at the end of regulation), so we can't necessarily assume they'd have made the right choice there, although I do agree with you that going for two would be the call.
But the flip side is that if the rule was different, and both teams are guaranteed a possession, would KC defer and then they'd be the ones going for 2 to win? And in that case, isn't the coin toss still deciding the game?
Maybe. I dont think there is an easy answer to any of it. I think it was just a situation where pretty much th ecoin flip winner decided the outcome.
Ive toyed with the idea of playing a 5th quarter, but I am not sure the answer is there either.
The thing that sucked last night is OT was about a anti-climatic as possible. Which kind of ruined what was a great game. I hate the college version as well.
OT just seems to be whatever you decide, it causes problems.
Last night was such a perfect storm, and had such a wild few minutes in regulation, that OT was bound to be somewhat anticlimactic, most likely.
But I'm not going to shed any tears for the losing team that could have executed better on specials and defense at the end of regulation to prevent the situation where their offense didn't get one last chance to bail them out again.
If nobody wins in the first 5 minutes, you have the kickers alternate 40 yard field goals. If both make them, you move back 5 yards and try again. You keep moving back until someone wins. If both miss on the same yardage attempt, each team picks a QC coach and they fight to the death at the 50 yard line.
Wtf... lol