Do NFL OT rules need to be changed?

[stevegrab 1,439]

Who thinks last night was "the last straw" and that NFL needs to change their rules?

 

And change them to what?  Something like the NCAA rules (which I think are a joke)?  Allow both teams to score a TD, and then its sudden death?

 

 

How many believe that defense is still part of the game and teams don't "win because they won the coin toss"?

 

I've seen stats before (could find them later if needed) that said since the change away from true sudden death (first team to score, even a FG wins) that 52% of the times the team that wins the toss goes on to win, but only 80% of those (so about 40% of all OT games) end with a TD on the opening drive. 

 

That means that 20% of the time the team who won the toss still wins, but needs more than one possession. The other 48% of the time the team that lost the toss go on to win (in however many possessions).

 

I know the change to 10min OT in regular season has meant some games were both teams score a FG, then very little time left, like that final game of the season with Chargers and Raiders. 

 

What's amusing is reading comments from people calling for the rule change that clearly don't know much about NFL rules. I think one point was even touched on here, "the Bills should have squib kicked it" but the clock doesn't start until somebody touches the ball, and the play could just take a knee, at most 1-2 seconds run off.

 

 

[Chief Dick 683]

No. 

 

And this coming from a guy who had this happen to him in 2018 when Brady won the toss and beat the Chiefs on drive 1 in OT to go to the Super Bowl. There are so many plays within a game that can win or lose the game for a team.

 

 

[League_Champion 2,845]

I've been screaming for a full quarter OT for years. Abolish ties and play until someone wins. Unfortunately this will never happen again because it cuts into the Network's precious programming that sponsors pay dearly for. 

[stevegrab 1,439]

Some stats are in the following SI story, from a tweet by Ian Rapoport

https://www.si.com/nfl/2022/01/24/nfl-overtime-rules-playoff-stats-coin-toss-chiefs-bills

 

Since the change away from Sudden Death in 2010 for playoffs and 2012 for regular season

163 OT games total (regular season and playoffs) winner of the coin toss went 86-67-10, winning 52.8% 

11 OT playoff games, winner of the coin toss is 10-1, and 7 of those 10 were opening drive TDs.

 

Not sure why such a big difference between regular season and playoffs, I guess in regular season isn't as critical to win, so maybe they team is less aggressive on the opening drive. Or since the teams are all better, they have a better offense that can score more easily. But those stats kind of reinforce there is no need to alter regular season rules, since the coin toss isn't a huge factor. 

 

A story I read on Yahoo sports claimed it was an "enormous advantage" without offering any stats, presumably they were talking specifically about playoff games since 53% is not a huge advantage. 

 

 

[darin3 1,718]

Both teams should possess the ball, even if the team that has ball first scores a TD.  Coin flip + TD shouldn't determine winner.

[millworkguy 700]

I'd like to see both teams start from the opposing 40, no field goals, td only. if they both score, they both go from midfield,  then their own 40 etc etc.

 

Winner is the team that scores when the other misses.

[irish 1,847]

They absolutely need to be changed. Should play a full OT period to declare a winner. Or like how college does it. 

[darin3 1,718]

14 minutes ago, irish said:

They absolutely need to be changed. Should play a full OT period to declare a winner. Or like how college does it. 

 

I like the college rule.... for college.  I think it wouldn't work in the NFL for some reason.  I just think both teams need to have a shot.  Don't like that a coin flip gives one team a shot at being the instant winner.  

[stevegrab 1,439]

Interesting responses, seems I'm in the minority in thinking they're fine as they are. 

 

I get the idea of fairness in giving each team a chance, especially after seeing the 10-1 record of the coin toss winner in playoff OT games. That was surprising as I had seen some stats before that for regular season where it was close to 50-50. 

 

What kind of baffles me though, is that people seem to think the defense doesn't matter, that once you get to OT both offenses need a chance. If each team scored on nearly every possession I might agree that is needed to be fair. But that doesn't happen in an NFL game, the Bills stopped the Chiefs 6 times (4FG attempts + 2 punts) which was about half their possessions (7 scores) in regulation. The Bills had a chance, if they could prevent a TD. 

 

I just don't want college rules, and the endless OT with gimmicks of starting location, forced 2p conv etc. A full OT period with leader taking the game would be more palatable. After that using the current playoff OT in the 2nd OT. 

[Ramhock 69]

I'm guessing the 10-1 playoff record is from the exhaustion of the defenses,  exerting more energy during regulation in a playoff game.  Maybe just consider a change for playoff OTs only.

[Bier Meister 365]

Tl; dr

 

needs revision

[Shaft 1,414]

It doesn't have to be a full quarter many other sports do a shortened extra period. It should be based on time, not possessions. 

[Shorttynaz 1,269]

2 hours ago, stevegrab said:

 

11 OT playoff games, winner of the coin toss is 10-1, and 7 of those 10 were opening drive TDs.

 

I said it yesterday when it happened, I posted it in a different thread - and I still wanna know, who the fk calls 'tails'?  

[loaf 1,237]

It needs looked at, definitely. 

[Ramhock 69]

I call tails.

[Shaft 1,414]

Just now, Ramhock said:

I call tails.

You don't like head...s? 

[Gopher 742]

4 hours ago, stevegrab said:

Who thinks last night was "the last straw" and that NFL needs to change their rules?

 

And change them to what?  Something like the NCAA rules (which I think are a joke)?  Allow both teams to score a TD, and then its sudden death?

 

 

How many believe that defense is still part of the game and teams don't "win because they won the coin toss"?

 

I've seen stats before (could find them later if needed) that said since the change away from true sudden death (first team to score, even a FG wins) that 52% of the times the team that wins the toss goes on to win, but only 80% of those (so about 40% of all OT games) end with a TD on the opening drive. 

 

That means that 20% of the time the team who won the toss still wins, but needs more than one possession. The other 48% of the time the team that lost the toss go on to win (in however many possessions).

 

I know the change to 10min OT in regular season has meant some games were both teams score a FG, then very little time left, like that final game of the season with Chargers and Raiders. 

 

What's amusing is reading comments from people calling for the rule change that clearly don't know much about NFL rules. I think one point was even touched on here, "the Bills should have squib kicked it" but the clock doesn't start until somebody touches the ball, and the play could just take a knee, at most 1-2 seconds run off.

 

 

 

I'd be shocked if it's anywhere near that high.  As for changing the rules, I don't think it's as bad as people want to make it seem.  The rules today are light years better than they were before (the true "sudden death"), and the fact that the coin toss winners only have a 52-48 advantage means it's about as close to 50/50 as it's going to get.  More importantly, when was the last time (prior to yesterday) that somebody complained about the rule?  It's literally been YEARS since it was even a topic of discussion.  

 

Buffalo didn't lose because of the coin toss.  They lost because they couldn't stop Mahomes when he got 44 yards in 13 seconds (which, when you think about it, is next to impossible).  They lost because they gave up 25 yards to Kelce on a play where, if they hold him to anything under 15, the game is likely over (barring a hail mary).  They lost because they kicked it into the endzone on a play where a squib kick almost assures them the win.  And, then, finally, they lost because they couldn't stop Mahomes yet again, or even hold KC to a FG.  Sorry, but they had their chances.  I don't feel bad whatsoever (and I was pulling for them big-time).  Your defense plays that badly, you don't deserve to advance.

 

All of that said, the 52-48 discrepancy is much bigger in the playoffs.  I think it's 10-1, or something like that.  I'd be in favor of leaving it as is for the regular season, and playing a full quarter in the playoffs.  If it's still tied, then go to sudden death.  But, let's be real.... people will still complain then, saying "college is better."  Which is a tired/old argument.  One, it's debatable that it's "better."  And, two, the NFL will never adopt the college overtime rules, if for no other reason than it would screw up FF stats, and there's too much money in FF for them to mess with such a good thing.

[skylive5 532]

I agree with CD..... rules are just fine. Life isn't fair and neither is NFL OT. So suck it up and live with it.

 

 

[Shaft 1,414]

27 minutes ago, Gopher said:

 

 

Buffalo didn't lose because of the coin toss.  They lost because they couldn't stop Mahomes when he got 44 yards in 13 seconds (which, when you think about it, is next to impossible).  They lost because they gave up 25 yards to Kelce on a play where, if they hold him to anything under 15, the game is likely over (barring a hail mary).  They lost because they kicked it into the endzone on a play where a squib kick almost assures them the win.  And, then, finally, they lost because they couldn't stop Mahomes yet again, or even hold KC to a FG.  Sorry, but they had their chances.  I don't feel bad whatsoever (and I was pulling for them big-time).  Your defense plays that badly, you don't deserve to advance.

 

And if the Bills won the coin toss, we could say the same thing against the Chiefs. The truth is the coin toss did matter and was a major factor in deciding if a team goes to the AFC championship game. It worked against the Chiefs a few years back and they complained about it. It shouldn't come down to a coin toss. Yes, defense is a part of the game and both sides should get a chance in opportunities or a time limit.

[Bobby Brown 1,013]

Can think of very good reasons why each team should get the ball at least once.  Can't think of very many good reasons why they shouldn't.

Arguments like life isn't fair and neither is OT aren't very compelling.  Lol.

[irish 1,847]

2 hours ago, stevegrab said:

Interesting responses, seems I'm in the minority in thinking they're fine as they are. 

 

I get the idea of fairness in giving each team a chance, especially after seeing the 10-1 record of the coin toss winner in playoff OT games. That was surprising as I had seen some stats before that for regular season where it was close to 50-50. 

 

What kind of baffles me though, is that people seem to think the defense doesn't matter, that once you get to OT both offenses need a chance. If each team scored on nearly every possession I might agree that is needed to be fair. But that doesn't happen in an NFL game, the Bills stopped the Chiefs 6 times (4FG attempts + 2 punts) which was about half their possessions (7 scores) in regulation. The Bills had a chance, if they could prevent a TD. 

 

I just don't want college rules, and the endless OT with gimmicks of starting location, forced 2p conv etc. A full OT period with leader taking the game would be more palatable. After that using the current playoff OT in the 2nd OT. 

I hear ya and I'm not dismissing defenses, however, both offenses need to possess the ball, period. Regardless of what the team, who got it first, does. 

 

That's just fair. And if on the first possession of an OT, the defense intercepts or recovers a ball, then that would be defenses doing their part and then both offenses will have possessed the ball. 

Edited January 25 by irish

[skylive5 532]

Of course it isn't compelling. Wasn't meant to be. Just fact. All the whiny babies looking for each team to have their fair chance. Gimmie a break.

 

 

 

 

[irish 1,847]

2 hours ago, darin3 said:

 

I like the college rule.... for college.  I think it wouldn't work in the NFL for some reason.  I just think both teams need to have a shot.  Don't like that a coin flip gives one team a shot at being the instant winner.  

 

Just curious to hear your reasoning, why wouldn't the system that works great in college, work well in the Pros?

[irish 1,847]

2 minutes ago, skylive5 said:

Of course it isn't compelling. Wasn't meant to be. Just fact. All the whiny babies looking for each team to have their fair chance. Gimmie a break.

 

 

 

 

 

Why is that a problem?  And why are we whiny babies that just want to see a hard fought, 60- minute, back and forth game, not come down to a single guess at a coin toss and watching the team that won it take possession and win the game on the first drive?

 

What is wrong with wanting more compelling football where both teams are given an equal opportunity to win the game and the team who's defense makes the "better stop" wins?

[skylive5 532]

And therein lies the problem. FF players expect equality and fairness. Which is counter to everyday life. Equality and fairness are a Fantasy.