NFL considering two possessions in OT

finally i always thought it was unfair game pretty much being decided on the flip of a coin due to field goals.
 
Not in favor of two possesions.

I am in favor of making fg's nill in OT though.

require either team to score six and six only.
 
i like first to 6 better than no field goals.

if this goes down favre is coming back.
 
yupp first to 6, does not sound bad at all, but then you will be taking punters out of the game which is not fair because teams pay hefty salaries for these guys to do their job
 
Im wondering if this would even be discussed if the shoe were on the other foot.
 
Originally Posted by DubA169

i like first to 6 better than no field goals.

if this goes down favre is coming back.
Favre's decision hangs on a NFL overtime rule change?
laugh.gif
 
it doesn't hang on it. but i think he would throw it in the pro column when weighing his decision.
 
I don't think the nfl is going to last long in the next couple of decades, so I say they do anything to keep the sport alive.
 
Originally Posted by itstmac

yupp first to 6, does not sound bad at all, but then you will be taking punters out of the game which is not fair because teams pay hefty salaries for these guys to do their job

They do?


And I like the first to 6 as well.
 
OT is fine the way it is.

But if I were to alter it I would have it like college where each team would get possessions except instead of starting at the opponent's 25 the offensive team would start wherever it is they're KR can return the kickoff to.
 
OT is NOT fine the way it is. I'm glad this is finally being discussed by the decision makers. You see the stats out there that the team winning the coin toss has won 60% in recent years? That's just not right.
 
Each team already has 4 quarters to win a game. You pay your defense MILLIONS to stop the other team just like you pay your offense to put up points.

No need to change it. OT is crunch time. You can't stop the other team then too bad.

If it aint broke, don't fix it
grin.gif

 
The only real reason why this is acceptable is that there is less time for players to have injuries, but I can't think of any other good reasons. There are ways to actually lessen injuries if you get rid of the kickoffs. I have this right up there with pitchers batting and jump balls on my ridiculous scale.
 
Originally Posted by RKO2004

If it aint broke, don't fix it
grin.gif

From the 2000 through 2007 regular seasons, there have been 124 overtime games. In every single game except one (I believe), the team that won the toss elected to receive. And those receiving teams won 60% of the time (and tied once). That's a relatively large advantage, particularly when compared to home field advantage.
It is broken. Some people are just too stuck in their ways and in love with dumb old traditions to realize it.
 
Originally Posted by Banks2Pierce

Originally Posted by RKO2004

If it aint broke, don't fix it
grin.gif

From the 2000 through 2007 regular seasons, there have been 124 overtime games. In every single game except one (I believe), the team that won the toss elected to receive. And those receiving teams won 60% of the time (and tied once). That's a relatively large advantage, particularly when compared to home field advantage.
It is broken. Some people are just too stuck in their ways and in love with dumb old traditions to realize it.


Did they win PERIOD or IN THE FIRST POSSESSION they had the ball?

Could be a deceiving stat if its the first option.

Each team already has 4 quarters to win a game. You pay your defense MILLIONS to stop the other team just like you pay your offense to put up points.

No need to change it. OT is crunch time. You can't stop the other team then too bad.


EACH team has 4 quarters to win the game. If you can't lock it up in that 60 minutes then you have the coin flip. If you lose the coin flip, you have your 50-60 million dollar defense to get you the ball back. Its simple.
 
I hate 'First to...' anything.

Give both teams a chance to have the ball somehow. Put a set time up there (like 10 minutes) or make it a match game like college (I get a field goal, you get the opportunity to either get a field goal or win the game with a TD); somehow, both teams deserve a chance with the ball.

'You have 4 quarters to win the game.' True, but because of a coin flip, one team gets 4 quarters plus another coupe minutes to try and score to win the game while the other team never even had a chance to score?

'You pay your defense millions to stop the other team's offense.' True, but BOTH teams pay their defenses millions of dollars to stop the ball, but only one team has to use their defense in overtime, because the other team won a coin flip? So the team who won the coin flip is paying their defense millions also, but doesn't have to worry about using them? Because they accurately called a coin toss?

It is broke.

Fix it.
 
laugh.gif
@ people saying it's fine as it is. Dumbest rule in history of sports. Imagine one day two great offensive teams, but bad or mediocre defensive teams meet in the Super Bowl and they go to OT. The whole season would be decided on a coin flip.
 
Back
Top Bottom