That regular season stat, which says includes playoffs, reflects an 86-67-10 record for the team that wins the toss, good for a 52.8 win%.
Remove the playoffs from that, and in the regular season, it moves to 76-66-10 (win % drops to 50%). Is it that the quality of offenses in the playoffs are that much better, accounting for a >40% discrepancy in win%? Or is the sample size in the playoffs still too small to make an accurate reading on that. Off the bat, I thought that regular season win% number was way too low, and it would be closer to the playoff win%.
In comment 15572022 ManningLobsItBurressAlone said:
Quote:
That regular season stat, which says includes playoffs, reflects an 86-67-10 record for the team that wins the toss, good for a 52.8 win%.
Remove the playoffs from that, and in the regular season, it moves to 76-66-10 (win % drops to 50%). Is it that the quality of offenses in the playoffs are that much better, accounting for a >40% discrepancy in win%? Or is the sample size in the playoffs still too small to make an accurate reading on that. Off the bat, I thought that regular season win% number was way too low, and it would be closer to the playoff win%.
I think it's the fact that during the playoffs the Defenses are leaving it all out on the field and are completely gassed at the end of the games. When it's crunch time in the playoffs you don't rotate your best players out for a breather
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
But the Giants sucking made me lose interest in the NFL in general. However, those two great close playoff games yesterday reminded my why I love football so much. I'm more an old school defense guy (80's Giants) but this arena league crazy offense is fun to watch when you have no emotional investment in any of these teams. I have become a fair weather Bill's fan, they are easy to root for.
Oh like what if they put the ball at the 50 yard line and then had a player from each team start at like the 20 yards line and then they both raced and first one to get the ball wins option to decide if they want to receive or defer.
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
Once again, what Bills should have done in regulation is not the point here. No one is arguing that KC did not deserve the win. It's about a screwed-up set of rules for OT during playoff games. it would be just as silly if the game was tied with 10 mins left and then went to OT
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
Once again, what Bills should have done in regulation is not the point here. No one is arguing that KC did not deserve the win. It's about a screwed-up set of rules for OT during playoff games. it would be just as silly if the game was tied with 10 mins left and then went to OT
It is not screwed up to expect an NFL team to hold another team to a FG with the game on the line, and if they can't do so to give that team a loss.
of opportunity for either team to win during regulation and there is 3 components of a team. If you go into OT and the other team geTs the ball first, stop them from getting a TD.
13 seconds. Buffalo had the game in their hands and blew it. Buffalo had 2 opportunities to stop Kansas city and couldn't do it.
If McDermott felt his defense was so gassed and couldn't stop Kansas city, then maybe he should have gone for 2 after the go ahead TD. He knew a FG would tie and it was up to a coin flip in OT.
Yes the Bills should have made a stop if they wanted to win
How many times does it have to be explained that this has nothing to do with regulation or that KC didn't deserve the win?
What we are talking about is if the OT rules for the playoffs are any good or not. Obviously from the stats the current rules are a huge advantage to the team winning the coin toss. For a sport that is billed as entertainment, I contend the current rules are absurd and need to be adjusted due to the fact that as they sit now they will always generate arguments that they suck because luck seems to play a much larger role in the playoffs
RE: Yes the Bills should have made a stop if they wanted to win
But both teams should have to make a stop. It’s like having a walk off homer in the top of the 10th inning
Or a boxing match that ends in a draw and it gets decided by a coin flip which boxer gets to take the first free shot at the other one
Right. Honestly play it like extra innings baseball. Road team gets the ball first, home team has last kicks. After the first exchange of possessions you have to go for two. After the third it’s sudden death.
I never really understood "sudden death" in the playoffs
What would be the harm in playing out a 10-minute OT period to its conclusion? Was anyone so eager for yesterday's game to end that another half hour would have been a bad thing?
No TV timeouts, no 2-minute warning, just play the thing out and see who wins.
If you want to increase the odds of having a winner determined by then, take extra points out of the mix, you need to go for 2 after any TD.
Winning the flip, or winning on the 1st possession?
I'm pretty sure the numbers suggest that the team that wins the flip wins 57% of the time in OT (removing games that end in ties). But they only win 22% of the time with a TD on their first possession. 78% of OT games have both teams possessing the ball.
There isn't a way to solve for this.
Buffalo could have and should have won in regulation. They blew the game.
So it was everything yesterday. And most of the time the defenses will have less than a full tank.
But it wasn't.
If both teams had a possession, KC would have scored, Buffalo would have gotten the ball back and scored to tie the game, and then KC would have scored again.
The idea that Buffalo was jobbed is nuts unless/until either defense would have figured out how to stop their opponent.
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
I don't see how this is the answer. Why should there be another 10 minutes of game before getting to a sudden death overtime? The game is tied after 60 minutes. Why shouldn't that qualify both teams for the sudden death? What's the magic of 70 minutes as opposed to 60 minutes? Also, you are risking ending right back in the sudden death conundrum where the "fairness" police will show up. Instead of after 60 minutes, "it all comes down to a coin toss," now after 70 minutes, "it all comes down to a coin toss." You're just kicking the can down the road 10 more minutes of game time.
I also think the college rules are not the answer because once you guarantee both teams a possession no matter what, you have simply adjusted the advantage to the offense that goes second (now they know if a field goal is enough, or if they have to go on fourth down, or potentially try a 2 point conversion). You have not eliminated the advantage of winning the coin toss.
For the longest time, the "fairness" crowd whined and complained about sudden death in the NFL. The current rules seems like a good compromise between the harshness of immediate sudden death and the farcical spectacle that is college football overtime. But the fairness people are never going to be satisfied. There will always always always be reasons people will come up with for why the rules, whatever they are, are not fair.
I don't see how this is the answer. Why should there be another 10 minutes of game before getting to a sudden death overtime? The game is tied after 60 minutes. Why shouldn't that qualify both teams for the sudden death? What's the magic of 70 minutes as opposed to 60 minutes?
It's 10 more minutes to break the tie. You're certainly entitled to your opinion though, as I am to mine.
did not feel at least a little bad for Josh Allen. He deserved better. But the Buffalo Bills, the team of players and its coaches, got exactly what they deserved.
has Mahomes, Kelce, Hill, Hardman, etc....on offense, the odds of winning go WAY up.
If the team winning the flip has Jones, Barkley, Pettis, Golladay and Dixon as the punter....well, winning the flip really only means that the opposition will be set up in pretty decent field position in about a minute or so.
has Mahomes, Kelce, Hill, Hardman, etc....on offense, the odds of winning go WAY up.
If the team winning the flip has Jones, Barkley, Pettis, Golladay and Dixon as the punter....well, winning the flip really only means that the opposition will be set up in pretty decent field position in about a minute or so.
Buffalo was a successfully executed pooch or squib kick away from not letting it get to a coin flip, weren't they?
At a certain point, you have to do the real football things properly before you blame the luck of the coin, right?
What would be the harm in playing out a 10-minute OT period to its conclusion? Was anyone so eager for yesterday's game to end that another half hour would have been a bad thing?
No TV timeouts, no 2-minute warning, just play the thing out and see who wins.
If you want to increase the odds of having a winner determined by then, take extra points out of the mix, you need to go for 2 after any TD.
I like this idea a lot. For playoffs, play out the entire 10min (to 15min) period. Have a 5 minute rest before it starts. Get rid of 1pt extra points to reduce chance of ties.
I might also consider knowing who kicks and receives at the beginning of the game so you can adjust your strategy. Some ideas for predetermining possession: home team decides to kick or receive (adds a little bit to home field advantage), separate coin flip at beginning of the game, winner of normal pre-game coin toss decides to receive kickoff in 1st half and OT or receive 2nd half only (this would offset the advantage that currently exists for deferring the kickoff).
There is no easy solution. But I think they can make some improvement tweaks. Heck the new rule is at least better than the old rule where you could win with a field goal.
has Mahomes, Kelce, Hill, Hardman, etc....on offense, the odds of winning go WAY up.
If the team winning the flip has Jones, Barkley, Pettis, Golladay and Dixon as the punter....well, winning the flip really only means that the opposition will be set up in pretty decent field position in about a minute or so.
Buffalo was a successfully executed pooch or squib kick away from not letting it get to a coin flip, weren't they?
At a certain point, you have to do the real football things properly before you blame the luck of the coin, right?
Im just saying that IF it gets to OT, and IF the team that wins that coin flip has those guys on offense, and the game can end if that offense scores a TD, the odds of that team winning the game are much greater than a team with an average/below average offense.
Im with you 100% on the issue that the game never should have reached OT. Once it did, the way both offenses were playing, the odds were pretty great that whoever got the ball first had a great chance to win the game. If the Bills had won, is anyone doubting that Allen could have taken them down for a TD, the way that offense was playing? But we will never know.
the argument against the current rules. Seems like the current rules work appropriately. It's virtually a coin flip who wins based on the coin flip itself. How is that evidence for the argument to change the rules? Because of the outlier playoff game results?
RE: Winning the flip, or winning on the 1st possession?
I'm pretty sure the numbers suggest that the team that wins the flip wins 57% of the time in OT (removing games that end in ties). But they only win 22% of the time with a TD on their first possession. 78% of OT games have both teams possessing the ball.
There isn't a way to solve for this.
Buffalo could have and should have won in regulation. They blew the game.
Actually, in the playoffs, the record is 10-1 for those winning the flip with 7 of them settled on the first possession
RE: I don't understand the point of posting the OP stats to make
the argument against the current rules. Seems like the current rules work appropriately. It's virtually a coin flip who wins based on the coin flip itself. How is that evidence for the argument to change the rules? Because of the outlier playoff game results?
Yes. Teams don't substitute as much in the playoffs so therefore the Defenses are more gassed at the end of the game. The coin is fine for the regular season but I believe it should be changed during the playoffs
the argument against the current rules. Seems like the current rules work appropriately. It's virtually a coin flip who wins based on the coin flip itself. How is that evidence for the argument to change the rules? Because of the outlier playoff game results?
Yes. Teams don't substitute as much in the playoffs so therefore the Defenses are more gassed at the end of the game. The coin is fine for the regular season but I believe it should be changed during the playoffs
that everyone wanted Buffalo to win. Eveb casual fans.
If Buffalo won the toss and the game would everybody be crying about the OT rules?
Yes indeed, because it would not seem fair for KC to not have a chance
Ok, let's just dig into this:
Buffalo DID have a chance, even after they shit the bed in the final moments of regulation.
Playing defense is a chance.
Get a stop. Force a turnover. Encourage a FG.
Those are all things that a team can do in order to ensure that their own offense gets the ball back.
Buffalo did none of those things. They didn't get cheated. They came up short on one side of the ball in a scenario where the other side of their roster would have done better.
Let's be realistic - that's the issue, right?
RE: RE: Winning the flip, or winning on the 1st possession?
I'm pretty sure the numbers suggest that the team that wins the flip wins 57% of the time in OT (removing games that end in ties). But they only win 22% of the time with a TD on their first possession. 78% of OT games have both teams possessing the ball.
There isn't a way to solve for this.
Buffalo could have and should have won in regulation. They blew the game.
Actually, in the playoffs, the record is 10-1 for those winning the flip with 7 of them settled on the first possession
The scenario in the playoffs and in the regular season is exactly the same if we remove ties.
You're thinning out the sample size, which makes data less reliable. You know that, right?
There is no thinning of anything. You have had 11 playoff games that have gone to Overtime since they changed the rule that first TD wins. 10 of those have been won by the team that wins the coin flip. 7 out of the 10 won it on their first possession.
I'm not arguing for a change during the regular season, All I am talking about is a change for the post season
that everyone wanted Buffalo to win. Eveb casual fans.
If Buffalo won the toss and the game would everybody be crying about the OT rules?
Yes indeed, because it would not seem fair for KC to not have a chance
Ok, let's just dig into this:
Buffalo DID have a chance, even after they shit the bed in the final moments of regulation.
Playing defense is a chance.
Bu
Get a stop. Force a turnover. Encourage a FG.
Those are all things that a team can do in order to ensure that their own offense gets the ball back.
Buffalo did none of those things. They didn't get cheated. They came up short on one side of the ball in a scenario where the other side of their roster would have done better.
Let's be realistic - that's the issue, right?
LMAO...Why are you trying to put words in my mouth? I think the rule should be changed regardless of who won that game. There has not been one argument that the Bills got cheated or that KC did not deserve the win.
The OT rules for the playoffs are stupid. That game was a war yesterday, who wouldn't want to see 10 more mins of those two teams battling it out?
There is no thinning of anything. You have had 11 playoff games that have gone to Overtime since they changed the rule that first TD wins. 10 of those have been won by the team that wins the coin flip. 7 out of the 10 won it on their first possession.
I'm not arguing for a change during the regular season, All I am talking about is a change for the post season
IF WE REMOVE THE REGULAR SEASON TIES, the overall data set is comparable, would you agree?
And if you do agree, wouldn't it make sense to use a larger data set with the regular season ties excluded?
MG, I keep wanting to give you credit, but you're going to have to get your own brain to keep up at some point.
This is going to be a MENSA battle at the Special Olympics.
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
What would you have thought that would happen, if Buffalo won the coin flip? Would you be saying that Kansas City blew it?
What would be the harm in playing out a 10-minute OT period to its conclusion? Was anyone so eager for yesterday's game to end that another half hour would have been a bad thing?
No TV timeouts, no 2-minute warning, just play the thing out and see who wins.
If you want to increase the odds of having a winner determined by then, take extra points out of the mix, you need to go for 2 after any TD.
This was one game I was upset it had to come to an end. Real entertaining. Games like this I feel bad there had to be a looser. I like the go for 2 pt conversion idea….or what if in OT if the team wanted to kick an extra point you move the kick back to say the 35 yd line to make it more difficult? That way you can choose between going for 2 at 5 or kicking the extra point from the 35.
KC--TD
Buff--TD
KC--TD
Same result
Remove the playoffs from that, and in the regular season, it moves to 76-66-10 (win % drops to 50%). Is it that the quality of offenses in the playoffs are that much better, accounting for a >40% discrepancy in win%? Or is the sample size in the playoffs still too small to make an accurate reading on that. Off the bat, I thought that regular season win% number was way too low, and it would be closer to the playoff win%.
Remove the playoffs from that, and in the regular season, it moves to 76-66-10 (win % drops to 50%). Is it that the quality of offenses in the playoffs are that much better, accounting for a >40% discrepancy in win%? Or is the sample size in the playoffs still too small to make an accurate reading on that. Off the bat, I thought that regular season win% number was way too low, and it would be closer to the playoff win%.
I think it's the fact that during the playoffs the Defenses are leaving it all out on the field and are completely gassed at the end of the games. When it's crunch time in the playoffs you don't rotate your best players out for a breather
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
Million dollar failed idea right there!
Quote:
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
Clearly the rules favor the coin winner in a shootout.
The 90% figure makes sense since as the NFL has developed, the high scoring teams make the playoffs.
BUF - 7
KC - 7 game over.
Maybe - but the Bills would've had a chance to go for a 2 point conversion for the win.
Quote:
In comment 15572032 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
Once again, what Bills should have done in regulation is not the point here. No one is arguing that KC did not deserve the win. It's about a screwed-up set of rules for OT during playoff games. it would be just as silly if the game was tied with 10 mins left and then went to OT
Quote:
In comment 15572038 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 15572032 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
Once again, what Bills should have done in regulation is not the point here. No one is arguing that KC did not deserve the win. It's about a screwed-up set of rules for OT during playoff games. it would be just as silly if the game was tied with 10 mins left and then went to OT
It is not screwed up to expect an NFL team to hold another team to a FG with the game on the line, and if they can't do so to give that team a loss.
13 seconds. Buffalo had the game in their hands and blew it. Buffalo had 2 opportunities to stop Kansas city and couldn't do it.
If McDermott felt his defense was so gassed and couldn't stop Kansas city, then maybe he should have gone for 2 after the go ahead TD. He knew a FG would tie and it was up to a coin flip in OT.
What we are talking about is if the OT rules for the playoffs are any good or not. Obviously from the stats the current rules are a huge advantage to the team winning the coin toss. For a sport that is billed as entertainment, I contend the current rules are absurd and need to be adjusted due to the fact that as they sit now they will always generate arguments that they suck because luck seems to play a much larger role in the playoffs
Or a boxing match that ends in a draw and it gets decided by a coin flip which boxer gets to take the first free shot at the other one
Quote:
But both teams should have to make a stop. It’s like having a walk off homer in the top of the 10th inning
Or a boxing match that ends in a draw and it gets decided by a coin flip which boxer gets to take the first free shot at the other one
Right. Honestly play it like extra innings baseball. Road team gets the ball first, home team has last kicks. After the first exchange of possessions you have to go for two. After the third it’s sudden death.
No TV timeouts, no 2-minute warning, just play the thing out and see who wins.
If you want to increase the odds of having a winner determined by then, take extra points out of the mix, you need to go for 2 after any TD.
I'm pretty sure the numbers suggest that the team that wins the flip wins 57% of the time in OT (removing games that end in ties). But they only win 22% of the time with a TD on their first possession. 78% of OT games have both teams possessing the ball.
There isn't a way to solve for this.
Buffalo could have and should have won in regulation. They blew the game.
But it wasn't.
If both teams had a possession, KC would have scored, Buffalo would have gotten the ball back and scored to tie the game, and then KC would have scored again.
The idea that Buffalo was jobbed is nuts unless/until either defense would have figured out how to stop their opponent.
Quote:
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
I don't see how this is the answer. Why should there be another 10 minutes of game before getting to a sudden death overtime? The game is tied after 60 minutes. Why shouldn't that qualify both teams for the sudden death? What's the magic of 70 minutes as opposed to 60 minutes? Also, you are risking ending right back in the sudden death conundrum where the "fairness" police will show up. Instead of after 60 minutes, "it all comes down to a coin toss," now after 70 minutes, "it all comes down to a coin toss." You're just kicking the can down the road 10 more minutes of game time.
I also think the college rules are not the answer because once you guarantee both teams a possession no matter what, you have simply adjusted the advantage to the offense that goes second (now they know if a field goal is enough, or if they have to go on fourth down, or potentially try a 2 point conversion). You have not eliminated the advantage of winning the coin toss.
For the longest time, the "fairness" crowd whined and complained about sudden death in the NFL. The current rules seems like a good compromise between the harshness of immediate sudden death and the farcical spectacle that is college football overtime. But the fairness people are never going to be satisfied. There will always always always be reasons people will come up with for why the rules, whatever they are, are not fair.
I don't see how this is the answer. Why should there be another 10 minutes of game before getting to a sudden death overtime? The game is tied after 60 minutes. Why shouldn't that qualify both teams for the sudden death? What's the magic of 70 minutes as opposed to 60 minutes?
It's 10 more minutes to break the tie. You're certainly entitled to your opinion though, as I am to mine.
If the team winning the flip has Jones, Barkley, Pettis, Golladay and Dixon as the punter....well, winning the flip really only means that the opposition will be set up in pretty decent field position in about a minute or so.
If Buffalo won the toss and the game would everybody be crying about the OT rules?
If the team winning the flip has Jones, Barkley, Pettis, Golladay and Dixon as the punter....well, winning the flip really only means that the opposition will be set up in pretty decent field position in about a minute or so.
Buffalo was a successfully executed pooch or squib kick away from not letting it get to a coin flip, weren't they?
At a certain point, you have to do the real football things properly before you blame the luck of the coin, right?
No TV timeouts, no 2-minute warning, just play the thing out and see who wins.
If you want to increase the odds of having a winner determined by then, take extra points out of the mix, you need to go for 2 after any TD.
I like this idea a lot. For playoffs, play out the entire 10min (to 15min) period. Have a 5 minute rest before it starts. Get rid of 1pt extra points to reduce chance of ties.
I might also consider knowing who kicks and receives at the beginning of the game so you can adjust your strategy. Some ideas for predetermining possession: home team decides to kick or receive (adds a little bit to home field advantage), separate coin flip at beginning of the game, winner of normal pre-game coin toss decides to receive kickoff in 1st half and OT or receive 2nd half only (this would offset the advantage that currently exists for deferring the kickoff).
There is no easy solution. But I think they can make some improvement tweaks. Heck the new rule is at least better than the old rule where you could win with a field goal.
Quote:
has Mahomes, Kelce, Hill, Hardman, etc....on offense, the odds of winning go WAY up.
If the team winning the flip has Jones, Barkley, Pettis, Golladay and Dixon as the punter....well, winning the flip really only means that the opposition will be set up in pretty decent field position in about a minute or so.
Buffalo was a successfully executed pooch or squib kick away from not letting it get to a coin flip, weren't they?
At a certain point, you have to do the real football things properly before you blame the luck of the coin, right?
Im just saying that IF it gets to OT, and IF the team that wins that coin flip has those guys on offense, and the game can end if that offense scores a TD, the odds of that team winning the game are much greater than a team with an average/below average offense.
Im with you 100% on the issue that the game never should have reached OT. Once it did, the way both offenses were playing, the odds were pretty great that whoever got the ball first had a great chance to win the game. If the Bills had won, is anyone doubting that Allen could have taken them down for a TD, the way that offense was playing? But we will never know.
It would reward home field advantage in the Playoffs, which is something that makes sense.
Or hold them to the initial FG
I'm pretty sure the numbers suggest that the team that wins the flip wins 57% of the time in OT (removing games that end in ties). But they only win 22% of the time with a TD on their first possession. 78% of OT games have both teams possessing the ball.
There isn't a way to solve for this.
Buffalo could have and should have won in regulation. They blew the game.
Actually, in the playoffs, the record is 10-1 for those winning the flip with 7 of them settled on the first possession
Yes. Teams don't substitute as much in the playoffs so therefore the Defenses are more gassed at the end of the game. The coin is fine for the regular season but I believe it should be changed during the playoffs
If Buffalo won the toss and the game would everybody be crying about the OT rules?
Yes indeed, because it would not seem fair for KC to not have a chance
Quote:
the argument against the current rules. Seems like the current rules work appropriately. It's virtually a coin flip who wins based on the coin flip itself. How is that evidence for the argument to change the rules? Because of the outlier playoff game results?
Yes. Teams don't substitute as much in the playoffs so therefore the Defenses are more gassed at the end of the game. The coin is fine for the regular season but I believe it should be changed during the playoffs
That's based on a SSS though...
Quote:
that everyone wanted Buffalo to win. Eveb casual fans.
If Buffalo won the toss and the game would everybody be crying about the OT rules?
Yes indeed, because it would not seem fair for KC to not have a chance
Ok, let's just dig into this:
Buffalo DID have a chance, even after they shit the bed in the final moments of regulation.
Playing defense is a chance.
Get a stop. Force a turnover. Encourage a FG.
Those are all things that a team can do in order to ensure that their own offense gets the ball back.
Buffalo did none of those things. They didn't get cheated. They came up short on one side of the ball in a scenario where the other side of their roster would have done better.
Let's be realistic - that's the issue, right?
Quote:
Those are two different things, right?
I'm pretty sure the numbers suggest that the team that wins the flip wins 57% of the time in OT (removing games that end in ties). But they only win 22% of the time with a TD on their first possession. 78% of OT games have both teams possessing the ball.
There isn't a way to solve for this.
Buffalo could have and should have won in regulation. They blew the game.
Actually, in the playoffs, the record is 10-1 for those winning the flip with 7 of them settled on the first possession
The scenario in the playoffs and in the regular season is exactly the same if we remove ties.
You're thinning out the sample size, which makes data less reliable. You know that, right?
I'm not arguing for a change during the regular season, All I am talking about is a change for the post season
Quote:
In comment 15572413 LakeGeorgeGiant said:
Quote:
that everyone wanted Buffalo to win. Eveb casual fans.
If Buffalo won the toss and the game would everybody be crying about the OT rules?
Yes indeed, because it would not seem fair for KC to not have a chance
Ok, let's just dig into this:
Buffalo DID have a chance, even after they shit the bed in the final moments of regulation.
Playing defense is a chance.
Bu
Get a stop. Force a turnover. Encourage a FG.
Those are all things that a team can do in order to ensure that their own offense gets the ball back.
Buffalo did none of those things. They didn't get cheated. They came up short on one side of the ball in a scenario where the other side of their roster would have done better.
Let's be realistic - that's the issue, right?
LMAO...Why are you trying to put words in my mouth? I think the rule should be changed regardless of who won that game. There has not been one argument that the Bills got cheated or that KC did not deserve the win.
The OT rules for the playoffs are stupid. That game was a war yesterday, who wouldn't want to see 10 more mins of those two teams battling it out?
I'm not arguing for a change during the regular season, All I am talking about is a change for the post season
IF WE REMOVE THE REGULAR SEASON TIES, the overall data set is comparable, would you agree?
And if you do agree, wouldn't it make sense to use a larger data set with the regular season ties excluded?
MG, I keep wanting to give you credit, but you're going to have to get your own brain to keep up at some point.
They are not the same
Look, if your intent is for you to be an asshole again because you happen to be on your period, keep me out of your nonsense.
Quote:
In comment 15572032 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
If Buffalo wanted to win they should have done something to make that happen during the first 60+ minutes. It's a team sport. Defense and special teams are part of the game. We can't just feel bad for Allen and that offense.
No one is claiming otherwise. It's just so idiotic to have such an amazing game involving two QBs willing their teams to keep fighting that comes down to a coin flip. This is the #1 sport in America and it has the worse OT rules imaginable during the playoffs
For the playoffs, they should take a 10 min intermission, then play a 10 min quarter. If still tied then go to sudden death. That way you involve all 3 phases of the game and luck is not the major factor
It didn't come down to a coin flip. Buffalo had ample opportunity to win the game in regulation. They blew it. The only reason it went to OT is that they blew it.
These are the rules. Everyone knows them.
What would you have thought that would happen, if Buffalo won the coin flip? Would you be saying that Kansas City blew it?
No TV timeouts, no 2-minute warning, just play the thing out and see who wins.
If you want to increase the odds of having a winner determined by then, take extra points out of the mix, you need to go for 2 after any TD.
This was one game I was upset it had to come to an end. Real entertaining. Games like this I feel bad there had to be a looser. I like the go for 2 pt conversion idea….or what if in OT if the team wanted to kick an extra point you move the kick back to say the 35 yd line to make it more difficult? That way you can choose between going for 2 at 5 or kicking the extra point from the 35.