Overtime changes ideas

[mkonyn]

OT should be a dunk competition.

 

[mongoosev]

think they should do rock, paper, scissors to see who gets the ball. here is how it goes. each ref stands in front of the players participating so he doesn't show his hand. they both go at the same time and the each ref calls the hand of each player's pick. that way they don't cause mistakes when a player shows his hands too late which could be cheating.

now as for scoring. I thinks they should they should just let the teams play for the whole 15 minutes no matter how many points you score. and if the other team is well behind, the coach knows he can't catch up he can call the game.

 

[AmishMafia]

think they should do rock, paper, scissors to see who gets the ball. here is how it goes. each ref stands in front of the players participating so he doesn't show his hand. they both go at the same time and the each ref calls the hand of each player's pick. that way they don't cause mistakes when a player shows his hands too late which could be cheating.

now as for scoring. I thinks they should they should just let the teams play for the whole 15 minutes no matter how many points you score. and if the other team is well behind the coach and knows he can't catch up he can call the game.

I was happy with your solution til I realized there was more than rock -paper-scissor to determine the winner.

Either that or ref gets 1 player from each team and announces, "i'm thinking of a number between 1 and 100, . . "

 

[Un4GivN]

Here is the root problem...

You cannot determine the better team accurately in 15 minutes.

So you will have gripes no matter how OT is instituted. Prove your team is better in the first 60 and you don't have to worry about OT rules.

And if I had to choose, I'd say the current way is fine. You have 60 minutes to score more points, you are also given an opportunity in OT. Even if you don't get the ball, you can stop them from scoring a TD. That isn't that much to ask of a team.

I do like current version more than the pure sudden death. Think it adds another element of strategy, so Im for keeping it this way.

 

[TJV]

I like Cowherd’s solution of giving the away team the option in OT. The home team has an obvious advantage throughout the first 60 minutes, if it can’t win it in regulation…

 

[Raptorman]

So, you want to go to the college format. Fine. But lets do it one better. Instead of the 25 yard line. Make they start at the 50. That way if they want to kick a field goal, they have to at least move the ball. Otherwise you end up with a FG competition. The team with the best kicker wins.

 

[Quientus]

Keep 15 min (quarter) of overtime, no sudden death. If The score is still tied, go to Field goal kicks, starting from The 20 yd line in turns, moving 10 yds out each time until one side misses ... I.e both teams get a FG attempt from The 20 yd Line to begin with, next attempt from both (if both are succesfuld from The 20 yd) is from The 30 yd, 40 yd ...

 

[TJV]

IMO the more dependence upon FG kicking the worse the OT rule change idea is.

 

[mongoosev]

OT should be a dunk competition.

....using the heaviest linesman. that would be fun to watch.

 

[El Guapo]

Actually, the one thing that I really like (besides the umpire camera) about XFL was how they started the game with "the scramble." (See below)

It eliminated the coin toss and put some challenge into things. Otherwise I'm in favor of the college format with each team getting an equal number of chances with 2-point conversions mandatory from the start of OT.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Quientus]

How does a kicker hold The position as most scoring player, if it's not a rather (semi) important position ? Seems to me having a reliable, stabile and skilled kicker is worth a lot ...?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

How does a kicker hold The position as most scoring player, if it's not a rather (semi) important position ? Seems to me having a reliable, stabile and skilled kicker is worth a lot ...?

Your method basically rewards the team who has the best FG kicker. 1 of 53 players on the team. Sorry, I'm not seeing the fairness of that ever happening. You had me with the 15 minutes of non sudden death, but don't agree with turning it into a shoot out between FG kickers after that.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

How does a kicker hold The position as most scoring player, if it's not a rather (semi) important position ? Seems to me having a reliable, stabile and skilled kicker is worth a lot ...?

A good kicker is important, but I don't think they should be responsible for deciding an overtime (ie: fg shootout). Kickers play very few snaps compared to the rest of the players on the team and since this is a team game the whole team should be involved and not just come down to who has the better kicker.

 

[Quientus]

A good kicker is important, but I don't think they should be responsible for deciding an overtime (ie: fg shootout). Kickers play very few snaps compared to the rest of the players on the team and since this is a team game the whole team should be involved and not just come down to who has the better kicker.

If a team cannot win in regulation + a whole ekstra quarter, shouldn't The most "complete" team win ? I.e overall ? And last time I checked special teams including a kicker is still part of a team ? Seems to me you guys don't count a kicker as a part of The team ?

It's not just The kicker on The field, but The entire special teams unit I'm Talking about to clarify ...

Besides you see a kicker (a FG) win a game alot ...

- just a thought ...

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

If a team cannot win in regulation + a whole ekstra quarter, shouldn't The most "complete" team win ? I.e overall ? And last time I checked special teams including a kicker is still part of a team ? Seems to me you guys don't count a kicker as a part of The team ?

It's not just The kicker on The field, but The entire special teams unit I'm Talking about to clarify ...

Besides you see a kicker (a FG) win a game alot ...

- just a thought ...

You are missing the point. What someone suggested was if after the 1st overtime period the game was still tied, that they go to a FG shootout. So in that case, only the kickers would be involved - that's what I'm objecting to. Yes, kickers win games a lot on FGs but the team was involved in getting them in FG position, where in a shootout that wouldn't be the case. Understand?

 

[Quientus]

You are missing the point. What someone suggested was if after the 1st overtime period the game was still tied, that they go to a FG shootout. So in that case, only the kickers would be involved - that's what I'm objecting to. Yes, kickers win games a lot on FGs but the team was involved in getting them in FG position, where in a shootout that wouldn't be the case. Understand?

Eh ? I'm not missing The point, however is The kicker is still part of The team, just like The rest of The roster, granted they don't play The same amount of snaps - you just Seem to dislike kickers ? Read what I wrote ... It's a FG shoot out, but The kicker wont be The only one one The field ... The rest of The unit Will be as Well, with chances of blocking ...
- understand ???

 

[Poppa San]

I got it! !! Dodgeball with footballs lined up at the 45s. 30 players five balls. Last man wins.

 

[El Guapo]

I like that too

 

[MadCat]

I agree, both offenses get the ball..

While a team's defense HAS to stop the offense--that is based only on a coin flip on who gets that ball 1st..

I am sure it will be changed, but when?

As soon as Brady loses an overtime playoff game because of the coin flip.

 

[Mondio]

So what if they change it to both offenses get the ball. So they both kick field goals and now the team that won the flip initially gets the ball back again and kicks another one. Now they got 2 possessions and the other team only one, all because of a coin flip

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

Eh ? I'm not missing The point, however is The kicker is still part of The team, just like The rest of The roster, granted they don't play The same amount of snaps - you just Seem to dislike kickers ? Read what I wrote ... It's a FG shoot out, but The kicker wont be The only one one The field ... The rest of The unit Will be as Well, with chances of blocking ...
- understand ???

No, I don't dislike kickers, but I don't want just them (or special teams) to determine the outcome of an overtime. But you, on the other hand, would like just the special teams to determine the winner with a shootout. Yes, the kicker is part of the team, but the offense and defense are also part of the team. Why wouldn't you want the whole team be part of determining the outcome?

 

[RRyder]

Is it too much to expect a defense to make a play in OT?

Cause it seems to me that arguing "it's only fair to give both teams a possession" is arguing against that

 

[Quientus]

No, I don't dislike kickers, but I don't want just them (or special teams) to determine the outcome of an overtime. But you, on the other hand, would like just the special teams to determine the winner with a shootout. Yes, the kicker is part of the team, but the offense and defense are also part of the team. Why wouldn't you want the whole team be part of determining the outcome?

lol ... - It is The team determining The outcome ... It's just that you obviously dont count special teams as a part of The "whole" team ... That is pretty obvious from your responses, because The idea went completely over your head ...

I get were your coming from ... Only problem is, in order for overtime to "be fair" with equal amounts of possessions you either;
A) dont want The OT rules to be changed or
B) you want a game to go on indefinitely ...

Either Way this thread was about ideas, and you are pretty much just arguing semantics ...

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

lol ... - It is The team determining The outcome ... It's just that you obviously dont count special teams as a part of The "whole" team ... That is pretty obvious from your responses, because The idea went completely over your head ...

I get were your coming from ... Only problem is, in order for overtime to "be fair" with equal amounts of possessions you either;
A) dont want The OT rules to be changed or
B) you want a game to go on indefinitely ...

Either Way this thread was about ideas, and you are pretty much just arguing semantics ...

Sorry, but a FG shootout involving just special teams is not involving the 'whole team' - that is not semantics. Where have I ever said that kickers aren't part of the whole team? Just because I don't want just one part of the team to determine the outcome doesn't mean I don't count kickers as part of the team - and saying that the idea went completely over my head is ridiculous. The entire game has been played with all parts of the team participating, now you want to include only the special teams? With your idea, at that point the whole team now consists of only the kicking special teams. My idea still includes the whole team (including kickers), while your idea excludes the offense and defense which play a bigger role during the game than what the kickers do.

You are correct, this was about ideas and I just happen to disagree with your idea and have explained why I disagree. I have never said that to be fair both teams need to get an equal number of possessions. My idea was each team gets at least 1 possession regardless of whether the fist team scores a td or not. After that, if the game is still tied then go to sudden death. Let the 'whole team' determine the outcome, not just the kickers.

 

[XPack]

In spite of how the last two Packers seasons ended, I like the current rule. All the team that kicks off has to do is prevent the opponent from scoring a TD to get a chance with the ball.

I think it favours the team winning the toss.

Team winning the toss - (1) Score
Team losing the toss - (1) defend and gain possession (2) Score

Both teams need to get a drive each. Rinse and repeat till one team gets a score and other doesn't.