Proposed New Overtime Rules

[MadScientist]

Now that the rule has changed, using the playoffs as a test bed, there won't
be an overtime playoff game for a couple of years.

[get louder at lambeau]

Wait! Call the owners back into the conference room.

I just thought of a better solution. Keep overtime as sudden death, but FGs aren't allowed. You go for it or punt.

[RashanGary]

Wait! Call the owners back into the conference room.

I just thought of a better solution. Keep overtime as sudden death, but FGs aren't allowed. You go for it or punt.

haha. The horror. Thompson signed a quality LT to a deal that goes year by year if the Packers choose. They "could" draft a LT that would push Clifton and if that player ends up becoming reliable, they can cut Clifton after one year, with no real loss other than his 1st years pay in an uncapped year.

The horror!!

[get louder at lambeau]

Wait! Call the owners back into the conference room.

I just thought of a better solution. Keep overtime as sudden death, but FGs aren't allowed. You go for it or punt.

haha. The horror. Thompson signed a quality LT to a deal that goes year by year if the Packers choose. They "could" draft a LT that would push Clifton and if that player ends up becoming reliable, they can cut Clifton after one year, with no real loss other than his 1st years pay in an uncapped year.

The horror!!

So...

...

...

...I'lll take that as you like my proposal?

[Joemailman]

Wait! Call the owners back into the conference room.

I just thought of a better solution. Keep overtime as sudden death, but FGs aren't allowed. You go for it or punt.

With our punters? Go for it I guess.

[RashanGary]

haha. I don't know how that got in here. I looked for it in the other thread and couldn't find it. Here it is.

[pbmax]

Horrible. Ridiculously complicated to satisfy too many groups. A safety can win the game but not a FG. Dopes.

The only good part of this is that like with the 2 point conversion (according to Peter King), the coaches got jobbed while they were not even in the room. The vote was originally going to happen tomorrow, but they moved it up while the coaches were golfing.

[pbmax]

This isn't promising. And I know it covers a lot of unlikely scenarios, but its quite complicated.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/88956802.html

[hoosier]

This isn't promising. And I know it covers a lot of unlikely scenarios, but its quite complicated.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/88956802.html

Yuck. A good rule is one that seems intuitive once you repeat it and mull it over a little. This list of scenarios, as one of the JSO comments put it, simply causes you to "lose the will to live."

[ThunderDan]

It seems like the NFL was in a rush to fix the OT problem. Doesn't seem like they addressed the issue at all to me.

Teams will now defer if they win the coin toss. That way if the other team scores a FG you know you have 4 downs when you have the ball. They are basically giving the 2nd team 33% more plays per series. If it's 3 and 8 and I know I can't punt on 4th down, I would call for a 5 yard crossing route and set-up 4 and 3. If the guy breaks a tackle maybe I get a first.

This potential in the new rule seems like a much bigger advantage than winning the coin toss as is.

[ThunderDan]

The other issue I have with this rule is that it is only for the playoffs. It will take 10-15 years (or longer) to have enough overtime games to have a statistically significant sample to see if there is an unfair bias in the new rule.

[channtheman]

I think had they just made it so that you can't punt (as someone else said) it would mean BOTH teams knew they had to go for it on 4th down. (Issue then becomes the other team getting an unfair advantage of field position if they were to stop the opposing team on their own 20 yard line).

Really, I don't think overtime was that bad.

[channtheman]

double

[CaptainKickass]

Sure feels like the NFL owners voted for "change for the sake of change".

I can't think of any other "playoff only" NFL rules off the top of my head. Are there any?

In addressing the issue of "fair/unfair advantage" concerning possession in overtime....

I'm pretty damn sure that this issue was addressed a long ass time ago by the great forefathers of football. They too recognized the need for a way to fairly balance the odds regarding possession and overtime to which everyone agreed to.

They called it "The Coin Toss".

[pbmax]

It seems like the NFL was in a rush to fix the OT problem. Doesn't seem like they addressed the issue at all to me.

Teams will now defer if they win the coin toss. That way if the other team scores a FG you know you have 4 downs when you have the ball. They are basically giving the 2nd team 33% more plays per series. If it's 3 and 8 and I know I can't punt on 4th down, I would call for a 5 yard crossing route and set-up 4 and 3. If the guy breaks a tackle maybe I get a first.

This potential in the new rule seems like a much bigger advantage than winning the coin toss as is.

I don't know if they will defer. This is unlike college where you are GUARANTEED a possession. If you kickoff and yield a TD, then its over. What will change will be increased motivation to keep the drive alive while in FG range. Teams will be less likely to run left for a yard to get in the middle of the field. They will call a play for a first down.

Long field goals become more problematic as well. Teams will be more likely to punt.