PDA

View Full Version : New Over-Time rules for...



JDSteeler
12-29-2010, 03:43 AM
...2010 Playoffs!!!

I heard this on the radio, and I'm not sure anyone posted this before.

The new rules are similar to that of the College Football Rules.

1.) The team who initially wins the toss, obviously has possession first.

A.) If "First-Possession Team" scores a TD, it's GAME OVER.

B.) If the FPT scores a FG, the other team has the opportunity to
match, or WIN by scoring a TD.

C.) The first team to score, after a FG tie, is the WINNER.

Here's the link!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5022064

JD

SidSmythe
12-29-2010, 07:02 AM
Not a bad idea ...

Although I think my solution is the best:

~Both teams get a possession.
~If initial team gets a FG, the oppenent must score a TD
~If initial team scores a TD, the opponent must go for 2 points if they score a TD
~If neither team scores, it becomes sudden death

Northern_Blitz
12-29-2010, 10:30 AM
I prefer sudden death.

This is just the league further devaluing defences. There are 3 phases to the game and they are all important.

I think that the winner of the coin toss in OT is generally 50% to win the game. In 2009, the winner of the coin flip won 8/15 games, about half. Six of those 8 games were decided on the first drive. It's better to be the home team than to win the coin toss (10/15).

http://robertsfootballnotes.blogspot.com/2010/03/nfl-overtime-rule-change-wont-affect.html

This year, in the first 9 weeks there were 11 OT games. Only 1 of those games ended on the first posession.

http://www.falcfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=14177

This is just the league protecting against any possible backlash in case Manning or Brady lose in OT without touching the ball. It's a stupid rule and its one more reason that you don't need a good D in the NFL anymore.

Mister Pittsburgh
12-29-2010, 10:33 AM
I prefer sudden death.

This is just the league further devaluing defences. There are 3 phases to the game and they are all important.

I think that the winner of the coin toss in OT is generally 50% to win the game. In 2009, the winner of the coin flip won 8/15 games, about half. Six of those 8 games were decided on the first drive. It's better to be the home team than to win the coin toss (10/15).

http://robertsfootballnotes.blogspot.com/2010/03/nfl-overtime-rule-change-wont-affect.html

This year, in the first 9 weeks there were 11 OT games. Only 1 of those games ended on the first posession.

http://www.falcfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=14177

This is just the league protecting against any possible backlash in case Manning or Brady lose in OT without touching the ball. It's a stupid rule and its one more reason that you don't need a good D in the NFL anymore.

Good information. Seems there is no need to tweak what is working if it is 50% as is.

Crash
12-29-2010, 11:16 AM
Hate it. They changed the rules because Favre throws a pick in regulation, and the year before Peyton Manning takes a bad sack in regulation needing a first down to advance in the playoffs.

Disgusting.

RuthlessBurgher
12-29-2010, 11:20 AM
...2010 Playoffs!!!

I heard this on the radio, and I'm not sure anyone posted this before.

The new rules are similar to that of the College Football Rules.

1.) The team who initially wins the toss, obviously has possession first.

A.) If "First-Possession Team" scores a TD, it's GAME OVER.

B.) If the FPT scores a FG, the other team has the opportunity to
match, or WIN by scoring a TD.

C.) The first team to score, after a FG tie, is the WINNER.

Here's the link!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5022064

JD

Yes...new rules for OT in the playoffs. The rules you posted are correct, except for your statement about it being similar to College Football rules. It's not contrived like college football where each team gets the ball at the 25 yard line. I hate that. In the NFL, there is still a kickoff, and teams need to drive down the field (i.e. they aren't automatically placed in FG range from the start like in college...I think that's stupid).

papillon
12-29-2010, 07:47 PM
I hate all of the options except to play another quarter. It's the playoffs the season is over once you lose. Play another quarter of football, so that, the game is decided by playing football the way it is designed to be played.

In the regular season you can use the other stupid rules. The playoffs should be played like football, period.

Pappy

SteelCrazy
12-29-2010, 08:19 PM
I would prefer an extended time period of 5 minutes and at the end the highest score wins, if still a tie, play another 5 minutes.

hawaiiansteel
12-29-2010, 08:24 PM
I say go straight to penalty kicks, look what that's done for the popularity of soccer... :wink:

skyhawk
12-29-2010, 09:45 PM
I love the new rule.

But not with this Steelers offense this year in the red zone. So I hope they don't implement it this year.

RuthlessBurgher
12-30-2010, 04:36 PM
I say go straight to penalty kicks, look what that's done for the popularity of soccer... :wink:

Keep the ice rink at Heinz Field for the playoffs. We can decide it like they do in hockey...with a shootout. I nominate Casey Hampton to play goalie for us. :wink:

hawaiiansteel
12-30-2010, 05:34 PM
I say go straight to penalty kicks, look what that's done for the popularity of soccer... :wink:

Keep the ice rink at Heinz Field for the playoffs. We can decide it like they do in hockey...with a shootout. I nominate Casey Hampton to play goalie for us. :wink:


we would be at a serious disadvantage though within our own division...the Ravens could put Terrence Cody in goal, the Bengals have Andre Smith and Shaun Rogers now plays for the Browns...

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/terrence-cody-fat.jpghttp://i650.photobucket.com/albums/uu223/Pitbull1647/andre-smith.jpghttp://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu185/hoopermark/rogersshaun.jpg

Starlifter
01-04-2011, 01:58 AM
I haven't really seen much about this so far on the boards and I thought it might be fun to get a good debate going before this weekend regarding the new rules for overtime.

quick recap: sudden death still applies BUT only if the team that gets the ball first scores a TD. If they only get a FG the other team gets the ball. They can then win with a TD or kick a FG and then after that next score wins the game.

my thoughts:

I hate this. I think it's poorly conceived and most likely will have unintended consequences. the argument for it is that a coin toss shouldn't determine the winner. The stats don't back that up in recent history. Also, it's insulting to defensive players that they can't stop a team from driving. Now if they NFL wants to admit publicly they stack the deck against the defense because points equals ratings - well, that would be a fun can of worms to open.

now regarding the new rules. first question. If you win the toss - do you still receive? It seems to me, the team that has the ball second (assuming your defense is good enough to prevent a TD) has a HUGE advantage. Let's say you win the toss and defer. The first team that gets the ball is going to play it straight up. In other words, 3 downs to get 10 yards and move the chains. Probably no big risks, hope for a TD, kick a FG if you must. In that scenario the team that gets the ball second knows EXACTLY what it has to do AND it now has 4 downs to do it. The only way the second team with the ball isn't in 4 down territory is if the first team fails completely to score. I think with the way the NFL favors offense a team with 4 tries to get a first down has a high percentage of success. You also get the option of using 4 downs to get in FG range and then taking a few shots for the win. Something the first team doesn't have the luxury of doing.

I know this is complicated which is why I think it's a bad idea. Football isn't played by mental giants. Donavan already proved that a few years ago in overtime. Keep it simple. Have faith in your defense - first team to score wins.

now, talk amongst yourselves......... :lol: :lol:

fordfixer
01-04-2011, 02:39 AM
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15417 (http://www.planetsteelers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15417)

Starlifter
01-04-2011, 03:44 AM
jeez, how'd i miss that?!?...... :HeadBanger :HeadBanger

Chachi
01-04-2011, 09:25 AM
The OT rules changes are another over reaction to something that wasn't broken in the first place.

It's just like the current situation where fans are complaining a team with a better record must go on the road in the playoffs, or a team with a losing record even made the playoffs.

Just because something happens that you don't like, it doesn't mean it's broken.

BradshawsHairdresser
01-04-2011, 09:34 PM
[quote="papillon"]I hate all of the options except to play another quarter. It's the playoffs the season is over once you lose. Play another quarter of football, so that, the game is decided by playing football the way it is designed to be played.

In the regular season you can use the other stupid rules. The playoffs should be played like football, period.

:Clap :Clap :Clap :Clap
I agree with this.

Shoe
01-05-2011, 12:24 AM
When you guys say "gets the ball", do you mean the FG kicking team kicks off? Or is it that stupid get-the-ball-at-the-25-yard-line thing?

Basically, first one to 4 points wins? If that's the case, I think that's GREAT. A FG is much too easy to navigate for IMO.

You don't want games decided by a kicker (who isn't really a football player). You want games decided by football teams. This change minimizes the importance of kickers, and maximizes the spirit of football = trying to score TOUCHDOWNS, and trying to stop TOUCHDOWNS.


quick recap: sudden death still applies BUT only if the team that gets the ball first scores a TD. If they only get a FG the other team gets the ball. They can then win with a TD or kick a FG and then after that next score wins the game.

RuthlessBurgher
01-05-2011, 01:44 PM
When you guys say "gets the ball", do you mean the FG kicking team kicks off? Or is it that stupid get-the-ball-at-the-25-yard-line thing?

Basically, first one to 4 points wins? If that's the case, I think that's GREAT. A FG is much too easy to navigate for IMO.

You don't want games decided by a kicker (who isn't really a football player). You want games decided by football teams. This change minimizes the importance of kickers, and maximizes the spirit of football = trying to score TOUCHDOWNS, and trying to stop TOUCHDOWNS.


quick recap: sudden death still applies BUT only if the team that gets the ball first scores a TD. If they only get a FG the other team gets the ball. They can then win with a TD or kick a FG and then after that next score wins the game.

Yes, there will be kickoffs. That 25 yard line business is stupid.

And it is not necessarily first to 4 points. If the first team scores a FG, and the second team fails to score, the game is over.

flippy
01-08-2011, 12:45 PM
What happens if a team gets a safety?

How about a simpler rule - No FGs in overtime and keep it sudden death.

Actually, why not just eliminate FGs? I hate them. I hate teams having to make a FG to tie or win a game. 10 seconds, 30 yards to go. No problem. FGs kinda make the NFL gay like basketball at the end where 30 seconds = infinite time on the clock.

Either score TDs or you don't deserve to win.

Plus kickers aren't really football players anyway. It'd free more money up for real players.

Crash
01-08-2011, 12:55 PM
The OT rules changes are another over reaction to something that wasn't broken in the first place.

It's just like the current situation where fans are complaining a team with a better record must go on the road in the playoffs, or a team with a losing record even made the playoffs.

Just because something happens that you don't like, it doesn't mean it's broken.

Yep. Favre throws a pick and doesn't see the ball in OT, Peyton takes a sack on his goal line needing two yards to advance in the playoffs the year before and doesn't see the ball in OT and all of the sudden the decades old format needed changed.

How about Peyton speak up and tells the world that he doesn't want his career to possibly end due to a freaking lockout?

Shoe
01-08-2011, 02:07 PM
What happens if a team gets a safety?

How about a simpler rule - No FGs in overtime and keep it sudden death.

Actually, why not just eliminate FGs? I hate them. I hate teams having to make a FG to tie or win a game. 10 seconds, 30 yards to go. No problem. FGs kinda make the NFL gay like basketball at the end where 30 seconds = infinite time on the clock.

Either score TDs or you don't deserve to win.

Plus kickers aren't really football players anyway. It'd free more money up for real players.

I think there needs to be FG though, to be fair. Eliminating FG bastardizes the game too much. If you can get into opposing territory twice, to kick two FG's, you should win.

I think the new system is a step in the right direction. I don't think I like how it's over if the opposing team fails to score, but it could work. We'll wait and see. (I can actually see how that's fair, and does offer great suspense.)

Starlifter
01-08-2011, 09:04 PM
each team has 60 minutes to win the game. fail to do so and you are at the mercy of a coin and other elements beyond your control. Life isn't fair, why should it be any different in the NFL? don't like the sudden rules, fine! win the game in 60.

RuthlessBurgher
01-13-2011, 02:45 PM
What happens if a team gets a safety?

A safety ends the game. The team that gets tackled in the end zone had their chance with the ball, but the other team scored instead. Game over.

NJ-STEELER
01-13-2011, 07:50 PM
what if there's a safety on the opening kickoff of OT