NFL could change overtime format for playoffs

[Revering4Blue]

NDIANAPOLIS (AP)—An NFL spokesman said Saturday the league could change its overtime format for playoff games at a meeting next month.

Under the new format, both teams would get the ball at least once unless the first team to get the ball scores a touchdown, Greg Aiello said. If the first team to get the ball makes a field goal and the other team ties the game, action would continue until a team scores again.

Under the current rules, the first team to score wins.

“There have been various concepts that have been discussed in recent years, but this one has never been proposed,” Aiello said.

The competition committee will discuss the new concept with teams and players at league meetings March 21-24 in Orlando, Fla., when it could come to a vote. At least two thirds of the teams would need to agree to the changes for new rules to be adopted.

The competition committee met with the players’ union and players on Thursday during the NFL Scouting Combine in Indianapolis. Discussion continued when the competition committee met with a general managers’ advisory committee on Friday.

The debate about the rules gained steam after the NFC championship game, when New Orleans beat Minnesota 31-28 in overtime and Brett Favre’s Vikings never got the ball in the extra period. Under the proposed rule, Minnesota would have gotten another possession because the Vikings didn’t allow a touchdown.

Overtime was adopted for regular season games in 1974, a sudden-death format that allowed games to end in a tie if neither team scored in 15 minutes. Overtime for playoff games always has been sudden death.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=A0wNdc58xIlLRfcAAEw5nYcB?slug=ap-overtimerules&prov=ap&type=lgns

[reds1869]

I like it, and hope they adopt this format for the regular season as well. Why in the world wouldn't they adopt it for the games that decide the playoff teams: the regular season?

[KronoRed]

Not a fan of such a silly format, just do what they do in college.

[Yachtzee]

Playoff rules should be the same as regular season rules.

[reds1869]

Not a fan of such a silly format, just do what they do in college.

At least the proposed format bears some resemblance to the game that preceded it. The college overtime is just a glorified scrimmage.

[KronoRed]

I don't like the whole "allow a FG and get a chance, but a TD and you don't" just seems goofy.

If you want to avoid the college problem, move them back to the other 25 yard line.

[top6]

My proposal is this.

Eliminate overtime in the regular season, and if teams are tied at the end of 4 quarters it's a tie game.

In the playoffs, play sudden death over time as is, but always give the team with the lower seed the ball. Alternatively, just keep playing 7 minute over time periods until someone has won.

[macro]

One problem I have with the college OT rules is that the points and stats count. Teams and players should NOT have their NCAA scoring rankings affected by cheap overtime touchdowns.

If they're going to play it that way, fine. But don't let the stats count. Yes, I know stats count in other sports, but teams aren't handed a scoring opportunity on a platter in other sports the way they are in NCAA football.

[Sea Ray]

This idea is an improvement over what we've got currently but I still have to ask, why if they score a TD is it OK for the other team not to get a possession? It seems to me the problem with the current system is that one team can win it w/o the losing team ever getting a possession. Just what problem are they solving?

Hopefully they'll tweak this at the Spring meeting

[Sea Ray]

My proposal is this.

Eliminate overtime in the regular season, and if teams are tied at the end of 4 quarters it's a tie game.

In the playoffs, play sudden death over time as is, but always give the team with the lower seed the ball. Alternatively, just keep playing 7 minute over time periods until someone has won.

I hate ties. As a fan I watch a competitive event to see a winner and a loser. I'll take a sorry OT system over a tie

[Sea Ray]

Playoff rules should be the same as regular season rules.

My guess is they're using the playoffs to test and tweak this new system and then they'll take it to the regular season as well. Of course right now the system is different but I agree with your concept that the rules should be the same

[oneupper]

My proposal is that the first possession of overtime should be determined BEFORE the game begins and not after regulation ends.

You could either have a fixed rule (Visitor gets the choice, for example)
or determine it at the initial coin toss.

This way both coaches would know ahead of time the consequences of a tie game at regulation and coach accordingly (go for the win, for example, if they know they are not getting the ball first in OT).

There is no totally "fair" way to do this, as shown by the college format, where there is an advantage of letting the other team get the ball first and then playing knowing what their outcome was.

So, if you can't make it totally fair, at least make it less uncertain.

[camisadelgolf]

What about a shootout format with each team starting on the two-yard line and going for two-point conversions?

[top6]

Playoff rules should be the same as regular season rules.

They are currently not the same, since a regular season game ends in a tie after 1 overtime, and a playoff game goes into another overtime.



I hate ties. As a fan I watch a competitive event to see a winner and a loser. I'll take a sorry OT system over a tie

I'm not the biggest fan of them either, but I don't have the strong aversion others do. What I really hate is a game being decided on a coin toss. I also personally dislike the college system, or shoot outs in soccer or hockey, because I don't think winners should be determined by all of a sudden playing another game. (I guess I don't mind shootouts so much when you get less points for winning by shootout than a normal game, but something like that would never work in the NFL.)

I also think the number of ties would be fairly minimal. Teams would not play for the tie at the end, I would be willing to bet. There still would be ties, though, but I personally feel that trade off is worth it.

[Roy Tucker]

I don't like the whole "allow a FG and get a chance, but a TD and you don't" just seems goofy.



I agree. Seems hokey. Just guarantee that each team will get the ball once in OT. After that, its sudden death. Simple and clean.

And I think experimenting with a new rule that hasn't been proven out in the playoffs could very well backfire and cause more problems than it solves. If anything, I'd experiment in pre-season just to see if it works.

[improbus]

How about this. The first team to six points in OT wins. A touchdown should end the game as it gives the defense ample chance to stop the offense (unlike a FG.)

Also, imagine the decisions that this would create. A team 4th and 2 on the 35 would have to debate on whether to go for it or kick the field goal, hope for a stop and kick another one. It seems like a way to reward good offense, good defense, and good special teams.

This seems like the proper compromise.

[dabvu2498]

Start the ball on the 50. Visiting team gets 4 downs. Home team gets 4 downs. No kicking or punting.

Whosever side of the 50 the ball ends up on, loses.

Touchdown or turnover, game over.

8 plays or less and you're done. Each team gets a chance unless they give up a big play or a turnover.

What say you?

[paintmered]

I've always thought the "first to six" plan was the best idea. It encompasses the whole game, isn't completely dependent on the outcome of the coin toss and avoids the absurdity of the college OT format.

Kudos, NFL. :thumbup:

[Sea Ray]

I've always thought the "first to six" plan was the best idea. It encompasses the whole game, isn't completely dependent on the outcome of the coin toss and avoids the absurdity of the college OT format.

Kudos, NFL. :thumbup:

Such a format does not address the main problem people have with the current system and that is that sometimes the losing team never gets a possession. If this is as far as they want to go my suggestion is "don't bother"

[Hoosier Red]

I prefer the each team gets the ball and then sudden death because this leaves some strategic downside to getting the ball first(the opponent knows what it needs for its' possesion) but also downside for the 2nd team(if they tie the game up, the first team has a big advantage like they do now.)

[Yachtzee]

Why not just take a page out of the soccer book and have a field goal shoot out. Each kicker starts kicking with the ball snapped from the 5 yd line. If each kicker makes it, move the ball back 5-10 yds and go again. If both miss, they both go again from that spot. If one makes and one misses, game over. Teams may bring in alternate kickers (e.g. put the punter in to kick if it's beyond the regular kicker's range). If the kickers are accurate enough, it would be pretty fun watching them try to boom it in from 55-60 yards.

[Sea Ray]

Yeah, let's lower our game to the level of European Futball...

[Razor Shines]

Such a format does not address the main problem people have with the current system and that is that sometimes the losing team never gets a possession. If this is as far as they want to go my suggestion is "don't bother"

Actually I think most people's biggest gripe is that one team may not even get the ball because sometimes the other team only has to go 40-50 yards and kick. I think most would agree that if you give up a TD on the first possession then you have nothing to complain about.

[Eric_the_Red]

What happens when the opening OT kickoff is returned for a TD? The defense didn't even touch the field and the game is over.

I say each team must get one possession, if you are going to change it. That way all three aspects of the game- offense, defense and special teams- figure into the result.

[Sea Ray]

Actually I think most people's biggest gripe is that one team may not even get the ball because sometimes the other team only has to go 40-50 yards and kick. I think most would agree that if you give up a TD on the first possession then you have nothing to complain about.

I can't speak for everyone but apparently Eric the Red and I disagree with you. If I kick off to you and you score a TD then I want the chance to match you and even beat you if I decide to go for two.

[cumberlandreds]

Why not play one extra 15 minute overtime of regular football. The team that scores the most points win. In the regular season if both teams are still tied at the end of the OT then call it a tie. in the Playoffs if both teams are still tied then go to sudden death format like it is now. That way both teams would have had equal opportunity to win in overtime.

[Eric_the_Red]

Why not play one extra 15 minute overtime of regular football. The team that scores the most points win. In the regular season if both teams are still tied at the end of the OT then call it a tie. in the Playoffs if both teams are still tied then go to sudden death format like it is now. That way both teams would have had equal opportunity to win in overtime.


I don't think players are conditioned to play another 15 minutes. Even in basketball OT is only 5 minutes. Playing another 15 full minutes of football would lead to too many injuries.

[Sea Ray]

Why not play one extra 15 minute overtime of regular football. The team that scores the most points win. In the regular season if both teams are still tied at the end of the OT then call it a tie. in the Playoffs if both teams are still tied then go to sudden death format like it is now. That way both teams would have had equal opportunity to win in overtime.

You've got to have a system that first and foremost determines a winner. If an OT can end in a tie then it didn't do what it was intended to do.

[Roy Tucker]

Why not play one extra 15 minute overtime of regular football. The team that scores the most points win. In the regular season if both teams are still tied at the end of the OT then call it a tie. in the Playoffs if both teams are still tied then go to sudden death format like it is now. That way both teams would have had equal opportunity to win in overtime.

I think its TV. They don't want their schedule wrecked. Another quarter adds 30-45 minutes which goes over into the next game or into 60 Minutes.

With sudden death, games don't usually go that long.

[cumberlandreds]

I think its TV. They don't want their schedule wrecked. Another quarter adds 30-45 minutes which goes over into the next game or into 60 Minutes.

With sudden death, games don't usually go that long.

That's probably it more than anything.

[cumberlandreds]

I don't think players are conditioned to play another 15 minutes. Even in basketball OT is only 5 minutes. Playing another 15 full minutes of football would lead to too many injuries.

They are big boys. They should be able to handle a few extra minutes.

[Eric_the_Red]

They are big boys. They should be able to handle a few extra minutes.


5 is a few. 15 is 25% more work than they are conditioned for.

[Chip R]

They went and did it for the playoffs.

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

[KronoRed]

Still a goofy idea.

[Reds Fanatic]

It makes no sense to make one rule for the postseason and another for the regular season. You are essentially saying our OT rules are flawed so we need to improve them for the postseason but are good enough for the regular season which decides who goes to the postseason. To me you either leave the rule alone or change it for both the regular and postseason. Half changing the rule makes no sense.

[bucksfan2]

It makes no sense to make one rule for the postseason and another for the regular season. You are essentially saying our OT rules are flawed so we need to improve them for the postseason but are good enough for the regular season which decides who goes to the postseason. To me you either leave the rule alone or change it for both the regular and postseason. Half changing the rule makes no sense.

Apparently there will be another chance to vote on passing the rule for the entire season later on this year, I thought Mort said it was around May sometime.

[Roy Tucker]

So what if the team #1 has the ball, throws an interception, team #2 runs it back 20-30 yards, and fumbles the ball back. Then team #1 kicks a FG.

Did team #2 "possess" the ball? Do they get another chance?

[Chip R]

So what if the team #1 has the ball, throws an interception, team #2 runs it back 20-30 yards, and fumbles the ball back. Then team #1 kicks a FG.

Did team #2 "possess" the ball? Do they get another chance?

Good question. I'd think they would because I'm guessing the intent is to get the offense to have a shot at scoring.

[Sea Ray]

It makes no sense to make one rule for the postseason and another for the regular season. You are essentially saying our OT rules are flawed so we need to improve them for the postseason but are good enough for the regular season which decides who goes to the postseason. To me you either leave the rule alone or change it for both the regular and postseason. Half changing the rule makes no sense.

Good point but keep in mind we already have differing rules. In the post season you can't have a tie but you can in the regular season. Donovan McNabb recently learned this...;)