New OT rules for the playoffs

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Thu Jan 06, 2011 10:55 pm

This makes it more interesting and I hope they consider this for all NFL OT games

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/1451 ... -in-effect

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:25 am

I really like this rule. I would love it if it were incorporated into the regular season.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 11:23 am

Justice Hog wrote:I really like this rule. I would love it if it were incorporated into the regular season.

I think that's their idea . . . in a few years this will be standard procedure.

Although I think it would be better for the league to let regular season games ending in a tie to stay ties. There's too much parity in the league right now, and letting more tie games show up into the standings will allow the deserving teams to rise in proportion to the lucky teams.

TCIYM · Post by **TCIYM** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 11:48 am

If the league goes to 18 games they should eliminate overtime altogether. If not, I would still prefer they play a regular 15 minute quarter than keep monkeying around with nonsense rules. The NHL did this with the shootout, and while everyone thought it was a good idea in the beginning it actually takes the game out of the game. Either allow ties or play real football with the same rules until someone wins. There doesn't always have to be a "happy medium" to every issue. Happy mediums should be reserved for the CBA.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:11 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
Justice Hog wrote:I really like this rule. I would love it if it were incorporated into the regular season.

I think that's their idea . . . in a few years this will be standard procedure.

Although I think it would be better for the league to let regular season games ending in a tie to stay ties. There's too much parity in the league right now, and letting more tie games show up into the standings will allow the deserving teams to rise in proportion to the lucky teams.

I like at least if you go to OT and lose you lose. I hate in hockey how if you win you win, if you lose you essentially still get a tie. I hear you on the lucky teams, but you probably either play few OT's or the luck evens out in the long run.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 2:08 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote:
Justice Hog wrote:I really like this rule. I would love it if it were incorporated into the regular season.

I think that's their idea . . . in a few years this will be standard procedure.

Although I think it would be better for the league to let regular season games ending in a tie to stay ties. There's too much parity in the league right now, and letting more tie games show up into the standings will allow the deserving teams to rise in proportion to the lucky teams.

I like at least if you go to OT and lose you lose. I hate in hockey how if you win you win, if you lose you essentially still get a tie. I hear you on the lucky teams, but you probably either play few OT's or the luck evens out in the long run.

I don't think it does necessarily. The Redskins had several OT games this year and I think it would have been more reflective of the team's actual strength to have those games down as ties. (Texans, Colts, and the Jaguars are the ones I remember off the top of my head.) Instead of being 6-10, we'd be 5-8-3, which to me seems like a much more fair and realistic appraisal of our performance.

From a quick glance at NFL.com's weekly score reports, it looks like the league averages about one overtime game every week, with several weeks containing more than one overtime game and only one or two non-OT weeks each season. Clearly overtime isn't an extraordinary thing, and dispersing a healthy number of ties into the league standings would help sort out a little more precisely the winners and losers. Including, importantly, some very close playoff races. I really don't like that they go straight from standings to tie breakers that may or may not be the best indicator of team strength. And in a league where parity dominates as much as it does today, there are going to be more 9-7 and 10-6 teams falling into ties in the playoff race. It'd be easier to sort out with ties factored in.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:13 pm

The Colts game was not an OT game, but the Titans and Packers were, and I think there might have even been a fifth one in there that I'm not recalling off the top of my head.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:51 pm

Deadskins wrote:The Colts game was not an OT game, but the Titans and Packers were, and I think there might have even been a fifth one in there that I'm not recalling off the top of my head.

Yeah, I should have looked that up first. It was four games: the Jags, Titans, Packers, and Texans — three of which were wins. Which would have made our record 3-9-4. Interesting . . .

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:44 pm

I hate the new rule. I don't necessarily think the old one was great but this thing is really contrived. There are so many scenarios/rulings. I'd rather simply see a full 15 minutes than this new thing. I think it's really bad. The game being played after regulation is a fundamentally different game.

Here's a weird one: In some cases the onside kick might be the percentage play! If the kicking team recovers, a FG wins. If they don't recover but stop the other team, a FG wins. If they don't recover but hold 'em to a FG, a TD wins.

Another weird one: If you give up a 1st-posession FG then your posession becomes 4-down territory all the way. It's a different game.

Very contrived. A different game. Way too many rules.

Just my opinion.

DarthMonk

ps - 1) Before the kickoff got moved from the 35 to the 30 the team that won the flip won the game 52% of the time. 2) The hockey rule encourages teams to try for a win. Before they did it almost all OTs ended in ties.

Justice Hog wrote:I really like this rule. I would love it if it were incorporated into the regular season.