View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently July 29th, 2014, 7:03 am



Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 NFL to vote on new OT rules 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post NFL to vote on new OT rules
Playoffs OT proposal to be considered
EmailPrintComments
9
Share
tweet
Associated Press
NEW YORK -- NFL owners will vote next week whether to allow each team a possession in overtime in the playoffs if the team winning the OT coin toss kicks a field goal on the first series.

Previously, the game would end whenever either side scores, as happened in the NFC Championship Game in January, with New Orleans beating Minnesota 31-28 on Garrett Hartley's kick.

But NFL competition committee chairman Rich McKay says a trend has developed showing too strong an advantage for teams winning the coin toss to start overtime.

If the team that falls behind by three points on the first series also kicks a field goal, then the game would continue under current sudden death rules.

The proposal is only for the postseason.

"Statistically, it is pretty clear there has been a change," McKay said. "When sudden death was put in for 1974, it clearly worked very well and was a good system. It brought excitement and effectively broke ties. From '74 to '93 you had a 50-50 [breakdown] in who would win between those who won the toss and who lost the toss.

"Changes occurred over time, and the numbers have changed to 59.8 percent winning the coin toss and winning the game. The team that loses the coin toss wins 38.5 percent.

"We are trying to put in a system that emphasizes more skill and strategy as opposed to the randomness of the coin flip."

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


March 17th, 2010, 12:10 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3712
Location: Davison Mi
Post 
Quote:
"Changes occurred over time, and the numbers have changed to 59.8 percent winning the coin toss and winning the game. The team that loses the coin toss wins 38.5 percent.


if we're talking about the payoffs.........what happens the rest of the 1.70 percent of the time???? :shock:

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


March 17th, 2010, 1:07 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
regularjoe12 wrote:
Quote:
"Changes occurred over time, and the numbers have changed to 59.8 percent winning the coin toss and winning the game. The team that loses the coin toss wins 38.5 percent.


if we're talking about the payoffs.........what happens the rest of the 1.70 percent of the time???? :shock:


The other 1.7% of the time the coin toss is screwed up by the referee.


March 17th, 2010, 3:28 pm
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post 
Actually, the other 1.7% of the games end in a tie. Obviously, that can't happen in a playoff game, but they were talking about all overtime games.

I could see why people would be in favor of this, but I don't have a problem with the current system. The way I see it, there are three phases to the game: offense, defense, and special teams. The team losing the coin toss has the opportunity to stop the other team from scoring. If that phase of their game doesn't do their job, they deserve to lose. Just my opinion.

_________________
Image


March 18th, 2010, 1:38 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2279
Post 
. Ive been saying it for a few seasons, but they should have just made a requirement for 6 points to be scored. This is close but may work a little better.

I guess if the 1st team gets it, and punts, then a field goal would win it for either team.

I am curious though... what if the original receiving team gives up a safety? Is it over. Does the other team still have to take the ball, drive down and score again to win?


March 18th, 2010, 1:54 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3712
Location: Davison Mi
Post 
DJ-B wrote:
. Ive been saying it for a few seasons, but they should have just made a requirement for 6 points to be scored. This is close but may work a little better.

I guess if the 1st team gets it, and punts, then a field goal would win it for either team.

I am curious though... what if the original receiving team gives up a safety? Is it over. Does the other team still have to take the ball, drive down and score again to win?


nope...once the safty is on the scorboard OT is over. no need to get the ball back you already won.

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


March 18th, 2010, 2:08 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2279
Post 
Where is that definied in the new rules?

Or is that what they mean by , if the team receiving the ball kicks a FG , then the other team gets a chance. But any other type of Score, (TD or Safety) ends OT right away?

I just didnt see mention of what happens with a Safety.


March 18th, 2010, 2:25 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2741
Post 
Well if a team gets a safety, they get the ball as well as the score, so why would they get the ball if they already scored?

A TD or safety would be an automatic win. A FG would give the opposite team a chance to match or win outright. If they score a FG, it then reverts to sudden death.


March 18th, 2010, 2:54 pm
Profile
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post 
I think this is bogus. I have no problem with the current system. If they truly wanted a fair shake then they should just play the way they do in college, but tweaked. The fact that they have these exceptions makes it silly.

_________________
Forward down the field!


March 19th, 2010, 2:47 pm
Profile
Junior Varsity

Joined: March 30th, 2009, 11:55 pm
Posts: 182
Post Re: NFL to vote on new OT rules
I disagree, and am glad that at the least it is getting a look. Understand, I used to follow the mindset most often expressed- "the defense/special teams get paid too, etc". But the game has changed, and I found this part of the original post particularly illuminating:

steensn wrote:
"Statistically, it is pretty clear there has been a change," McKay said. "When sudden death was put in for 1974, it clearly worked very well and was a good system. It brought excitement and effectively broke ties. From '74 to '93 you had a 50-50 [breakdown] in who would win between those who won the toss and who lost the toss.

"Changes occurred over time, and the numbers have changed to 59.8 percent winning the coin toss and winning the game. The team that loses the coin toss wins 38.5 percent.

"We are trying to put in a system that emphasizes more skill and strategy as opposed to the randomness of the coin flip."


It doesn't surprise me that the statistics have swung this way. This isn't your fathers (or yours, if you happen to be in my age bracket :oops: ) NFL. They have spent the last 10-15 years trying to increase offensive production through constant rule changes that favor the offense- from moving the kickoff back in an attempt to increase starting field position, to the persistant handcuffing of DBs in their coverage, to the point that now it's hard to look at a QB crosseyed without drawing a 15-yard flag.

Not surprising to me at all the advantage has swung towards the winners of the coin toss in a substantial way. Maybe it's time to realize these changes have impacted the competitive balance of OT scenarios, especially in the playoffs, where they matter most. I'd be perfectly fine with them taking the game away from the result of the coin toss, the flags of the officials, and the legs of the kickers... and putting it back on the teams and the coaches where, imo, is where it belongs.


March 23rd, 2010, 11:50 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5022064

Done deal...

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


March 24th, 2010, 11:05 am
Profile
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post 
I said it before and i'll say it again, I hate this rule. It's silly and arbitrary now and even worse then before. Why is it just in the playoffs? Why do both teams need to get a possession? PLAY DEFENSE! Just because you can't stop a team doesn't mean it's unfair. If you look at the numbers it wasn't an overwhelming number of teams that win the coin toss win the game. It was 60-40. If it was 70-30 or 80-20 then sure it would warrant a change, but not now. Another thing that bothers me is that it downplays the role of the kicker somewhat as well.

The fact that Minnesota, the team that got the short end of the stick, voted no, is surprising. I think that the NFL looked at the rule because of that game.

If there was going to be a better scenario then the new rule and previous rule, I think it would be to just play 8 or 10 minutes more and whoever is up at the end of that time wins. If they are still tied, keep going. That's how it is in the rest of the major sports (except for shootouts...field goal kicking contest?)

_________________
Forward down the field!


March 24th, 2010, 11:47 am
Profile
Post 
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I said it before and i'll say it again, I hate this rule. It's silly and arbitrary now and even worse then before. Why is it just in the playoffs? Why do both teams need to get a possession? PLAY DEFENSE! Just because you can't stop a team doesn't mean it's unfair. If you look at the numbers it wasn't an overwhelming number of teams that win the coin toss win the game. It was 60-40. If it was 70-30 or 80-20 then sure it would warrant a change, but not now. Another thing that bothers me is that it downplays the role of the kicker somewhat as well.

The fact that Minnesota, the team that got the short end of the stick, voted no, is surprising. I think that the NFL looked at the rule because of that game.

If there was going to be a better scenario then the new rule and previous rule, I think it would be to just play 8 or 10 minutes more and whoever is up at the end of that time wins. If they are still tied, keep going. That's how it is in the rest of the major sports (except for shootouts...field goal kicking contest?)


I disagree and I think you're #'s are inaccurate. I think it is more like 70% of the time the team getting the ball in OT wins.

That said, this new rule is silly. I don't want to see the exact same situation as college, because it is too easy to score in college (they damn near give you the ball in FG range), but I would like to see something like a regular kickoff to each team, or each team gets an opportunity from THEIR 35 (rather than the opposing teams 35).

It just seems ridiculous that an entire season can come down to a coin flip. Especially in the NFL, where the salary cap seems to dictate that you can't be great on both sides of the ball (good maybe, but I don't think any team has been truly great on both sides of the ball). It's unfair for teams that are offense heavy to never even get to showcase their talent in OT.


March 24th, 2010, 11:52 am
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post 
I got the 60-40 numbers from this article: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5022064

I also heard, but have not been able to substantiate it yet, that even though the team that gets the ball first wins 60 percent of the time, the number of teams won it on their first possession is only like 35%. If that's true then this rule change is even more ridiculous.

_________________
Forward down the field!


March 24th, 2010, 12:26 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I got the 60-40 numbers from this article: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5022064

I also heard, but have not been able to substantiate it yet, that even though the team that gets the ball first wins 60 percent of the time, the number of teams won it on their first possession is only like 35%. If that's true then this rule change is even more ridiculous.


I don't see why it's an issue to allow both teams to have a possession?

It gives both teams a chance to win the game outright, or for a tie to occur if a FG is kicked on the opening possession, which happens more than it should to determine a game. 35% is more than a third of the time. That means that the coin flip IS determining about a third of the games going into OT. That's still not fair.


March 24th, 2010, 2:14 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.